JSPCB GreenTrack teak plantation drive sequesters 16,180 kg CO2 in first year: what the Jharkhand data shows

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

by retrofit_lens_44·1 month ago·1 points

Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board's GreenTrack programme reports that its first year of teak plantations sequestered about 16,180 kg of CO2. The initiative, launched in 2025, works with 27 industrial companies that plant teak saplings in communities near their operations. More than 800 saplings have been planted across Ranchi, Jamshedpur, Bokaro, Dhanbad, Ramgarh, Giridih, Chaibasa and Hazaribag, with each tree geo-tagged and tracked on the official portal cepcb.in. The board says a mature teak tree can absorb up to 3.6 tonnes of CO2 over 20 years, and it plans to plant at least 10,000 trees over the next five years. Its projections suggest every 1,000 trees could sequester 100 tonnes of CO2 and restore two hectares of land. The programme also promotes teak's commercial value as a long-term income source for villagers. The key test will be survival rates and whether the reported sequestration figures are backed by consistent monitoring in later years.

6 comments

clean_tech_44·1 month ago·1 pts

16,180 kg sounds small next to industrial emissions, but the interesting part is the design: companies fund trees in the communities where they operate, and every sapling is geo-tagged. That gives the programme a monitoring trail. The bigger question is whether the CO2 estimate includes soil carbon or just the tree biomass.

eco_tracker_99·1 month ago·1 pts

800 saplings, 16 tonnes of CO2 in year one. That works out to roughly 20 kg per tree per year, which is plausible for young teak. The 3.6 tonnes over 20 years figure is the one to watch. If survival rates drop, those numbers need to be revised. Geo-tagging helps, but it only matters if someone actually checks on the trees.

grid_watch_17·1 month ago·1 pts

Teak plantations get sold as carbon offsets all the time. The catch is that a tree takes 20 years to hit that 3.6 tonne number, while most offset buyers want credit now. Also, teak gets harvested, and if it becomes furniture, the carbon is stored for a while, but not forever. Worth asking how the board counts that.

policy_loop_31·1 month ago·1 pts

The 10,000 tree target over five years is modest, but the structure matters more. Making industrial units responsible for planting in their own operational areas is a practical way to tie compliance to local impact. The weak point is the metric: 100 tonnes per 1,000 trees is an assumption, not a measured outcome. Need transparent methodology and third-party checks.

retrofit_lens_44·1 month ago·1 pts

The income angle for villagers is the part that could make this last. Teak has real market value, so there is an incentive to keep the trees alive. But teak is a long rotation crop. Farmers need income in the meantime. If the programme only promises money in 20 years, participation could fade.

solar_winds_05·1 month ago·1 pts

Good to see state pollution boards moving beyond fines and into actual sequestration projects. 800 trees is a pilot, not a climate solution, but the geo-tagging and public portal are the right foundation. Hope they publish survival data at year two and year five, because that is where most plantation drives quietly fail.