Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
27 September 2021 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
Eddie Smit, Tercia Strydom, and Prof Johan van Tol testing the hydrophobicity of soils directly after an experimental fire.

The main driving force behind climate change is the emission of greenhouse gases through human activities, says Prof Linus Franke, Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Soil, Crop and Climate Sciences at the University of the Free State. 

“Carbon dioxide is the biggest culprit, accounting for 72% of the global warming effect, followed by methane and nitrous oxide.” 

Too much carbon in the atmosphere

Human activities are the main driver of climate change, mainly by burning fossil fuels such as coal, gas, and oil, with the energy sector, industries, transport, buildings, and agriculture as the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases. 

According to the United Nations, the burning of these fossil fuels generates greenhouse gas emissions that wrap around the earth like a blanket, trapping the heat of the sun and resulting in raised temperatures. According to Prof Franke, it is important to mitigate climate change and prevent a global temperature rise of more than 1,5 degrees Celsius. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we are looking at a temperature increase of around four degrees Celsius by the end of this century, if there are no drastic changes.

With an increase in global warming, we are expecting more disturbances in weather patterns, resulting in further extreme weather conditions such as droughts, floods, and extremely cold/hot conditions. Annually, millions of people lose their lives, livelihoods, and homes due to the effects of global warming.

“The latter has been predicted for a long time, but today it is a common phenomenon. Twenty years ago, climate change was about analysing trends in data sets. Today, to observe climate change, one can just look out of the window. In the past 10 years, climate change has become a reality,” says Prof Franke. 

Although carbon dioxide is one of the biggest contributors to global warming, it has an important role to play in soil health. 

Soil as a major sink of carbon

As plants absorb the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, enormous amounts of carbon are stored as organic soil matter in the upper two metres of soil. Prof Franke says carbon in the top two metres of soil is 200 times more than the amount that is annually emitted by human activities and three times the amount that is present in the atmosphere or vegetation. 

“Carbon in soil plays an important but underestimated role,” he says. He believes that through proper soil management, humans can control the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. In the long term, this could have a positive effect on climate change.

“Our ultimate aim it to get sufficient amounts of carbon in the soil,” says Prof Franke. His department is involved in several studies to understand soil carbon and carbon sequestration processes. 

Odwa Malongweni collecting a soil sample from exclosures in the Kruger National Park.(Photo: Supplied)

Prof Johan van Tol, Associate Professor in the same department, and postgraduate students are conducting research in the Kruger National Park and the Drakensberg, where they are investigating the best ways to preserve carbon and increase the soil carbon levels. 

He is of the opinion that there are two viable options for storing carbon removed from the atmosphere: the soil and the oceans. “Of the two, storing carbon in the soil is more realistic for most people and companies, as ownership and management of this natural resource can be determined. The potential for storing carbon in the soil is vast, yet poor soil management has led to carbon emissions equal to that of burning oil and coal reserves. Good soil management and restoration of degraded soils, on the other hand, can result in considerable sequestration of atmospheric carbon,” he says. 

According to him, soil and environmental factors determine the carbon storage potential of the soil. He says in the mountainous soils of the Maloti-Drakensberg (MD), the cool climate and high rainfall have resulted in carbon-rich soils. “This area is generally considered a ‘carbon hotspot’, yet little is known about the carbon dynamics of these soils.”

Preliminary results from a project by two of his postgraduate students, Cowan Mc Lean and Jaco Kotze, titled Characterisation of carbon stocks, microbial diversity and degradation of the soils of the Amphitheatre summit, Northern Drakensberg, show that average carbon stocks of the soils are high to very high in the alpine wetlands. They found that poor land management (overgrazing) has resulted in soil and land degradation (e.g., erosion, draining of wetlands, and loss of vegetation and biodiversity). 

“The degraded soils are no longer a ‘sink’ of atmospheric carbon, but become a ‘source’ that releases carbon,” he states. 

He says drastic action is required to restore and protect these important carbon hotspots. 

Today, to observe climate change, one can just look out of the window. In the past 10 years, climate change has become a reality. – Prof Linus Franke
In a study in the Kruger National Park, PhD students Tercia Strydom and Odwa Malongweni are investigating the impact of fires and herbivores on soil quality, including carbon contents. “They found that soil carbon is significantly impacted by fire and herbivores. The changes in vegetation structure due to fire and herbivores are likely to be the key driver of changes in carbon stocks,” says Prof Van Tol. 

An agricultural perspective 

Prof Franke considers carbon as an essential element for farming. “It is important for a healthy farming system,” he says. 

He is conducting a study on high-density grazing, funded by the Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture. The on-farm performance of different grazing management systems, including selective and high-density grazing, with special reference to the spatial and temporal dynamics of soil carbon, is investigated in this study. 

The research indicates that the grassland biome of South Africa covers about 20% of South Africa’s land surface, with more than half of the biome converted to arable land or greatly disturbed by urban development mining activities. The remaining tracks of the grassland biome are mostly used for livestock grazing on natural grassland. 

 

Prof Johan van Tol, Sue van Rensburg from the South African Environmental Observation Network, and Prof
Linus Franke in the Drakensberg. (Photo:Supplied)

 

He says there are different grazing management strategies of natural grasslands. “In continuous grazing systems, animals are given the opportunity to graze all season long with minimal interference. Rotational grazing systems incorporate periodic deferments, allowing field vegetation to recover in the period when grazing is absent. 

“The more recent strategy of high-density grazing uses large herds, often double or triple the normal stocking densities for an area, grazing intensively on small areas of land for a short period of time, followed by a long resting period of the field.”

“High-density grazing is claimed to improve rangeland productivity by improving soil health, increasing soil carbon stocks to an extent that the emissions of greenhouse gases by livestock may be compensated by soil carbon sequestration, and improving the condition of the vegetation, while enhancing animal productivity on a per area basis. The adoption of high-density grazing can have major impacts on the sustainability and the economics of livestock production. An aim of the research is to quantify to what extent the claims of increasing soil carbon levels under high-density grazing realise under on-farm conditions,” explains Prof Franke.

He trusts that the knowledge generated in this project will be helpful to the broader agricultural sector, providing knowledge on carbon cycling, environmental sustainability, and opportunities for climate change mitigation in the livestock production sector.

Prof Franke is convinced that the protection of grasslands against degradation, while ensuring sufficient, reliable, and sustainable food production, are absolute key components driving the national and global development agenda.


Prof Johan van Tol taking a soil sample on top of the Drakensberg. (Photo: Supplied)

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept