Apple to Invest in Mangrove Forest Restoration Project in Colombia

Apple has announced it will invest in a mangrove tree restoration project for a 27,000-acre forest in Colombia, as part of a broader effort by the company to achieve carbon neutrality (via Fast Company).

Apple VP of environment, policy, and social initiatives Lisa Jackson gave details of the investment at the Global Climate Action Summit in San Francisco, but stopped short of disclosing how much cash Apple intends to earmark for the project, which is being undertaken in partnership with the non-profit Conservation International.

Image via Fast Company

"These forests are critical because they're one of nature's most important tools in the battle against climate change – they can absorb and store up to ten times more carbon than a terrestrial forest," Jackson told the audience.

The project will involve tree-planting in degraded areas of the Colombian forest and tree preservation, which should help capture an estimated one million metric tons of CO2 emissions over its lifetime. Projections over the first two years indicate 17,000 metric tons in reduced emissions.

That's the same amount of emissions generated by the cars that will update Apple Maps over the next decade, making the program carbon neutral for the company, notes Fast Company.

According to M. Sanjayan, CEO of Conservation International, mangrove trees are excellent absorbers of carbon and are able to store carbon dioxide in their leaves and branches, as well as siphon off the gas into surrounding soil and sediment through vast underwater root systems.

Mangrove trees "have the densest carbon storage of any habitat on Earth," said Sanjayan. "If you want to actually change the thermostat of the world in your lifetime, then ending the destruction of mangroves and restoring them is one of the biggest things you can do."

Conservation International has calculated how much "blue carbon" the trees sequester underwater, which will allow the project to quantify the trees' ability to act as "carbon sponges".

"By investing, [Apple] opened the door for others to also think about blue carbon as a viable way to sequester carbon and reduce emissions globally," said Sanjayan.

Back in 2015, Apple partnered with the Conservation Fund to acquire over 36,000 acres of working forest in Maine and California, ensuring the maintenance of the forests and preserving the supply of raw materials for paper. Later that year, Apple committed to protecting one million acres of forest in China.

Underlining its environmental commitments, Apple announced in April that its global facilities, including retail stores, offices, data centers, and more, are powered with 100 percent clean energy.

Tag: Environmental Responsibility

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

unobtainium

9 weeks ago

Climate change is being used a distraction

Please don’t be ignorant.

Nobody is claiming climate change is the only environmental crisis facing our planet, but if rapid climate change occurs, it will compound all the issues you mention and render them moot. It’s true that the biosphere is currently under an enormous amount of stress, but rapid climate change will make it impossible for already stressed ecosystems to adapt or adjust.

Rating: 12 Votes

tennisproha

9 weeks ago

Go Apple! This looks like a thoughtful initiative so I’m thankful to Apple for doing it. However, we have a lot more to do to limit climate change and not enough time left to do it. Please pressure your politicians to act.

Rating: 10 Votes

RightMACatU

9 weeks ago

Best Apple news I've heard in months as it doesn't speak of profit, greed and any type of capitalism XS, pun intended :D

Rating: 8 Votes

Mascots

9 weeks ago

The truth about Conservation International:
http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/category/organizations/conservation-international/

Thanks MR for this greenwash article!

Your beef is that Exxon donated to them as well? Or that companies that donate to them aren't obligated to curb their emissions?

I honestly don't see how any investment back into Earth isn't a positive for it - whether through credit or by reduced emissions - given the amount of damage happening to it at any given moment.

We need rapid change, soon. We've got to start somewhere and if money from those who are doing the damage can be used to help work against it in any capacity, that means one less dollar for them to use to hurt the earth, too.

Rating: 8 Votes

CarlJ

9 weeks ago

More eco distractions for the company that’s having trouble focusing on its own announced products.

Or you could, you know, just skip over the articles that aren't on topics that interest you. You are going out of your way to read a site that dedicated to reporting every story they can find about Apple.

FYI to Tim Cook: I’m wearing my Apple Watch to throw all my recylcables in the regular trash, and the regular trash in the recycling. Feels great and does wonders after with the Breathe app.

In protest we should all pledge to hinder the green movement, until Apple patches the gaping holes in the Mac product line. It’s time to set our tuna nets to 11 and clear cut our way back to real desktop computers.

Please stop actively trying to be a horrible person. You look awfully petulant and childish throwing your toys out of the pram. Not everything in the world is about whether your phone/computer has this button or that button. Apple is focused on making good products. As a minuscule side project they're doing a tiny bit to help the planet. Stop trying to hold the planet hostage until you get your new shiny toy.

Rating: 5 Votes

bugout

9 weeks ago

You spelled Colombia wrong.

Rating: 4 Votes

laurim

9 weeks ago

Climate change is being used a distraction from the real issue that is the pollution of land, water and air from industrial waste, human activities, dead zones in the oceans, deforestation etc.

Livestock is responsible for the biggest contributions to toxic emissions and degradation of land but the supposedly “caring-sensitive” likes of Tim Cook and progressive politicians cry about climate change and are capitalizing and profiting on speeches about climate change, but few of them would be willing to go full plant based diet or do jntitatoves against meat industry. What a joke.

By 2050, the oceans could have more plastic than fish. A garbage patch off the coast of Hawaii. By 2050, plastic in the oceans will outweigh fish, predicts a report from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, in partnership with the World Economic Forum.
Here are some stats that back my statement above.

https://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/local/watchdog/2018/09/13/blue-green-algae-toxicity-agriculture-dairy-farms-clean-water/1031631002/

“[B]Animal agriculture is responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than the combined exhaust from all transportation. ”
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM

“Livestock and their byproducts account for at least 32,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, or 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. Goodland, R Anhang, J. “Livestock and Climate Change: What if the key actors in climate change were pigs, chickens and cows?”

https://gelr.org/2015/10/23/a-leading-cause-of-everything-one-industry-that-is-destroying-our-planet-and-our-ability-to-thrive-on-it-georgetown-environmental-law-review/[/B]
«
[SIZE=5][B][B]Livestock is responsible for 65% of all human-related emissions of nitrous oxide – a greenhouse gas with 296 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide, and which stays in the atmosphere for 150 years.»[/B][/B]

[B][B]https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/ghg_report/ghg_nitrous.cfm[/B][/B]

[B][SIZE=5][B][B]«Emissions for agriculture projected to increase 80% by 2050.»[/B][/B][/SIZE][/B]
[B]http://academic.regis.edu/MFRANCO/Seminar in Biology research Literature/Papers/GobalDiets.pdf ('http://academic.regis.edu/MFRANCO/Seminar%20in%20Biology%20research%20Literature/Papers/GobalDiets.pdf')[/B]

For more stats
http://www.cowspiracy.com/facts/[/SIZE]

Ah, the soft bigotry of first world people. Vegans are less than 1% of the world population but they have 99% of the superiority. There’s an 85% failure rate to being vegetarian/vegan but sure, everyone will give up their favorite foods and cultural identity. We will have to raze all the protected lands to make enough farmland to feed a world of vegans but hey, woods, prairies and homes for wild animals to live freely is overrated. Oh and eff you, people who live in areas like Alaska where vegetables have to be imported at huge expense. Maybe you can find a couple veggies you can grow year round and eat those every meal day in, day out.

Rating: 3 Votes

AlexGraphicD

9 weeks ago

Climate change is being used a distraction from the real issue that is the pollution of land, water and air from industrial waste, human activities, dead zones in the oceans, deforestation etc.

Livestock is responsible for the biggest contributions to toxic emissions and degradation of land but the supposedly “caring-sensitive” likes of Tim Cook and progressive politicians cry about climate change and are capitalizing and profiting on speeches about climate change, but few of them would be willing to go full plant based diet or do jntitatoves against meat industry. What a joke.

By 2050, the oceans could have more plastic than fish. A garbage patch off the coast of Hawaii. By 2050, plastic in the oceans will outweigh fish, predicts a report from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, in partnership with the World Economic Forum.
Here are some stats that back my statement above.

https://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/local/watchdog/2018/09/13/blue-green-algae-toxicity-agriculture-dairy-farms-clean-water/1031631002/

“Animal agriculture is responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than the combined exhaust from all transportation. ”
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM

“Livestock and their byproducts account for at least 32,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, or 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. Goodland, R Anhang, J. “Livestock and Climate Change: What if the key actors in climate change were pigs, chickens and cows?”

https://gelr.org/2015/10/23/a-leading-cause-of-everything-one-industry-that-is-destroying-our-planet-and-our-ability-to-thrive-on-it-georgetown-environmental-law-review/
«
[SIZE=5]Livestock is responsible for 65% of all human-related emissions of nitrous oxide – a greenhouse gas with 296 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide, and which stays in the atmosphere for 150 years.»[/SIZE]

[SIZE=5]https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/ghg_report/ghg_nitrous.cfm

[SIZE=5]«Emissions for agriculture projected to increase 80% by 2050.»
http://academic.regis.edu/MFRANCO/Seminar in Biology research Literature/Papers/GobalDiets.pdf ('http://academic.regis.edu/MFRANCO/Seminar%20in%20Biology%20research%20Literature/Papers/GobalDiets.pdf')[/SIZE][/SIZE]

[SIZE=5]For more stats
http://www.cowspiracy.com/facts/[/SIZE]

Rating: 3 Votes

GrumpyMom

9 weeks ago

I live in an agricultural reserve. Growing crops is bad for the environment, too. Agricultural runoff is causing unhealthy conditions for our oceans and other bodies of water.

I have tried going to a vegetarian diet because I love animals and have been involved in animal rescue for over 20 years. I got sick as heck because I already have many dietary restrictions from autoimmune disease. And the soy in the meat substitutes was aggravating a seizure disorder. Heck there were things like oxalates in too many vegetables and gluten in grains that were causing me issues.

It would be lovely if vegans would stop assuming that what works for them can be applied to everyone and even nicer if they would stop getting in my face about it. Not that you are, but I know people in my life who do.

The best I can do is cut down meat consumption. That leaves me very little I can eat. Perhaps if industry stopped overloading fish with toxins I could make a go of it as a pescatarian, but we aren’t there yet.

I can’t go vegan, but I do pick up trash when I go out on my walks. I clean up quite an impressive amount and see interesting things while I’m at it. It’s a good feeling knowing at least what I picked up won’t end up in the storm water system and go out to sea.

Rating: 3 Votes