Louisiana's wetlands store massive amounts of carbon. They also contribute to emissions when lost.
Wetlands like Wax Lake Delta along Louisiana's coast store massive amounts of carbon, which can contribute to CO2 emissions when lost. (Photo Credit: Elise Plunk/ Louisiana Illuminator
ST. MARY PARISH – Louisiana's wetlands are one of the planet's most vital carbon storage centers, but destroying these reservoirs can accelerate harmful emissions that intensify global warming, according to experts.
The Trump administration is fast-tracking energy projects, such as the Blue Marlin Offshore Port crude oil pipeline near Lake Charles that could destroy about 234 acres of wetlands, according to the Environmental Integrity Project. New research finds the stakes for Louisiana's coast are even higher than previously thought.
On a sunny afternoon in early February, rainbows of microorganisms swirled in the muck of the Wax Lake delta, covering the mud like kaleidoscopic patches of plastic wrap. Microbes like these work in tandem with marsh plants to draw carbon dioxide from the air and break it down, storing the carbon in the soil.
'People didn't think about [wetlands] in the way we think today, as a carbon sequestration hot spot,' said Kanchan Maiti, an LSU professor of oceanography and wetland studies.
'If we keep losing wetlands, we're going to be losing that carbon sink,' said Matt Rota, senior policy director from nonprofit advocacy group Healthy Gulf.
But Louisiana is losing its wetlands, an average of a football field of land lost every 100 minutes, due to subsidence, storm erosion, oil development and sea level rise. The state is home to 40% of U.S. wetlands.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Louisiana's land loss crisis has been widely reported. The state has a multi-billion dollar Coastal Master Plan devoted to addressing the crisis. Now, new research highlighting Louisiana's wetlands' role in the carbon cycle argues for more focus on their heightened global value.
When wetlands are destroyed, the carbon they store is released — some ends up in the Gulf, and some is consumed by microbes and gets released into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas contributing to global warming. These microbes also naturally emit methane and nitrous oxide, also greenhouse gases with an even more powerful warming potential than CO2.
With the global carbon cycle thrown out of balance by the burning of fossil fuels, understanding where emissions come from and how carbon is stored is beginning to take center stage.
'This isn't just our problem … it is also something that I think is pretty easily connected to national and international issues,' said Beaux Jones, CEO of nonprofit research and coastal policy group The Water Institute.
Louisiana's wetlands are unique; they are stellar carbon storage sites as well as some of the world's most vulnerable to loss.
'It's unique, and it's a natural service for us,' University of Florida geosciences professor Thomas Bianchi said. He has researched carbon sequestration and transport for decades.
Maiti said researchers knew Louisiana's wetlands were 'rich in carbon,' but their importance in the carbon cycle has become more critical as the state grapples with global warming and land loss.
'Our relative sea level is the highest [and] because the wetland is subsiding,' Maiti said, 'we're not getting enough supply of sediment for it to keep up with the sea level rise,' he added.
The state's relative sea level rise, which takes into account natural subsidence with increased sea levels, is nearly four times the global rate and one of the fastest in the world.
Just how much carbon gets released as CO2 when development and land loss disturb Louisiana's wetlands is still unclear, Maiti said. But the destruction of the state's wetlands for oil and gas activity, like the pipeline project near Lake Charles, concerns scientists.
'The moment we start losing this land, we're going to release that carbon,' Maiti said.
Tracking where carbon comes into a system, where it goes out and the speed at which it cycles is important in globally managing how things like excessive CO2 affect the planet, Bianchi said. He and other experts call it a carbon budget, comparing it to the business cycle, where places like marshes act like 'banks' for carbon.
Fossil fuels are created from carbon, layered deeper and deeper in the earth over eons. Producing oil, gas and coal takes carbon from underground, burns it and releases it into the air faster than it would have naturally if left underground.
'Now we're in a situation where, instead of wetlands buying us 1,000 years before this organic carbon goes [and] makes it to the atmosphere, we're circulating that system, and the carbon is going out the next year,' Maiti said.
Industry interest in carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology has grown over the past few years as scientists, industry and lawmakers look for solutions to containing greenhouse gases and balancing the carbon budget. Some see the technology as a vital component in decarbonization as well as a way to garner money and industry jobs, while others see it as a red herring for the climate crisis.
There are 30 CCS projects planned or proposed in Louisiana, and while oil companies and many politicians have embraced them, they have faced pushback from environmental advocates and community members.
'We're trying to find ways to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere through engineering, but one of the things that is really important is to not lose the systems that are already doing that for us,' Bianchi said.
Scientists and advocates alike are calling for increased protection of wetlands because of their natural carbon storage capacity.
Constructed or restored wetlands are other avenues being explored as both ways to increase storm resilience, prevent erosion and store carbon in Louisiana. Research shows new wetlands are extremely efficient at pulling carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and level out to similar levels of carbon storage that naturally formed wetlands do after about 15 years.
Maiti emphasised that while 'a constructed wetland, if done properly, and if it is given the time' should work like any natural wetland.
'The beauty of wetlands is they can sequester this carbon for thousands of years,' Maiti said. 'I think the key here is the time … anything we are starting from scratch, that will be behind by decades, before it actually reaches the [storage] potential of wetlands we have today.'
Delaney Dryfoos from The Lens contributed to reporting from New Orleans
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
AI data centers could drive a new wave of Texas air pollution, report finds
The boom in artificial intelligence (AI) risks filling Texas air with toxins, a report has found. State regulators are considering proposals for more than 100 new gas power projects — the vast majority of them entirely new plants — to power a new wave of data centers, according to findings published early Wednesday by the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP). More than 30 have already been permitted in a process that amounts to a 'rubber stamp,' the EIP said. 'To meet its increasing demand for electricity, Texas should be encouraging more clean energy instead of feeding public subsidies to dirty fossil fuels,' Jen Duggan, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, said in a statement. The plants spread across the state but cluster around Houston, the I-35 corridor between Austin and San Antonio and the oilfields of West Texas. If all are built, they could produce as much pollution each year as another 27 million new cars and trucks — the equivalent of doubling Texas's current motor vehicle fleet, the report found. Oil and gas pollution includes volatile organic carcinogens such as benzene, asthma-triggering compounds including ozone and nitrogen oxides and lung-burrowing particles like PM 2.5. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state's environmental regulator, declined The Hill's request for comment on the analysis. The report comes in the wake of the failure of a slate bills at the Texas legislature that had sought to restrict the growth of renewables in favor of gas power — an issue that drove an acrimonious inter-party debate within the state's ruling GOP. One major reason for that failure: the state's insatiable demand for electricity, which the state's grid managers have estimated could double by the end of the decade, largely due to new cryptocurrency miners, data centers and oilfield operations. In the fight over the renewable restrictions, wind, solar and battery advocates pitched their technologies — which can be installed much faster than gas — as ideal to meet that demand. 'Everything is supposed to be bigger in Texas, but there's no need to go big with gas plant pollution when there are cleaner alternatives,' said Adrian Shelley, the Texas director for civil society group Public Citizen. 'Texas is already number one in clean energy, which helps save the electric grid and reduce consumer costs, so we should rely on clean energy to increase our supply of electricity,' Shelley added. But with a 'frantic race' to build capacity amid long wait times to connect to the grid, data center developers are increasingly turning to a new wave of privately owned gas plants, according to reporting this week from The Texas Tribune. One such plant, outside the rapidly growing Central Texas town of New Braunfels, will generate about 1.2 gigawatts of power — about two-thirds as much generation capacity as is needed for the million-plus people of nearby Austin. But all that power will go entirely to data centers, the Tribune found. Despite the plants' size — some are large enough to power a medium-sized city — EIP contends that Texas regulators incorrectly classified three of them as belonging to a Clean Air Act category designed for minor sources of pollution. That would mean that the gas plants will not have to use the best available technology to clean their emissions, causing a greater release of health-harming chemicals. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


The Hill
6 hours ago
- The Hill
AI data centers could drive a new wave of Texas air pollution, report finds
The boom in artificial intelligence (AI) risks filling Texas air with toxins, a report has found. State regulators are considering proposals for more than 100 new gas power projects — the vast majority of them entirely new plants — to power a new wave of data centers, according to findings published early Wednesday by the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP). More than 30 have already been permitted in a process that amounts to a 'rubber stamp,' the EIP said. 'To meet its increasing demand for electricity, Texas should be encouraging more clean energy instead of feeding public subsidies to dirty fossil fuels,' Jen Duggan, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, said in a statement. The plants spread across the state but cluster around Houston, the I-35 corridor between Austin and San Antonio and the oilfields of West Texas. If all are built, they could produce as much pollution each year as another 27 million new cars and trucks — the equivalent of doubling Texas's current motor vehicle fleet, the report found. Oil and gas pollution includes volatile organic carcinogens such as benzene, asthma-triggering compounds including ozone and nitrogen oxides and lung-burrowing particles like PM 2.5. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state's environmental regulator, declined The Hill's request for comment on the analysis. The report comes in the wake of the failure of a slate bills at the Texas legislature that had sought to restrict the growth of renewables in favor of gas power — an issue that drove an acrimonious inter-party debate within the state's ruling GOP. One major reason for that failure: the state's insatiable demand for electricity, which the state's grid managers have estimated could double by the end of the decade, largely due to new cryptocurrency miners, data centers and oilfield operations. In the fight over the renewable restrictions, wind, solar and battery advocates pitched their technologies — which can be installed much faster than gas — as ideal to meet that demand. 'Everything is supposed to be bigger in Texas, but there's no need to go big with gas plant pollution when there are cleaner alternatives,' said Adrian Shelley, the Texas director for civil society group Public Citizen. 'Texas is already number one in clean energy, which helps save the electric grid and reduce consumer costs, so we should rely on clean energy to increase our supply of electricity,' Shelley added. But with a 'frantic race' to build capacity amid long wait times to connect to the grid, data center developers are increasingly turning to a new wave of privately owned gas plants, according to reporting this week from The Texas Tribune. One such plant, outside the rapidly growing Central Texas town of New Braunfels, will generate about 1.2 gigawatts of power — about two-thirds as much generation capacity as is needed for the million-plus people of nearby Austin. But all that power will go entirely to data centers, the Tribune found. Despite the plants' size — some are large enough to power a medium-sized city — EIP contends that Texas regulators incorrectly classified three of them as belonging to a Clean Air Act category designed for minor sources of pollution. That would mean that the gas plants will not have to use the best available technology to clean their emissions, causing a greater release of health-harming chemicals.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Yahoo
Weather modification bills, fueled by ‘magic' and conspiracy theories, advance in Louisiana
Bills banning weather modification in Louisiana are making their way through the State Legislature. Cloud seeding is a real field of scientific study, but can be rife with misinformation. (Elise Plunk/Louisiana Illuminator) Two bills to ban weather modification in Louisiana have quietly moved their way through the state legislature this session, as a cohort of other states have moved to do the same with technology that purports to encourage rain or alter temperature. Senate Bill 46, sponsored by Sen. 'Big Mike' Fesi, R-Houma, and House Bill 608, by Rep. Kim Coates, R-Ponchatoula, would ban the intentional release of chemicals into the atmosphere to alter the weather or climate. Coates' measure includes a $200,000 fine for any violation. Weather modification is a wide-reaching term and often marbled with deep veins of misinformation. Human efforts and theories that attempt to alter precipitation or temperature are real but largely new areas of scientific study. The concept of weather modification has produced solid science along with skepticism and conspiracy theories in the decades since studies began. The Louisiana bills specifically reference cloud seeding, or attempts to encourage rainfall with aerosols sprayed into the air. They also cover solar radiation modification, which tries to deflect sunlight away from Earth to curb increasing temperatures and associated climate change. Cloud seeding experiments are exceedingly rare along the Gulf Coast, and solar radiation modification exists only as a theoretical concept. Robert Rauber, an atmospheric scientist and professor emeritus at the University of Illinois, said cloud seeding simply doesn't have widespread use in Louisiana, where rain is relatively abundant. 'The Gulf Coast doesn't need rain,' Rauber said, unlike the mountainous or desert states where cloud seeding is a more attractive option. 'The reason why they cloud seed out west is to increase water supplies.' Rauber has participated in a variety of cloud seeding experiments in mountainous regions of the western United States and said the types of clouds along the Gulf Coast aren't really conducive for seeding. 'It's never been proven to work' at scale with the puffy, cumulus clouds more common in the South, said Rauber. 'These clouds form wherever the heck they want … you can't target an area very effectively.' Cloud seeding can't alter the paths or intensity of hurricanes either, said Rauber. He cited failed experiments in the 1940s when scientists seeded hurricanes with dry ice to see if they could weaken their intensity. Although researchers learned valuable information on how hurricanes formed and traveled, they were not able to change their path or intensity. One business has conducted cloud seeding experiments along the Gulf Coast, according to Rauber, who stressed that the science is shaky. Rainmaker Technology Corp., a geoengineering company based in El Segundo, California, has conducted experiments along the Gulf Coast as recently as March, according to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration records. The company claims to use charged water particles to promote rain instead of aerosols. 'It's magic as far as I'm concerned because I have not seen any scientific research done in a proper way that shows that any of that is effective,' Rauber said. Misinformation and unproven methods that Rainmaker Technology and other companies promote adds to public fear and conspiracy theories surrounding weather modification, the professor said. Rainmaker Technology did not respond to calls for comment. Cloud seeding with silver iodide has been practiced for more than 70 years, and the scientific consensus is that the amount used is relatively effective, with the right clouds, and environmentally safe. Sprayed into clouds as an aerosol, silver iodide freezes and gives moisture-heavy clouds something to grab onto, coaxing its water molecules to condense and fall from the sky as rain. James Diaz, a medical toxicologist and professor emeritus at the LSU Health Sciences Center School of Public Health in New Orleans, said silver can prompt reactions when ingested in large doses and lab experiments suggest the heavy metal could be harmful to aquatic life in large amounts over time, but he said the amounts used for cloud seeding do not alarm him. 'These toxicities are unlikely after cloud seeding,' Diaz said. It's a similar story with iodide. Large amounts over long periods of time can do environmental and health harm, but Diaz said the amounts needed for cloud seeding aren't worrying. 'We should be more concerned about petrochemicals and pesticides,' he said. Fesi's bill doesn't apply to firefighting aerosols or pesticides used for agriculture. Coates said in an interview she intends to amend her bill so that it would not apply to pollutants emitted from the burning of fossil fuels. Fesi mentioned in his floor speech that sulfur dioxide is among the chemicals he believes are being sprayed into the atmosphere. There is no evidence that cloud seeding uses sulfur dioxide. The burning of fossil fuels, namely coal and oil at power plants and industrial facilities, is one of the largest sources of sulfur dioxide, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Coates and Fesi clarified in interviews their bills will not regulate industrial emissions. Coates said she considers her bill to be part of the wider push in Republican-led states to ban weather modification, adding she believes the issue to have bipartisan appeal. Florida recently approved legislation similar to what's under consideration in Louisiana, and Tennessee approved a ban on weather modification in 2024. 'I just decided that I wanted to bring the bill because I don't feel like anyone in Louisiana gave someone the right to do research in the air above us,' Coates said. 'That's our air above us, and we haven't given anybody permission, anybody the right to spray or do any modification above us.' When asked about the lack of widespread weather modification experiments in Louisiana, Coates said her bill is more precautionary. 'Why mess with Mother Nature?' she added. Coates' bill advanced from the House Committee on Natural Resources and Environment with unanimous support and awaits debate in the full House. Fesi testified on the Senate floor April 28 during debate over his bill that he believes 'certain agencies within the federal government are doing cloud seeding and geoengineering.' In an interview Friday, the senator was asked what evidence he had to support his claims. 'Look up in our sky,' Fesi answered. In an interview, Fesi later said he sees 'just tons and tons of cloud seeding' above his backyard and described it as 'all of the stripes across the skies.' Neither bill specifically discusses banning contrails, short for condensation trails. The thin, white cloud streaks that stretch behind airplanes are created as warm exhaust from jet engines meet the icy cold atmosphere, similarly to how warm breath briefly creates a fog in cold air. Unsubstantiated contrail theories attempt to connect weather modification and contrails, alleging jets are spraying chemicals for reasons ranging from weather alterations to population control. Sen. Regina Barrow, D-Baton Rouge, was the only lawmaker to question Fesi's claims on the Senate floor. He responded that '32 different agencies collect money for geoengineering of our weather.' Pressed by Barrow for details, Fesi shared a widely debunked conspiracy theory that the federal government is spraying aerosols to block sunlight, and that the materials – namely aluminum oxide – have been found in agricultural fields from contrail chemical spraying. No evidence exists of a government program that conducts or collects money for cloud seeding or solar radiation modification experiments. With no one else challenging his statements, Fesi's bill advanced from the Senate on a 27-12 party line vote, with Republicans prevailing. The measure awaits committee consideration in the House of Representatives.