[Terrapreta] Tree planting -- a bit more

[lou gold]

Lewis and All,

I really hope that I'm not off topic. I think that we are talking about
import, export, storing and storage of carbon.

At present the modelers think that the Amazon forest stores the equivalent
of about 11 years worth of the total CO2 emissions on earth at present
rates. A big chunk of this vast sink will be released should there be a
catastrophic event. Today, there is a synergistic relationship between
agricultural expansion, deforestation, fire, infrastructure development,
general economic development, forest fragmentation and the forest's own
ability to generate and moderate it's own climate. This last item is not
about carbon, it's about moisture. But it could trigger one of the biggest
carbon releases ever seen. Thus the non-carbon ecosystem services of a
forest ARE central to our discussion. Unfortunately, the constellation of
interactive variables is now pointing toward a catastrophic event -- one
that might claim the eastern half of the Amazon basin in as little as a few
decades. http://news.mongabay.com/2007/1129-amazon.html

I believe that this critical fact is vastly more important to understand
than knowing the particular trade-offs in various stages of forest
succession. Basically, we already know what happens at the catastrophic end
of a forest -- most of the stored carbon is released. We also know that the
system is stressed and that it is going to take emergency actions to save
it. These actions center now on two things -- halting further incursions
into the standing forest and altering the situation outside the forest so as
to reduce the pressure for further deforestation.

The carbon market is critical for providing the necessary incentives. First,
there needs to be carbon credit for reduced deforestation -- this can VERY
quickly mean that a standing tree will be more valuable than a logged one
and it will generate a local economy of preservation. Second, there needs to
be a way to improve the productivity and sequestration on already deforested
land. This is where agrichar enters the picture. But it also needs an
incentive which can be provided by carbon credits for sequestration in the
soil. Increasing agricultural output without further deforestation can occur
by healing the land, resulting in more food and more forests.

See, it's all connected. And that's why I'm resistant to what appears as a
single factor emphasis. Excuse me Lewis if I somehow missed your point.

All best for all,

lou



On Dec 4, 2007 8:58 PM, <MMBTUPR at aol.com> wrote:

>       from   Lewis L Smith
>
> I accept Lou Gold's comments, but frankly I was under the impression that
> the focus of the discussion was on the import and export of carbon, and did
> not mean to overlook or be disrespectful to the multitude of other things
> which go on in such a complex biological system as a forest !
>
> For example, just to think of all the creepy crawlies in a rain forest [
> we have a very nice one here in Puerto Rico ] . It is enough to boggle the
> mind. And then there are some 2,000 medicinal plants. And all the species of
> bushes and trees. And so on. And all these living things [ and their detris
> after death ] interact with each other.
>
> Directly or indirectly, many people believe that God created it. But could
> even he model it ?  I guess so, but it would take some overtime.
>
> That is why I suggested a sequence of material balances.
>
> Cordially. ###
>
>
> **************************************
> Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products.
> (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
>
>



-- 
http://lougold.blogspot.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071204/3de7e446/attachment.html