[Terrapreta] Fw: a tiny outburst of common sense

Kevin Chisholm kchisholm at ca.inter.net
Tue Dec 18 10:22:52 CST 2007


Dear Sean

I don't understand the "Carbon Credits" mechanics, as it would apply to 
Terra Preta... perhaps you, or someone else could explain how the system 
is proposed to work, or point me to a URL that has the details.

Some of the questions that would interest me would be:

Where can one apply for Carbon Credit payments?

Is there a "minimum credit", below which inspection costs make the 
effort uneconomic?

How much would a Buyer pay for a credit of 1 Tonne of CO2?

How much would a Seller get for providing the 1 Tonne of CO2 credit?

Most existing Carbon Credits are based on "not adding" more CO2, while 
TP "removes" CO2 from teh Biosphere. Shouldn't TP get a higher payment 
per tonne of Carbon Credit generated?

Best wishes,

Kevin


Sean K. Barry wrote:
> Hi Lou,
>  
> Good points, all.  "Invest Now" is more optimistic and progressive.  
> There could still be a generational issue; since were being asked 
> invest in our childrens and grand childrens lives.  The consumer 
> credit issue could be a problem too.  Maybe buried carbon should be 
> the coin of the realm?  Earned carbon credits could be treated like 
> cash.  Earn carbon credits for your grandchildren.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> SKB
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* lou gold <mailto:lou.gold at gmail.com>
>     *To:* Sean K. Barry <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>
>     *Cc:* David Yarrow <mailto:dyarrow at nycap.rr.com> ; terrapreta
>     <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>     *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 11:33 AM
>     *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Fw: a tiny outburst of common sense
>
>     Yes, 25x25 is a good example of how some states and
>     municipalities  are moving forward despite a stalemated federal
>     government that is mostly captive of lobbyists who has
>     institutionalized access to Congress.
>
>     Of course I like the drift of your "Pay It Forward" phrase but it
>     is not likely to travel well in a society addicted to "Pay It
>     Later" consumer credit. Thus, I prefer the phrase "Invest Now"
>     which limits the sense of a burden to pay, replacing it with a
>     sense of future opportunity. I think that in all our messaging we
>     need to stress that we are not talking about guilt, or
>     reparations, or penalties but, instead , about a better and more
>     abundant way.
>
>     hugs,
>
>     lou
>
>     On Dec 17, 2007 12:37 PM, Sean K. Barry <sean.barry at juno.com
>     <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi Lou,
>          
>         The Minnesota state legislature was the first in the nation to
>         enact a Global Climate Change Mitigation strategy into law. It
>         is called "25 by 25" (25% reduction by 2025) bill.  It does
>         exactly what you propose.  It requires the electric utility
>         Exel Energy, to replace 25% of their electric generating
>         capacity with wind and other renewables by the year 2025.  It
>         is the first law of its kind and it is being accomplished
>         ahead of schedule.  My belief is that the ball needs to keep
>         rolling and even faster after 2025.
>          
>         There is a phrase I thought of later yesterday ... "Pay It
>         Forward" ... It was the title of a movie about soccer , I
>         think , too.  But the idea to me seems that we need to change 
>         from operating to get what we need now into more one of
>         getting for futture generations what they will need then.  We
>         have to live now only to sustain livability for others after
>         us.  This is very different than live and let live, to each
>         his own, every man for himself, and capitalistic markets,
>         etc.  It is more like realizing that its pay back time.  We
>         cannot any longer sustain the resource extraction and ignore
>         the waste paradigm.  We need to think about sustaining people,
>         people in other places and at later times.
>          
>         We have to pay our abundance forward.
>          
>         Regards,
>          
>         SKB
>
>             ----- Original Message -----
>             *From:* lou gold <mailto:lou.gold at gmail.com>
>             *To:* Sean K. Barry <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>
>             *Cc:* David Yarrow <mailto:dyarrow at nycap.rr.com> ;
>             terrapreta <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>             *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 4:13 AM
>             *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Fw: a tiny outburst of common
>             sense
>
>             Yep, and politics has its ways to distort all the logic
>             and market forces. For example, the most recent US energy
>             bill avoided two opportunities to guide business as usual
>             into new directions.  One would have required utilities to
>             generate an increasing share of their power from renewable
>             sources like wind. The other would have rolled back about
>             $12 billion in tax breaks granted to the oil companies in
>             the last energy bill and used the proceeds to help develop
>             cleaner fuels and new energy technologies.
>
>             That's politics as usual. But, I believe there's an even
>             deeper "logic" at work: the industrial age paradigm
>             generates both profits and progress from resource
>             extraction and disregard for waste. It approaches limits
>             through depletions and pollutions. It generates a zero-sum
>             politics of scarcity. Viewed from the perspective of the
>             earth, the human race is a vast collection of "haves" and
>             "have-nots" in a process of taking and wasting and
>             fighting for the spoils. This is the field on which
>             business-as-usual plays. The rich get richer, and so on....
>
>             I keep thinking that there is another logic deeply
>             embedded in the terra preta model. Rather than a one-way
>             taking from the earth by the human race, it presents the
>             possibility of reciprocities that have not been part of
>             the previous industrial paradigm. In essence, it shows a
>             view from the earth which says that by capturing and
>             converting waste into soil, we the human race may enter a
>             process of giving and using. This, in turn, presents a
>             potential for moving us from exhaustion toward abundance
>             and generates a new playing field for business-as-usual.
>             It suggests the possibility of truly sustainable abundance
>             and a system in which all get richer.
>
>             Respectfully, I would like to suggest that this is a
>             revolutionary shift -- a sea change -- that requires a
>             leap of faith from familiar notions of scarcity into
>             off-our-present-map novel notions of abundance. It may
>             turn out that consciousness-as-usual is as much or even
>             more of an obstacle than business-as-usual.
>
>             We have quite a song to sing. Let's do it.
>
>             OK, that's my-your-our dream.
>
>             hugs,
>
>             lou
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>             On Dec 16, 2007 10:48 PM, Sean K. Barry <
>             sean.barry at juno.com <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>> wrote:
>
>                 Hi David,
>                  
>                 I just read something called "Jevons Paradox".  Duane
>                 Pendergast referred me to it.  It is related to a
>                 "logical fallacy", called "affirming the consequent",
>                 and I think, an incorrect working the modus tollens or
>                 modus ponens rule?
>                  
>                 The applicable "fallacy" in the article you referred
>                 points out that you cannot rely on conservation of use
>                 of fossil fuels to lower fossil fuel consumption. 
>                 Reducing the demand (conservation or raising the
>                 efficiencies) will lower prices temporarily, but
>                 eventually will result in increased demand again.  If
>                 we conserve, then carbon demand and consumption will
>                 not go up?  ... doesn't work.  That dog don't hunt. 
>                 That is a weak induction argument.  The market forces
>                 will drive an increase in total demand for fossil
>                 fuels.  It is a powerful mechanism that has built most
>                 of all the world wide monopolies.
>                  
>                 The only logical method applicable, is a correct use
>                 of "inference", when A => B, says not A means not B
>                 and also not B means not A.  The way to use this to
>                 stop burning fossil fuels, is not to burn less
>                 (conservation), but rather to stop mining and drilling
>                 for (supplying) fossil carbon fuels!  Or, eliminate
>                 the supply altogether and that will definitely lower
>                 the total demand and consumption,.  If supply A, then
>                 demand B (and consumption), means that without supply
>                 => then no demand (and no consumption) in a market.
>                  
>                 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
>                  
>                 In a world where the demand for energy is intense,
>                 crucial, and intensifying, the fossil fuel energy
>                 industry is in its hey day.
>                 They operate in a vast market, which allows them to
>                 promote conservation and at the same time drive up
>                 corporate revenues.
>                 As for their "renewable energy" objectives, in an open
>                 market, replacement of fossil carbon fuel will
>                 eliminate the demand and consumption, only if
>                 replacement "renewable energy" sources are found at a
>                 lower price and can completely replace the "energy"
>                 content of the fossil carbon fuels.  As long as there
>                 are people who can only buy fossil carbon fuels, then
>                 suppliers will always be able to sell at just about
>                 any price.  If the supply becomes so precious and
>                 rare, it will price right into unavailability for all.
>                  
>                 Without replacement of the "energy" sources, we ALL
>                 will not have enough available "energy" resources to
>                 live and work as we now do.  Conservation is the
>                 "bait" of markets that fossil fuel suppliers are
>                 running, along with automobile manufacturers, and
>                 politicians who's futures are bent on the "status quo"
>                 of open markets acting like open markets.  This is
>                 just business.  Business as usual is their moniker. 
>                 What would you do, doing so well in business, to
>                 consider changing what you are doing?
>                  
>                 Maybe we should consider creating the business of
>                 "Eliminating Fossil Carbon Fuel Consumption", and use
>                 the logic of eliminating (or taxing the shit out of)
>                 fossil fuel supply, in order to rid the world of
>                 noxious carbon dioxide pollution?
>                  
>                  
>                 "The government's climate change policy works like
>                 this: extract every last drop of fossil fuel then pray
>                 to God that no one uses it."
>                  
>                 Regards,
>                  
>                 SKB
>
>                     ----- Original Message -----
>                     *From:* David Yarrow <mailto:dyarrow at nycap.rr.com>
>                     *To:* terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>                     <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>                     *Sent:* Sunday, December 16, 2007 3:19 PM
>                     *Subject:* [Terrapreta] Fw: a tiny outburst of
>                     common sense
>
>                     The Technology That Will Save Us from Runaway
>                     Climate Change
>                      - George Monbiot
>                     http://www.alternet.org/story/70302/
>                      
>                     David Yarrow
>                     "If yer not forest, yer against us."
>                     Turtle EyeLand Sanctuary
>                     44 Gilligan Road, East Greenbush, NY 12061
>                     dyarrow at nycap.rr.com <mailto:dyarrow at nycap.rr.com>
>                     www.championtrees.org <http://www.championtrees.org>
>                     www.OnondagaLakePeaceFestival.org
>                     <http://www.OnondagaLakePeaceFestival.org>
>                     www.citizenre.com/dyarrow/
>                     <http://www.citizenre.com/dyarrow/>
>                     www.farmandfood.org <http://www.farmandfood.org>
>                     www.SeaAgri.com <http://www.SeaAgri.com>
>                      
>                     "Happiness can be found even in the darkest of times,
>                     if one only remembers to turn on the light." 
>                     -Albus Dumbledore
>                     _______________________________________________
>                     Terrapreta mailing list
>                     Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>                     <mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>                     http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
>                     <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/>
>                     http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
>                     http://info.bioenergylists.org
>
>
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 Terrapreta mailing list
>                 Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>                 <mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>                 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
>                 http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
>                 <http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org>
>                 http://info.bioenergylists.org
>
>
>
>
>             -- 
>             http://lougold.blogspot.com/
>             http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/
>             <http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/>
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     http://lougold.blogspot.com/
>     http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/
>     <http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org





More information about the Terrapreta mailing list