[Terrapreta] Carbon emissions show sharp rise

[Frank Teuton]

Sean et al;

I fail to grasp the reasoning behind the idea that emptying biologically active carbon reservoirs (soil OM, trees, prairies, etc.) is somehow fundamentally different than emptying biologically inert (relatively speaking) reservoirs, coal, oil, gas, peat, etc.

The simple truth is, we can only manage atmospheric CO2 levels by learning to manage all the possible reservoirs of carbon, including biological reservoirs as well as inert reservoirs. Pumping relatively inert carbon underground is one way, which includes terra preta approaches...aiming to increase SOM and standing biomass via perennial plant strategies, including forest and prairie approaches, is another....stimulating phytoplankton in the ocean is of course still another.

In the meantime, it is simple arithmetic that depleting existing biological reservoirs further is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Increased deforestation for, say, charcoal production where the charcoal is then subsequently burned for fuel empties the forest bioreservoir of carbon, which is not a good thing. We will need to optimize all reservoirs of carbon to make this thing work.

It is my understanding that up until about 1950 the majority of the increase in atmospheric carbon was due to human land use impacts, eg, deforestation, tillage, desertification, and similar phenomena. Not until about 1950 did fossil fuel burning exceed biome degradation as the leading anthropogenic cause of atmospheric CO2 increase. If the argument is that we need to put back the C, I would suggest we need to put it back not only into inert carbon forms in the ground, but also back into the living biological systems from whence a great deal of it was also taken.

It isn't one or the other, but what combinations of both can be made to work.

My two cents, 

Frank Teuton
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Sean K. Barry 
  To: Richard.Black-INTERNET at bbc.co.uk ; Sean K. Barry 
  Cc: terrapreta 
  Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 2:21 PM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Carbon emissions show sharp rise


  Correction: All of human activity burning fossil carbon fuels increases the atmospheric levels of carbon by 6 billion tons per year. 

  SKB
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Sean K. Barry 
    To: Richard.Black-INTERNET at bbc.co.uk 
    Cc: terrapreta 
    Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 12:17 PM
    Subject: Carbon emissions show sharp rise


    Hi Richard,

    I just read your article ...

    Carbon emissions show sharp rise

    By Richard Black

    Environment correspondent, BBC News website


    Charcoal is made from relatively recently living plant materials, usually hardwoods.  The carbon in those plants was previously in the atmosphere no more than maybe 100 years ago, at the most.  Carbon from coppiced woodland made into charcoal is only out of the atmosphere maybe 3 years.

    On the other hand, fossil carbon (coal, oil, natural gas) fuels have carbon in them that has been out of the atmosphere for 300+ million years!  The recent up tick (the recent 150 years) in the growth of atmospheric CO2 concentration is primarily from the emissions of burning fossil carbon fuels alone.  Burning charcoal has only and will only recycle recent preexisting atmospheric CO2.  Only fossil fuel burning ADDS CO2 to the atmospheric concentrations.  Nature recycles CO2 in/out of the atmosphere (out of the sky and into the plants, out of the plants and into the sky) at a clip of 120 billion tons of carbon every year.  All of human activity burning fossil carbon fuels increases the atmospheric levels of CO2 by 6 billion tons per year.  Inputs of CO2 to the atmosphere are +5% greater than is absorbed by Nature.

    Increased burning of charcoal does have other potential pollution problems.  Rising levels of emissions of the potent green house gas, Methane-CH4 and particulate soot are both two significant problems which can effect both environmental and human health.

    If we controlled emissions of Methane-CH4 and particulate soot, then we could replace all of fossil fuel burning with biomass charcoal burning and NEVER increase the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere.  We could also do the same and REDUCE atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
    I believe that your assertion that CO2 from charcoal burning is causing recent Global Warming is profoundly incorrect.



    Regards,

    Sean K. Barry
    Principal Engineer/Owner
    Troposphere Energy, LLC
    11170 142nd St. N.
    Stillwater, MN 55082-4797
    (651)-285-0904 (Work/Cell)
    (651)-351-0711 (Home/Fax)
    sean.barry at juno.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20071230/1fcfb5ee/attachment.html