[Terrapreta] Three-party sales agreements - formerly Re: Global Carbon Cycle

[Ron Larson]

Sean (cc terra preta list).  See also few notes below on my point #4 issue - which I want to put in a different "box" (sales) than yours (accounting).  I am concerned that we have some complicated future three-way transactions to deal with.  Granted that some can be as simple as you describe below - but others are going to require new procedures to have the "UN" be putting money into TP transactions.  We have to make the deals simple.  For a $1000 or $10,000 purchase of char by someone, with a potential rebate of a portion through application to the "UN" - there will be a strong reluctance by the UN to go back annually for new payments.  The transaction costs would be excessive.  I am partly concerned about the benefits of placing the char in the ground - but more about how to capture in the initial deal with the "UN" the extra CO2 to be removed in out-years due to the initial char deposition.  

    Another way of getting at this multiplier issue is to say we need to prove that diverting char from the energy part of the economy is a wise investment for getting more eventual energy (and indirectly more CO2 removal) from the increased productivity of the soil.  I hear regularly that it is better to simply consume that charcoal (NOT place any in the ground) and avoid the CO2 emissions associated with the fossil energy displaced immediately.  I am convinced that is not correct - that more fossil energy and more CO2 can be displaced with the TP investment.  It is this multiplier phenomenon that I am saying we need to address if we are to make TP adoption occur more rapidly.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Sean K. Barry 
  To: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org ; Christoph Steiner ; Ron Larson 
  Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 12:35 AM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Global Carbon Cycle


  Hi Ron,

  You bring up an issue about carbon accounting in sequestration projects.  I think it might not be that important of an issue.  [RWL:  respectfully - I think it is a huge, key issue.  I am not concerned here about accounting after the fact, although that is another important related topic.]

  Out year carbon sequestration might not be so easily measured.  But, it also might not even need accounting for.  Measurable amounts of carbon (charcoal) can be sequestered and earn the "carbon credits" immediately, when its applied.  Let the out year benefits for increased soil organic carbon go on without earning "carbon credits" on the trading scheme. [RWL:  Then your are undervaluing the char and someone will not be paying the right amout.] They are apparently too hard for bean counters to measure anyway.  The out year benefits will be for those who use the land for agriculture. [There will also be out-year CO2 and energy benefits (for society), as well.] They can reap those benefits directly, without need for a money trading scheme.  [RWL: agreed that the soil end of the triad can reap benefits - but will they be adequately incentivized when you don't accurately value the future CO2 and energy benefits as well.]

  These new husbands of the "Neo Terra Preta" land could apply more charcoal whenever they wanted to, earn some more "carbon credits" then, and still reap more agricultural benefits down the line.  The sticking point on carbon sequestration has been on making reasonable estimates (not measurements) on future sequestrations.  "Neo Terra Preta" forming doesn't have this problem. [RWL:  True in some simple one-party decisions or two-party transactions - but not when there are three parties involved.] The tonnage of charcoal amended can be measured immediately and accurately, upon application.  There may likely be a need to monitor whether the charcoal is always fresh and not mined from some already paid for, "Neo Terra Preta" formations.  Direct application of charcoal taken directly from visable charcoal making operations ought to do the trick there, I'd think.

  What do you think of that?  [RWL:  I think we need to include the topic of "out-year multipliers" in our forthcoming summary data list.]

  SKB
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Ron Larson 
    To: Sean K. Barry ; terrapreta at bioenergylists.org ; Christoph Steiner 
    Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 9:30 PM
    Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Global Carbon Cycle


        <snip material related to a "point #4" from recent dialogs on a data list>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20070602/e6077928/attachment-0001.html