[Terrapreta] What fixed "acid rain" is what is working in the Kyoto Protocol
Mary Lehmann
mlehmann3 at austin.rr.com
Tue Apr 22 11:53:34 CDT 2008
Sean,, I thought we paid low carbon emitters so that we could be high
carbon emitters. I really never did understand about carbon caps and
credits. Is there some article I can read that gets down to basics?
It always seemed to me that the people who owned the air commons were
the public who had to breathe the air, so that emitting rights should
be paid to them (us) but instead of selling them we could tear them
up or use them ourselves if we are polluting, say by driving. I.E.
the whole thing seems a mish-mash of distributing ill-defined rights
to big pollutors as if they owned the air commons by consent of the
government. Familiar. Please clear up my confusion if you can.
Mary
========================================================================
============
On Apr 17, 2008, at 4:39 PM, Sean K. Barry wrote:
> Hi Gerrit,
>
> Did you know that the solution to the "acid rain" problem in the
> Upper Midwest of the US, was accomplished on a program of paying
> and trading in "emissions credits" between and among emitters? Did
> you also know that elements of the Kyoto Protocol were developed
> based upon this proven working model?
>
> Coal fired power plants in the Upper Midwest of the US were known
> to be emitting high concentrations of sulfur oxides (SOx) and
> nitrous oxides(NOx). Knowledge of this was by a simple, fast,
> chemical analysis of smokestack gas contents (unless you can't
> believe that gas chromatographs and mass spectrometers actually can
> work). Lakes in area down wind from the plants were acidified,
> with no known natural source for the pronounced reductions in pH.
> It was "killing" lakes that had existed in nature for millennia.
> It was predicted by the models of air movement in the areas
> surrounding the coal fired power plants (simple geo/climate
> analysis), that the emissions could be the possible source for the
> acid buildup.
>
> The scientists thought that the emissions from coal fired power
> plants CAUSED "acid rain", because they said SOx and NOx in a
> rainstorm will combine with H2O to make Sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and
> Nitric acid (HNO3). This was a well supported hypothesis then,
> too, like AGW. The ACTION of cleaning up the "acid rain" was the
> experiment, because it was predicted by the scientists, that
> "scrubbing" the emissions from coal fired power plants would STOP
> the acidification of local lakes. The acidification needed to be
> STOPPED! Somehow this was obvious to everyone (scientists
> included), so the ACTION to experiment with their prediction was
> funded and commenced.
>
> The protocol for that experiment, which was done, also, at the same
> time, was simple; immediately to try and to fix the "acid rain"
> problem based on what the scientists said. Emitters of SOx/NOx
> emissions had to pay into a fund (an Emissions Reduction Fund),
> prorated on their emissions, and until they ceased emissions. The
> fund's "emissions credits", were then used exclusively by the same
> emitter companies to pay for developing the technology and putting
> SOx/NOx "scrubbing" equipment into their own plants. ALL of the
> companies had to share the "scrubber" technology with one another
> until the coal power plants of ALL companies were retrofitted.
>
> Because of the payments needed to the fund continued operations
> without "scrubber" technology, the companies operating the coal
> power plants had a strong economic incentive to do something about
> SOx/NOx emissions. They also had access the funds to do that
> something. When the retrofit was complete, then payments to the
> fund ended, so they ALL knew what to do.
>
> This program WORKED! Acidification in the areas around the
> "scrubber" retrofitted plants STOPPED immediately when the
> emissions of SOx/NOx dropped and has not returned.
>
> Some of the competition were EARNING (unfairly, it was thought)
> "emissions credits" for having to put in "scrubber" technology when
> they were building a new plant and getting to pay for it from the
> fund (like China and India building ... new ... coal ... fired ...
> power ...plants!). There was a lot of pissing and moaning going on
> around then about the ACTIONS that were mandated. I think this
> program was set up by a US judge in a class action suit or an EPA
> suit. The Canadians had a similar problem on the north side of the
> Great Lakes and some of the companies were on both sides.
>
> What the Kyoto Protocol does is ask developed nations (emitters) to
> pay into a "Atmospheric Carbon Reductions Fund" and to develop CO2
> sequestering technology and share it with developing nations. The
> value of the "carbon credits" in the fund will increase as the
> developed world enlarges the fund and the investment begins to work
> towards meeting the carbon reductions objective. It is important
> that we develop "CO2 scrubbing" technology here in the developed
> US, but it is equally, if not more important, that we get that
> technology into the coal fired power plants in places like China,
> who is a very fast developing country.
>
> This Kyoto Protocol isn't about only "equal treatment" of ALL
> parties. It levels things and applies "fair treatment" to ALL
> parties, depending on their participation in the problem, the
> solution, the places where growth in more problems is possible and
> preventable, and the on the impacts to ALL people. Some people
> can, will, and should bear some financial burden, so that others
> may not suffer some more harse burdens like, heatstroke,
> homelessness, thirst, drowning, starvation, loss of family, or loss
> of life.
>
> Regards,
>
> SKB
>
>
> The Kyoto Protocol "carbon credits" are designed to be the same
> thing as the, to do the same thing, and provide the same incentives
> and ACTIONS, etc.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerald Van Koeverden
> To: terra pretta group
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Earthen Kiln Conjecture
>
> Global warming or not, air pollution is causing all kinds of
> pulmonary and other diseases both in people, animals and
> plants; ... remember acid rain?
>
> And as developing countries get more wealth, they too will follow
> in our footsteps...and make our collective 'footprint' on the
> environment that much bigger.
>
> We have to figure out how we are going to not only feed more people
> with less land and more expensive inputs, but also facilitate their
> travel, electrical generation, etc. such that our footprint doesn't
> get so big that we destroy ourselves in an ocean and sky of our
> own poisons.
>
> Right now we are doing a terrible job. The cash register still
> rings louder than the pleas of those trying to keep earth livable.
>
> Gerrit.
>
> On 17-Apr-08, at 11:07 AM, gordon eliott wrote:
>> yes terra preta is fascinating in itself.
>> and yes for anyone interested in climate remediation, may i suggest:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI&feature=related
>>
>> best wishes
>> gordon eliott
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Terrapreta mailing list
>> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>> http://bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> terrapreta_bioenergylists.org
>> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
>> http://info.bioenergylists.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/
> terrapreta_bioenergylists.org
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/
> terrapreta_bioenergylists.org
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080422/286b757b/attachment.html
More information about the Terrapreta
mailing list