[Terrapreta] Sean! Why hast thou foresaken us?

[Mark Ludlow]

Sean will return!

As someone who has often dissed him on this List, I, nevertheless, deeply
appreciate Sean's honorable devotion to his beliefs, (as he is able to
explicate them).

There will come a time when soldiers (converts, true-believers, martyrs)
will be in short supply. Sean is who he is. Implicit with modern day char
usage is the notion that it will provide a countervailing influence to
increasing fossil fuel combustion. In my opinion, the desirability of
planting char along with seeds and compost should be a given (first do no
harm). From this notion may expand the ideas of 1) how to produce char and
2) how to use it most productively in an agricultural system. Ultimately,
these endeavors are two sides of the same coin. But if the interest in char
as an agricultural amendment is tentative, it's value as an atmospheric
carbon sequesterant is not.

In the back of our minds, as we (hopefully) accelerate agricultural
production with optimized char, will remain the idea that we are also
sequestering carbon. My personal belief is that char should be optimized as
an agricultural amendment to the point that carbon credits are irrelevant.
But some sort of cohesive rationale must be expressed for the use of
agricultural carbon before mainstream agriculture pays attention. Pee and
Poo only goes so far in a model of broad adoption.

Let's give Sean some slack. Why would we wish to drive someone away from us
who is so good hearted? He gives his strong opinions, but he receives a lot
of grief from List members. To his credit, he has no selfish instincts.
There's room on this list (perhaps we could limit him to 20 posts each day)
both in bandwidth and generosity of spirit.

What is our individual gain in censuring him? Will we, each of us, be
stronger from not being subjected to his diatribe? I think not.

Best regards,
Mark