[Terrapreta] Use Terra Preta soil formation as a means to combat Global Warming and Global Climate Change

[Sean K. Barry]

Hi Jim,

My thinking on Terra Preta is that it can work in the long run for agricultural purposes.  It looks like quite a complex mixture, and soil building process too, involving - charcoal-in-soil, soil organic matter, soil microorganisms, plants, water content, nutrient concentration, maybe vermiculture, and even pottery shards.  It happens over a long time.

One of the evident ingredients in still existing TP sites his high carbon content in the soil, specifically charcoal.  In the early 21st century charcoal-in-soil had another possible use, a use possibly more cast than the agricultural use for now, maybe.  Charcoal-in-soil is long term carbon sequestration, with estimated life in the soil measured in millennia.

This topic comes up in here - "Use Terra Preta soil formation as a means to combat Global Warming and Global Climate Change".
Then the nay-saying peopl answer.  "Well, that's if you believe that humans even caused GW or that we could do anything about it anyway.  Well, that's if Terra Preta can even last that long in the soil.  Well, that can't work because that is too much charcoal to have to make and pay for.  The economics aren't there.  Well, charcoal is fuel and people will use it for fuel before they will ever put it into the ground.  No one will do it unless they can get an immediate agricultural benefit to their soil for putting charcoal into it.  Charcoal has volatile matter which has cancer causing pytotoxins in it.  That is just pie in the sky high tech toys that will never pay for themselves or make charcoal from biomass economically."

I seen and been in a lot of these discussions and heard lots of arguments against trying anything.  The results of this exercise are impressive, right, aren't they?  I believe now is the time for ACTION.  I've studied the theory of the anthropogenic cause for current GW and GCC.  I am an adherent to it.  I also, therefore, think humans can have an effect on world climate.  This is enough for me to believe that human ACTION can reduce this problem of rising GHG concentrations and/or reduce its effects (GW and GCC) for people now and in our following generations.

>From human actions alone, we have directly caused the atmospheric CO2 concentration to rise from ~250-280 ppm steadily and increasingly up to 383 ppm in 150 years.  We will drive it past ~450 ppm with business as usual.  We are now, have been for some time, and will be in the future affecting the atmosphere and the climate by doing this emissions of GHGs like CO2, and CH4 , and N2O into the atmosphere.

But, we have the power to change all this, too, I think.  We can effect the atmosphere differently.  We can mitigate this problem of rising GHG concentrations.  We can remove CO2 directly and semi-permanently from the atmosphere by charring biomass and burying it into soil.  It may or may not look and act like the agricultural miracle of Terra Preta within our or our children's lifetimes.  That will, I'm sure, take some learning and nurturing for us to to do that.  But, putting charcoal-into-soil now will remove carbon from the atmosphere, now.

With an active program like the Kyoto Protocol working, and with all parties signed on (US , Australia, and China signed on as an Annex I country),  then where CDM projects are running in developing countries, "carbon credits" can accrue and carbon sequestration can be fully funded.  Rather than tax Americans, I think the US government should give a tax deduction for money invested in third world "carbon credits".  I don't believe in a "carbon tax", either.  But, I think we should all wipe our own asses, too.

To me there is a workable plan to actually do something that will actually reduce the problem at its root.  Atmospheric CO2 concentrations are already too high, reducing further emissions is a lame answer to that.  Look at Jevons's Paradox and see that energy conservation won't work either.  It is just a game of the marketers to promote expanding sales volume at low prices.  The only real way to do anything to reduce atmospheric concentrations of GHG is to directly remove CO2 and reduce emissions of GHG, specifically from burning of fossil fuels and using fossil fuel derived fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides.

We should conserve only on the use of all renewable (non-fossil) energy sources.  Let the fossil fuel mining, drilling, and refining companies exhaust there cheap energy quickly and be stuck trying to sell an inferior product (a fossil carbon intense energy resource) at higher prices.
Then enact a tax on fossil carbon rich fuels.  Make only those who would afford themselves fossil fuels pay that tax then.

Biomass conversion to charcoal also has an answer to the looming energy crisis.  Conversion of biomass to charcoal for use in charcoal-in-soil carbon sequestration can, at the same time, liberate a significant amount of heat energy and chemical energy in the form of medium to low BTU gases as products from the conversion process.  So, usable energy can be harvested from biomass at the same time as some of the biomass could be left (un-harvested) as charcoal.

Good night true advocates of Terra Preta and to others.

Regards,

SKB






Regards,

SKB

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jim Joyner<mailto:jimstoy at dtccom.net> 
  To: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 9:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] What is so bad about global warming?


  I understand that terra preta is something of a focal point for a 
  discussion about many somewhat related things. But are we not getting a 
  little ahead of ourselves?

  First, we don't even know for certain that we can create terra preta, 
  i.e., sequester carbon in the soil in some sort of very long term 
  beneficiality.

  Second, and maybe more important, we don't know, even if we can create 
  terra preta or something near it, that it can be done economically.

  Isn't it just a little early to be talking about the use of TP saving 
  the human species from itself? Isn't all this talk of stopping global 
  warming with TP just a kind wishful thinking, mental masterbation?

  Seems to be we should be working on these two items. IF the answers work 
  out well, GW can take care of itself one way or the other.

  Jim

  _______________________________________________
  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://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/>
  http://info.bioenergylists.org<http://info.bioenergylists.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080314/c4f83689/attachment.html