[Terrapreta] What TP as carbon sequestration can do?

[Sean K. Barry]

Hello TP readers,

Some think that we should vastly curtail or even STOP emitting fossil carbon as CO2.  This idea stems from some rather obvious observations. Humans are adding CO2 to the atmosphere at a continuous rate, that is both the highest measured rate from any source and is at a rate that is increasing faster than from any other source.  Some argue that the oceans and the plants will absorb this excess CO2.  However, the measurements of increasing atmospheric concentrations of CO2, in spite of what oceans and plants can absorb, does not support this view.  In fact, 
recent measured increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentration (1970-2000: atmospheric CO2 concentrations up on average 1.5 ppm yr-1, 2006: up 2.14 ppm, 2007: up 4 ppm) indicate that the oceans and plants are now less able to "absorb" CO2 than they have been in just the recent past.  Thus, it would seem that the oceans and plants uptake of CO2 is "at saturation".

One must suppose, too, that as atmospheric concentrations of CO2 go up, so does global average temperature and consequent changes in climate (or the extent/loss of climate zones, i.e. the spread of desertification, the loss of Artic and Antarctic ice mass).  Some, too, would argue against this last assertion.  I don't know why?  It seems fairly obvious if anyone who would closely examines the history of CO2 and temperature along the mathematical models of their interaction.  This is, again, one of these very observable measurements that could be made by those who would disagree.

Now, to think that we should vastly curtail or even STOP emitting fossil carbon as CO2 is not really the same thing as saying we should stop burning fossil fuels.  Thsat would be the simplest and moist straightofrward apporach, but many, many people get themselves all bent out of shape, calling you a Marxist, or a liberal, or all kinds of names if you would imply that this should be what is done by most to reduce the growth in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

Today, I am now going to suggest a different approach.  This will make the people Greenpeace shudder.  Wallace Broecker suggested it.  I am beginning to be inclined to agree.  HUMANS WILL NEVER STOP BURNING FOSSIL CARBON FUELS, so the only real way we can reduce the growth in atmospheric concentrations of CO2 or reduce actual concentrations of CO2 is to actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere.  This is where the formation of Terra Preta comes in.  Forming TP soils requires charcoal.  Making charcoal and putting it into soil removes CO2 from the atmosphere (indirectly by stabilizing the carbon from plants that grew in the atmosphere and took in carbon as CO2 when they grew).

The change in thinking here is that making charcoal for the formation of Terra Preta soils CAN ALLOW US TO CONTINUE TO BURN FOSSIL CARBON FUELS.  I used to think this was stupid and immoral.  I know Green peace does.  But, it now has an appeal to me because it recognizes present and probably future reailty; HUMANS WILL NEVER STOP BURNING FOSSIL CARBON FUELS.

We can't beat them, so we might as well join them.  If we can give the fossil carbon fuel industry and incentive to make charcoal for Terra Preta soil formation and the sequestration of carbon, this will allow them to continue to operate.  They are a better ally than they are a foe.  This will also makes allies out of the ones who cannot or will not take the sacrifice of stopping the burning of fossil carbon fuel.

What does anyone think about this?

Regards,

SKB



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080525/5326578a/attachment.html