>Dears, > >Good points. I have envisioned, for the past 25 or so years, how might be >the best way to draw carbon out of the atmosphere. Presently I'm growing >corn as a soil improvment crop to add carbon in organized (not necessarily >stable but lasting forms to the soil, i.e. the carbon stays in the soil >even though it changes its forms.) forms and add it back to our soils. Corn >is a C4 plant, meaning it is amongst the best photopynthesisers. I can't >grow sugar cane here because of the winters or I wqould be experimenting >with sugar cane. > >Trees change the ecology and bring the biology of the soil up into the >trunk and canopy of the forest. So they actually deplete the soil of life >and send it up into the stand. Maybe this DOES actually give off carbon >dioxide initinally > >But no matter, corn grabs up so much more carbon dioxide in a single year >it isn't funny, so why try to grow trees other than stable aesthetics? Grow >corn. Or grow hemp, which is comparable in sequestering carbon dioxide, and >preferable if you want fiber. Such good fiber. The reason, so far as I can >tell, that trees are in favor is that inputs are so low you could wait >forever. Well, the same is true of field broadcasting. If field >broadcasting is used other inputs would be comparably low. People should >investigate and not just accept the current global ideas. > >Best, >Hug
This was the comment. hope it survivest Berst, Hugh > > > > >>Dear Friends, >> >>Here is the first of two articles that were just forwarded to the >>Ecological Economics forum. >> >>Tree farms won't halt climate change >> >>09:32 28 October 02 >>Fred Pearce, Valencia >> >>The Kyoto Protocol to halt climate change is based on a scientific fallacy, >>according to the first results of CarboEurope, a Europe-wide programme that >>has pioneered research into the carbon budget. >> >>The protocol says that countries can help meet their targets for cutting >>emissions of greenhouse gases over the next decade by planting forests to >>soak up carbon dioxide. But the soil in these "Kyoto forests" will actually >>release more carbon than the growing trees absorb in the first 10 years, the >>new research shows. >> >>"Countries will be able to claim carbon credits for the forests. But that >>won't reflect what is happening in the atmosphere," says Riccardo Valentini >>of the University of Tuscia in Viterbo, Italy. He presented the CarboEurope >>data last week in Valencia, Spain. >> >>The project's revelations could embarrass governments now meeting in New >>Delhi to discuss implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. Earlier in October, >>Italy announced plans to achieve between 10 and 40 per cent of its emission >>reductions target for 2012 through forest planting. But now its own >>scientists are warning that these sinks might not work. >> >> >>CO2 surge >> >> >>The problem is soils. Forest soils and the organic matter buried in them >>typically contain three to four times as much carbon as the vegetation >>above. CarboEurope's researchers have discovered that when ground is cleared >>for forest planting, rotting organic matter in the soil releases a surge of >>CO2 into the air. >> >>This release will exceed the CO2 absorbed by growing trees for at least the >>first 10 years, they say. Only later will the uptake of carbon by the trees >>begin to offset the losses from soils. In fact, says CarboEurope chairman >>Han Dolman of the Free University Amsterdam, some new forests planted on >>wet, peaty soils will never absorb as much carbon as they spit out. >> >>The world's densest network of CO2 monitoring devices has revealed that >>Europe's forests are absorbing up to 400 million tonnes a year, or 30 per >>cent of the continent's emissions. >> >>Researchers once assumed that most of this came from young forests, since >>old forests were thought to be in equilibrium with the atmosphere - sucking >>up as much gas as they spew out. But, says Valentini, old forests actually >>accumulate more carbon than young plantations. This suggests that >>conservation of old forests is a better policy for tackling global warming >>than planting new ones. >> >> >>Perverse incentive >> >> >>But the Kyoto Protocol takes none of this into account. "Besides ignoring >>soils, it has no measures to stop deforestation," says Valentini. Instead, >>it seems to give countries a perverse incentive to chop down existing >>natural forests and replace them with plantations. >> >>"They will be able to claim carbon credits for the new planting, while in >>reality releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the air," says Valentini. "There >>is nothing in the protocol to stop this." >> >>"If the politicians had known in 1997 what we know now, they would never >>have agreed to its rules on carbon sinks - at least, I hope they wouldn't," >>says Dolman. >> >> >>09:32 28 October 02 >> >> >>Return to news story >> >> >> © Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd. >> >>-- >> >>With kindest regards, >> >>Barry Carter >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>2319 Balm >>Baker City, Oregon 97814 >>Phone: 541-523-3357 >>Web Pages: >>Forest - http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/bmnfa/index.htm >>ORMUS - http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/whatisit.htm >> >>We must either let the Law of Love rule us through and through or not at >>all. Love among ourselves based on hatred of others breaks down under the >>slightest pressure. The fact is such love is never real love. It is an >>armed peace. And so it will be in this great movement in the West against >>war. War will only be stopped when the conscience of mankind has become >>sufficiently elevated to recognize the undisputed supremacy of the Law of >>Love in all the walks of life. Some say this will never come to pass. I >>shall retain the faith till the end of my earthly existence that this shall >>come to pass . . . >> --Mahatma Gandhi-- > >Visit our website at: www.unionag.org Visit our website at: www.unionag.org
