The world does not have enough plant nutrients. The lack of nutrients "turns the land surface into a net source of CO2 by 2100."
Therefore, if one wishes for biologic reductions in atmospheric, oceanic, and terrestrial CO2 concentrations which last for millennium, one must store the carbon without storing the nutrients. One must separate the carbon from the nutrients near (a few kilometers) the growing plants and return the nutrients to grow more plants over large areas (5% of ocean surface) but in short time frames (a few months). That is: one must accelerate natural processes with about 30 time current artificial organic N production while unnaturally pulling carbon out of the cycle.
But that alone is not good enough. The process must spin off food for 10 billion people with developed country demands without using fresh water. Otherwise the pursuit of food and fresh water will remain the higher value market.
Ocean Forests.
---------- Original Message --------
Subject: [geo] Future productivity and carbon storage limited by
terrestrial nutrient availability : Nature Geoscience
From: Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, July 02, 2015 1:49 pm
To: geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>
Poster's note : relevant to BECS, CROPS and other bioremediation of CO2 pollutionFuture productivity and carbon storage limited by terrestrial nutrient availabilityWilliam R. Wieder, Cory C. Cleveland, W. Kolby Smith & Katherine Todd-BrownNature Geoscience 8, 441–444 (2015) doi:10.1038/ngeo2413
20 April 2015The size of the terrestrial sink remains uncertain. This uncertainty presents a challenge for projecting future climate–carbon cycle feedbacks1, 2, 3, 4. Terrestrial carbon storage is dependent on the availability of nitrogen for plant growth5, 6, 7, 8, and nitrogen limitation is increasingly included in global models9, 10, 11. Widespread phosphorus limitation in terrestrial ecosystems12 may also strongly regulate the global carbon cycle13, 14, 15, but explicit considerations of phosphorus limitation in global models are uncommon16. Here we use global state-of-the-art coupled carbon–climate model projections of terrestrial net primary productivity and carbon storage from 1860–2100; estimates of annual new nutrient inputs from deposition, nitrogen fixation, and weathering; and estimates of carbon allocation and stoichiometry to evaluate how simulated CO2 fertilization effects could be constrained by nutrient availability. We find that the nutrients required for the projected increases in net primary productivity greatly exceed estimated nutrient supply rates, suggesting that projected productivity increases may be unrealistically high. Accounting for nitrogen and nitrogen–phosphorus limitation lowers projected end-of-century estimates of net primary productivity by 19% and 25%, respectively, and turns the land surface into a net source of CO2 by 2100. We conclude that potential effects of nutrient limitation must be considered in estimates of the terrestrial carbon sink strength through the twenty-first century.--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
