Also, at night the plants breath out Carbon Dioxide.  Their net carbon
sequestration depends on their mode of photosynthesis combined with day
length and degree of cloud cover.  I was talking with a friend of mine who
did research on photosynthesis in trees.  he said that when a cloud coverd
the sun, the photosynthesis would crash.  :)

M


On Tue, January 15, 2008 11:30 am, David Bryant wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Indeed.  I should also point out that logging increases C respiration
> from decay woody debris and increased sol temperature...
>
> IMHO: he only form of biofuel production that is sustainable, and C
> neutral, is waste conversion.  I.e biodiesel from waste oil, ethanol
> from waste cellulose and methane from manure.   While all do include
> some energy inputs, so does waste disposal and it does not provide
> any energy benefits.  I doubt however if a corporate infrastructure
> of biofuel production can avoid being seduced by the lure of
> sustainable profits from unsustainable biomass to energy from primary
> agricultural sources .
>
>
> David
>
> On Jan 15, 2008, at 5:38 AM, William Silvert wrote:
>
>> Although David is correct about long-term carbon budgets, this too
>> is an
>> oversimplification. Biomass is a form of carbon sequestration, and
>> when
>> forests are cut down to develop biofuel plantations, as is
>> happening in
>> Indonesia and elsewhere, a lot of carbon is removed and ultimately
>> gets into
>> atmospheric CO2. Furthermore much biofuel production is energy-
>> intensive,
>> perhaps the worst example being the growth of corn in the US where
>> much
>> energy goes into the production of fertilizers and pesticides, as
>> well as
>> irrigation. And of course there are other environmental costs in
>> addition to
>> energy.
>>
>> So far as I am aware, the only significant forms of carbon
>> sequestration are
>> biomass and carbonates -- am I wrong about this? Maintenance of
>> high forest
>> biomass can help, and as for carbonates, I think the main mechanism is
>> through creation of calcium carbonate by marine organisms, which we
>> can't do
>> much about. Perhaps someone has better information, but it seems to
>> me that
>> it is highly desirable both to reduce the consumption of fossil
>> fuels and to
>> promote conservation of high plant biomass.
>>
>> Bill Silvert
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "David Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 10:24 PM
>> Subject: Re: ESA Press Release: Nation's Ecological Scientists
>> weigh in on
>> biofuels
>>
>>
>>> This statement that biofuels are combustables, and therefore give off
>>> CO2, is a commonly promoted oversimplification, oft stated by less-
>>> than-knowledgeable reporters.  The carbon in biofuels WAS in the
>>> atmosphere last winter/growing season (depending on your latitude)
>>> and therefore biofuels are technically C neutral from the perspective
>>> of the C Cycle.  Just like the rain/snow that falls on us today was
>>> in the ocean days/weeks before and does not contribute to the sea
>>> surface level rise.
>


Malcolm L. McCallum
Assistant Professor of Biology
Editor Herpetological Conservation and Biology
http://www.herpconbio.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to