Surely you also have to consider whatever vegetation your are replacing?
It's the net increase in net primary productivity which matters

A
 On Jun 7, 2013 12:33 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dr. D.and list
>
>    I am not an expert in this area, but  try to follow the subject closely
> -  because it is a hugely important topic for biochar and you should get an
> answer.  You asked below *"My guess is that many group members here might
> [think] this is among the least effective "geo-engineering" efforts. Am I
> wrong? *"
>
>     My answer:  we need more data.  By no means "least" yet..
>
>     Googling found this Wiki statement (emphasis added):
> *'They grow at such a rate as to produce roughly 40 cubic feet (1.1 m3)
> of wood each year, approximately equal to the volume of a 50-foot-tall tree
> one foot in 
> diameter.[7]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_giant_sequoias#cite_note-NPS2009-7>This
>  makes them among the fastest
> growing organisms on Earth, in terms of annual increase in mass.  "
>
>
> *    This is encouraging but meaningless in CDR  (NPP) terms until we
> know the associated tree age and land area.   If the above hypothetical
> tree had unity density [barely floated] of about half carbon,  we could say
> about 0.55 tonnes C/yr per tree.   If there were 100 such trees per hectare
> (each occupying 100 sqm)  or spaced about 10 meters apart, then we could
> say the NPP was about 55 tonnes C/ha-yr or about 5.5 kg C/sqm-yr. This
> would be astoundingly good. But could be off easily by a factor of10 if the
> 40  cu ft related to a 250 ft  tall tree  (maybe this growth statistic is
> for land with fewer than 10 trees per ha??).  Anyone up on these numbers
> for giant sequoia?  An actively managed planted forest might start off with
> 100 times as many trees per ha (one per sqm) - and slowly reduce the
> density to get the maximum annual dollar yield from the initial  planting
> -  the thinned little guys going to energy and biochar "of course". There
> are numerous forestry experts who know this proper (maxmum profit) planting
> and thinning schedule for different species.  The growth follows a sigmoid
> curve shape - so we need data on that as well.  If the maximum growth
> period is 500 years off, that is not so good.
>
>    Speaking of biochar,  millions of seedlings are now finding better
> growth and economics with char replacing vermiculite or similar starter
> "soil".
>
> Ron
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Dr D" <[email protected]>
> *To: *[email protected]
> *Sent: *Thursday, June 6, 2013 1:49:34 PM
> *Subject: *[geo] Nice but unrealistic carbon capture project?
>
> Instead of sharing a paper, below is a 5 min video from the New York
> Times....
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/video/2013/06/06/science/100000002262388/reaching-for-the-sky.html
>
> The Archangel Project wants to take cuttings from giant trees (Sequoias),
> propagate them in the millions, and plant thousands of arces of them
> throughout the US (e.g. New England). The idea is to capture carbon and
> store if for thousands of years.
>
> My guess is that many group members here might this is among the least
> effective "geo-engineering" efforts. Am I wrong?
>
> --
> 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 [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>
> --
> 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 [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>

-- 
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to