For an example of what John is talking about, see http://ourworld.unu.edu/en/japanese-agricultural-heritage-systems-recognized. Japanese traditional agricultural practices are based on maintaining coherent local biomes as opposed to razing them and creating monocultures. ᐧ
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:27 PM, John HARTE <[email protected]> wrote: > Ken, best not to look at it as an either or problem. There are ways to > increase agricultural sustainability and at the same time store carbon and > promote biodiversity. > > Sent from my iPhone > John Harte > > > On Feb 12, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> > wrote: > > My view is that we should be managing land in ways that place extremely > high emphasis on protecting biodiversity and natural ecosystems while > meeting human needs, which probably means focusing on agricultural > intensification and not worrying so much about carbon storage.. > > For solving the climate problem, to paraphrase Bill Clinton, "it's the > energy system, stupid." > > > > _______________ > Ken Caldeira > > Carnegie Institution for Science > Dept of Global Ecology > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA > +1 650 704 7212 [email protected] > http://kencaldeira.com > https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira > > My assistant is Dawn Ross <[email protected]>, with access to > incoming emails. > > > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:24 AM, David desJardins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Certainly there's no question that we could have a big one-time (but >> large even though it's one-time) removal of carbon from the atmosphere if >> we convert large land areas from agriculture to be optimized carbon sinks. >> >> But if you want to use currently-agricultural land to remove carbon from >> the atmosphere, then it's probably even better to grow trees and cut those >> trees down and bury them and do that over and over again every 10-20 years, >> than to convert the land to a carbon-dense biome? That gives you ongoing >> carbon removal, not just a one-time effect. >> >> On Thu Feb 12 2015 at 8:16:40 AM Fred Zimmerman < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> A couple of weeks ago Greg Rau shared a Jan. 30 article from Science >>> that discussed the difficulty of accurately characterizing biomes (land >>> use/land cover maps are not perfect) and the pitfalls in targeting >>> particular biomes for interventions. >>> ᐧ >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Aines, Roger D. <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> That seems like the important argument, John. Are there any simple >>>> metrics >>>> we can use to think about the best way to optimize soil carbon in a >>>> particular biome? And, are there realistic totals that we could say >>>> those >>>> optimized situations represent in the US, or even the world? >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Roger D. Aines >>>> >>>> Fuel Cycle Innovations Program Leader >>>> >>>> E Programs, Global Security >>>> >>>> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory >>>> >>>> Mail Stop L-090 Livermore, CA 94551 >>>> >>>> 925 423-7184 >>>> 925 998-2915 cell >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Administrative Contact >>>> >>>> Michelle Herawi [email protected] >>>> >>>> 925 423-4964 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2/12/15 7:49 AM, "John Harte" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >Remember: forests = trees + soil + microbes +Š Much of the carbon is >>>> in >>>> >the soil and converting meadow/grasslands/prairie to some kinds of >>>> forest >>>> >or woody shrubland can result in net carbon loss even as the woody >>>> plants >>>> >grow. World wide 4 or 5 times as much carbon in soil as in all living >>>> >biomass. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >John Harte >>>> >Professor of Ecosystem Sciences >>>> >ERG/ESPM >>>> >310 Barrows Hall >>>> >University of California >>>> >Berkeley, CA 94720 USA >>>> >[email protected] >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >On Feb 12, 2015, at 6:37 AM, "Robert H. Socolow" < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> >wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Many second-growth forests are still increasing their carbon stocks. >>>> I >>>> >>think that's the argument being made. >>>> >> >>>> >> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >> >>>> >>> On Feb 11, 2015, at 7:38 PM, David desJardins <[email protected] >>>> > >>>> >>>wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> forest has to be carbon-balanced, it isn't removing net carbon from >>>> >>>the atmosphere but essentially all of the carbon taken up by plants >>>> >>>eventually gets returned to the atmosphere when those >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> 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. >>>> >> 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 [email protected]. >>>> >To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> >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 [email protected]. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> 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 [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
