New Hansen paper on Ice melting impacts makes important points

[Thomas Goreau]

A new paper published yesterday provides important conclusions based on new advances in modeling the impacts of global warming on ice melting, sea level rise, temperature change, and climate feedbacks:

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3761–3812, 2016 www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/ doi:10.5194/acp-16-3761-2016
© Author(s) 2016. CC Attribution 3.0 License.

Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 ◦C global warming could be dangerous

James Hansen1, Makiko Sato1, Paul Hearty2, Reto Ruedy3,4, Maxwell Kelley3,4, Valerie Masson-Delmotte5,
Gary Russell4, George Tselioudis4, Junji Cao6, Eric Rignot7,8, Isabella Velicogna7,8, Blair Tormey9, Bailey Donovan10, Evgeniya Kandiano11, Karina von Schuckmann12, Pushker Kharecha1,4, Allegra N. Legrande4, Michael Bauer4,13, and Kwok-Wai Lo3,4 

Hansen et al provide much more detailed models of the impact of Ice melting than have previously been presented. Most importantly they include an extremely important part of the physics for the first time in such models to my knowledge, namely the effects of ice melting on heat absorption. Water absorbs large amounts of heat to cause changes of physical state when ice melts, and when water boils, without increasing temperature. 

Melting ice caps are absorbing heat without raising global temperatures, even though the heat content of the system is rising, and this acts to retard or delay the full effects of global warming, falsely making it seem “not as bad”. You can see this for yourself with a thermometer in a glass of ice water in a warm room. The temperature will stay near 0 degrees C as long as there is significant ice to melt without the temperature rising, even though the glass of water is steadily absorbing heat from the warmer air. As long as more ice is melting than is freezing, heat is being absorbed without a temperature change, until the ice is nearly gone. Only then do you start to get a large increase in water temperature even if the heat flow from the room to the glass is constant. 

Hansen et al show that the cold fresh meltwater floats on the surface because it is too light to sink in salty water, thus slowing down heat exchange with the deep sea, and causing masses of cold surface water to accumulate near Greenland and Antarctica, depending on the rate of melting. These increased temperature  and pressure gradients cause increased wind speed and storms. Hansen et al show that the distribution of the meltwater can apparent cold anomalies, but these are not at all the first step to an Ice Age as some have claimed, and are merely temporary local blips on a steady overall global warming scenario. Furthermore they do not prevent heat flowing to the deep sea from warmer parts of the ocean, and this warmer water greatly increases the rate of ice melting. 

Their exploration of these effects for the first time leads to an odd feature similar to that I published on in 2005, showing from global satellite data that increasing regional wind speeds driven by global warming can cause seemingly anomalous relative local cooling driven by cold water upwelling. The faster the Ice melts the shorter the apparent lower warming blip, and the sooner the full effect of warming will be felt. They point out that because this is a surface effect,  it has a different time scale than the 1600 year delay caused by ocean mixing, which has long been absent from the IPCC models due to their artificially short time horizon, a major and deliberate methodological flaw. 

Hansen et al. also use paleoclimate data, not just models that might be inaccurate for many reasons, to conclude that the models used by IPCC have underestimated the long term climate sensitivity of global temperature and sea level to CO2 documented in the paleoclimate records, as I showed in 1990. They come to this conclusion from observations of storm tossed rocks in the Bahamas to estimate sea levels the last time global temperatures were 1-2 degrees C warmer than today, around 120,000 to 130,000 years ago. Because these rocks can be tossed by intense breaking waves well above the sea level height, this somewhat overestimates sea level, compare to the values I derived from studies of the actual preserved fossil sea level notch of this age from Jamaica and other places. 

They conclude (as I did in 1990) that IPCC models seriously underestimate the long term changes, and that these will be much sooner and greater than realized, despite relatively modest transient effects on the way that only appear to mask the long term effects.

Unfortunately, they still propose a pure emissions reduction approach. Because they don't suggest simultaneously increasing natural biological sinks they neither seem to realize that only soil carbon can absorb excess atmospheric CO2 fast enough to prevent the worst climate impacts, if we only used the proven methods already in hand, nor the urgency of implementing soil carbon restoration solutions in UNFCCC. 

Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Coordinator, Soil Carbon Alliance

Coordinator, United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development Small Island Developing States Partnership in New Sustainable Technologies

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@bestweb.net
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

The Green Disc, New Technologies for a New Future: Innovative Methods for Sustainable Development

http://www.greenthindisc.org

No one can change the past, everyone can change the future

[Erich Knight]

Dear Thomas,

I hope you don't mind that I think Jim Hansen et al. should review your comments.

As you know, a few years back I sent Dr. Hansen a brief on biomass thermal conversion technologies and Intensive Paddock Grazing.

I hope he takes heed & will in future support Soil Carbon Sequestration.

As I always steal & modify Walter Jehne's line;

Soil Biology is our only way to rapidly and massively draw down CO2 from the air to offset our ongoing and past carbon emissions, It Can safely and naturally restore the hydrological cycles by increasing biogenic aerosols and cloud albedo that can readily cool the planet by the 3 watts/m2 needed to offset the now locked in greenhouse warming effects and avoid the Storms of Our Grandchildren.

To which I always add;

The French have lead the way recognizing Soil Carbons' value and committing to build Soil Carbon by 0.40%  annually.  Putting them on the road to Carbon Negativity before any industrialized country. 25 nations have signed on to 4p1000. 100 of the 196 countries in Paris submitted plans to reduce CO2 via agriculture, forestry and replacing soil carbon into their programmes.
http://4p1000.org/understand

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/

--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/1DD8BCBD-E83B-4F73-B000-F18A43A5D346%40bestweb.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Thomas Goreau]

Dear Erich,

Thanks! I’d love to send Jim Hansen a copy of the book on Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase. I have followed his work since the start when I worked in planetary atmosphere modeling at Caltech and on sources and sinks of soil and ocean GHGs at Harvard. My comments below on last week’s Nature paper on terrestrial GHG balances is very relevant as well:

The terrestrial biosphere as a net source of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, 2016, Tian et al., Nature, 531:225-228, summarizes the latest information on global scale natural and human-caused sources and sinks of greenhouse gases over the last 30 years.

Key findings:

Global warming impacts of methane and nitrous oxide source increases have been about twice as great as any cooling benefit from biomass sinks (and soil, though not explicitly discussed) 

Ruminant livestock were estimated to be about 20% of the methane source. They do not mention recent work showing the largest single cause of recent global CH4 increase is fracking in the US.

They correctly point out some of the complicated tradeoffs between sources and sinks of CO2, N2O, and CH4 for many land, waste, and energy management options.

They conclude that:

“The future role of the biosphere as a source or sink of GHGs will depend on future land-use intensification pathways and on the evolution of the land CO2 sinks………Increasing land-use intensification using today’s practices to meet food and energy demands will probably increase anthropogenic GHG emissions. However the results of this study suggest that adoption of best practices to reduce GHG emissions from human impacted land ecosystems could reverse the biosphere’s current warming role.”

In effect what they conclude (despite ignoring soils both as a problem and solution) is what we have all been saying: that restorative land management (Geotherapy) is both possible and necessary. 

In other words, the latest global GHG inventories back our case, the science is on the side of restoration as the essential tool to prevent runaway warming!

Best wishes,

Tom

Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Coordinator, Soil Carbon Alliance

Coordinator, United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development Small Island Developing States Partnership in New Sustainable Technologies

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@bestweb.net
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

The Green Disc, New Technologies for a New Future: Innovative Methods for Sustainable Development

http://www.greenthindisc.org

No one can change the past, everyone can change the future

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEO_ii_5bY6PKQeBVARU_8Ntb7M9wcmD80WJmY_O3L18Pb6x2g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Thomas Goreau]

Dear Jim,

Delighted to hear from you! 

I know from your papers that you are long aware of these possibilities, the key is that best land management practices have opposing effects to conventional ones, so the problem is still correctable in principle, and is the only hope for a rapid drawdown at affordable costs (in fact with huge side benefits). 

I’d like to mail you a copy of the book if you can send me your mailing address. I’ve looked at your other recent paper on enhanced rock weathering as carbon sinks, there are also several chapters on that as well as on soil organic carbon and biochar and regenerative methods. 

Best wishes,

Tom

Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Coordinator, Soil Carbon Alliance

Coordinator, United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development Small Island Developing States Partnership in New Sustainable Technologies

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@bestweb.net
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

The Green Disc, New Technologies for a New Future: Innovative Methods for Sustainable Development

http://www.greenthindisc.org

No one can change the past, everyone can change the future

On Mar 24, 2016, at 9:35 AM, James Hansen <jimeh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for this.  In my talks I always note that "improved agricultural and forestry practices", as well as rapid phasedown of fossil fuel emissions, will be essential to restore the planet's energy balance.  At most I can make a few superficial comments on the topic (including the fact that my oldest grandchild and I applied 1 ton of biochar on our property).  I will try to understand the topic a little better when I write my next book.

Jim Hansen

[Benoit Lambert]

Dear soil-agers,

Thank you so much Thomas for keeping us in contact, and interpreting this high-end, sophisticated world of climatologists. It is good to bring our attention on the essentials of those long articles. You have to be very familiar with the topic to follow everything.

Let me suggest that to make things happen for carbon farming (and biochar), we need to support initiatives as Vermont Senate Bill 159 aiming at putting carbon back in soils. In Quebec we have translated the Bill and will try to get a similar project in our politicians' minds. 

Bill 159 is of course following the Vermont bill to label GMOs -- the US Senate bill to counter labelling by States' regulations was rejected March 17. Bill 159 is all positive, win-win-win, supporting small and new farmers. It also brings science to farming, not a luxury... It is a very pro-active, a positive approach. It is very much in line with the 4p1000 French Declaration at COP 21, and this is how Vermonters are presenting it: the forefront of a movement. 

I think anything that goes into that direction now needs to be put forward, until we feed the world, and get back to 280 ppm.

Best regards,

Benoit

(from/de Soil Carbon Coalition)

As Vernadsky realized about 100 years ago, life (powered by photosynthesis and carbon cycling) is the most potent geologic force. Carbon cycling (which heavily influences water cycling) underlies almost all of our biggest challenges. Many now realize that humans have become a principle influence on carbon and water cycling, but our influence has been largely inadvertent, and often (e.g. changes in soil carbon in specific places) outside our awareness.

Comme l’a découvert Vernadsky il y a approximativement un siècle, la vie (générée par la photosynthèse et le cycle du carbone) est la plus puissante des forces géologiques. Le cycle du carbone (qui influence fortement le cycle de l’eau) est la principale force derrière tous nos plus importants défis. Plusieurs réalisent aujourd’hui que l’humanité est devenue la principale influence sur les cycles du carbone et de l’eau, mais notre influence s’est produite largement par inadvertance, et souvent (e.g. la diminution des niveaux de carbone des sols) en dehors de notre connaissance. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/462592AA-CD6A-4D5E-ADC9-A148E2E5CE5E%40bestweb.net.

[Ronal W. Larson]

List,  three earlier responders (Alan,  Erich,  Tom)  and other ccs

This is to defend Hansen. 

 I think he would have made a big mistake to tie biochar into a highly computational, highly original, lengthy paper on layers of fresh water on top of salt water.  The connection through needing to do more with biochar would also have required other lengthy sections on solar, wind, energy efficiency, etc.  All would have distracted from his (brand) new message of another major reason for implementing any and all feasible forms of both carbon removal and mitigation.  We in biochar should be lauding the fact that he is still producing brand new results like this - after “retiring”.

Since the early 2000s, he has said numerous positive things about biochar - and has tested it himself.  He is much more valuable to a biochar’s future doing research where almost no one else has similar expertise and background, and showing/proving urgency.

One area where we interested in biochar should be using more of his past carbon negativity statements are the areas of afforestation and reforestation.   I know of no-one with stronger statements on the needed increase in standing biomass than Hansen.  I rarely find biochar taking credit for the much greater above ground biomass that will be needed to make char (remove C/CO2) in quantities like that fossil fuel is annually inserting now.  It is our job to show that it is better to be actively managing for biochar, that much increased biomass that Hansen is calling for.  Letting forests grow unmanaged for biochar seems a big mistake - with which management I think Alan, Erich and Tom all concur.

In googling for Hansen and biochar, I of course found a lot, but I found nothing more recent than this December video interview during COP21: http://www.sector39.co.uk/blog/?cat=108

 He gets into our sort of topics about half-in (out of 23+ minutes) and mentions biochar specifically at 13:20  (or 15:48 in the audio version you can get to from the site: “The Elephant”  https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-elephant/id1018988600.

This seems good proof that Hansen has not forgotten biochar;  he did not mention any other carbon removal approach (I think).  This interview was talking a lot about his then-forthcoming ocean paper

Ron

On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:31 AM, al...@greendiamondsystems.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Erich,

Two observations:

I saw no mention of biochar (charcoal suitable for horticultural use) as a carbon negative addition. I know that there are vineyards in France that are using biochar and this is even more stable than the soil stored labile carbon and the volume that could be added is significantly greater than the annual uptake by plants if it became acknowledged that this was relevant to humanity.

Second, it would be interesting how the French are financing this proactive practice other than paying more for food? We still seem to have missed the concept that central banks make liquidity out of thin air, and value can only be bestowed on something if there is life. So if it is important for there to be life there should be no problem in generating the liquidity to get the practice to happen - especially if it is ameliorative, permanent (in the short run -100s of years to 10s of thousands of years), over time will enhance the maintenance of life with more food and fiber.

We need to be talking to the right people in the right way. If those folks are convinced that most of humanity is less important than they are then we need to know this and act accordingly.

 

Alan C. Page, Ph.D., Research Forester - MA License #184
Green Diamond Systems
125 Blue Meadow Road
Belchertown, MA 01007

Phone: 413-323-4401
Cell: 413-883-9642

Blog: Common Good Dialog
Website: Common Good Forestry
Website: Common Good Forest Products

---

From: "Erich Knight erichj...@gmail.com [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: Soil Age <soil...@googlegroups.com>; biochar <bio...@yahoogroups.com>; "se-bi...@googlegroups.com" <se-bi...@googlegroups.com> 
Cc: James Hansen <jimeh...@gmail.com>; James Hansen <je...@columbia.edu>; "la...@osu.edu" <la...@osu.edu>; Paul Hepperly <Paul.H...@gmail.com>; kristine...@rodaleinstitute.org; Timothy LaSalle <tim.l...@gmail.com>; E Philip Small <psmal...@landprofile.com>; ag...@usda.gov; "steven...@ars.usda.gov" <steven...@ars.usda.gov>; Jim Titus <titu...@epa.gov>; "ewi...@oeb.harvard.edu" <ewi...@oeb.harvard.edu>; David Fork <fo...@google.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 2:25 AM
Subject: [biochar] Re: [soil-age] New Hansen paper on Ice melting impacts makes important points

__._,_.___

---

Posted by: <al...@greendiamondsystems.com> 

---

Reply via web post

•

Reply to sender

•

Reply to group

•

Start a New Topic

•

Messages in this topic (3)

---

Save time and get your email on the go with the Yahoo Mail App

Get the beautifully designed, lighting fast, and easy-to-use, Yahoo Mail app today. Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

 

---

VISIT YOUR GROUP

• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

 

__,_._,___

[Benoit Lambert]

Thank you Ron,

I don’t think anyone says James should do more. lol 

But with the scientific facts, and the needed warnings to the world, there is no doubts solutions — all of them win-win-win — have to be presented with a better pitch, to a wider audience. That is a challenge for all of us, from all venues.  

In the field of renewable energies and energy efficiency, the Worldwatch Institute and Lester Brown have been doing a great job at announcing better days, for decades. They certainly did better predictions on renewables than the IEA… Today people like Elon Mush and Jigar Shah do the same from an industry, and a financial view point. There is no doubt in my mind that renewables will take over fossil fuel rapidly. Today in many countries, most new electricity today come from wind, solar, and biomass.

Yet it is clear that soils are central to the carbon cycle, and we will not drawdown GtC from the atmosphere and oceans with renewables. We need to reinvent agriculture and land use in general, to feed humanity, fight global warming, reduce pollutions, mitigate erosion/eutrophisation/water shortages and floods. A very good documentary « INHABIT - a Permaculture Perspective » I bought on Vimeo, does a great job at sending this badly needed positive message. 

Now, I have been reading big books as Biochar for environmental management, Geotherapy, and currently Carbon farming by Eric Toensmeier. I have listen to hundreds of hours of video on no-till/cover crop, holistic grazing management, permaculture, soil life-web, history of soil degradations by geomorphologist David Montgomery, etc. I refer to those books and experts in my blog that I just renamed Geotherapy Chronicle (hope you don’t mind). 

What I see seldom are people that can tell us, with a certain confidence, how we are going to be carbon negative, and how much it will cost. How do you sequester 400 GtC? That is the million dollar question. With you Ron we estimated on this site last year 2-4 billion per ppm, using biochar only. I think this number holds. That would be 1000 billion to get back to normal (300-350 ppm)… cause emissions will obviously not stop tomorrow. A trillion or 1.5% of world economy during one year, not as much as it sounds. In fact the best investment ever…

But what if we mix biochar with compost? What if we use some rock dust, and push permaculture? What if, with biochar, we encourage home-gardens systems, agro-sylvo-pasture, agroforestry and perennial crops, agroecology strategies? What if we do it in regions that have bare, infertile soils, as in Northern Africa? What if we bring in new soil expertise from the soil health / soil-life web experts, or mycorrhizal fungi of Prof André Fortin that has grown forests on rocky sides of dams in Northern Québec… And what about bringing back animals that co-evolved with soils for thousands of years, sometimes creating humus 200 feet deep?

The part that often stays in the air (if I might say) is the stability of carbon versus labile carbon. Biochar appears as the most stable, but more data and research would be welcome. Mind you the terra preta is arguably the longest agriculture experience ever produced. I increasingly believe a land/soil-based, multistrada, multipurpose biological revolution is needed. It could put us on the path to restoration and regeneration, and, by the same token, allow nations to start controlling the carbon cycle. 

Best regards,

Benoit

(from/de Soil Carbon Coalition)

As Vernadsky realized about 100 years ago, life (powered by photosynthesis and carbon cycling) is the most potent geologic force. Carbon cycling (which heavily influences water cycling) underlies almost all of our biggest challenges. Many now realize that humans have become a principle influence on carbon and water cycling, but our influence has been largely inadvertent, and often (e.g. changes in soil carbon in specific places) outside our awareness.

Comme l’a découvert Vernadsky il y a approximativement un siècle, la vie (générée par la photosynthèse et le cycle du carbone) est la plus puissante des forces géologiques. Le cycle du carbone (qui influence fortement le cycle de l’eau) est la principale force derrière tous nos plus importants défis. Plusieurs réalisent aujourd’hui que l’humanité est devenue la principale influence sur les cycles du carbone et de l’eau, mais notre influence s’est produite largement par inadvertance, et souvent (e.g. la diminution des niveaux de carbone des sols) en dehors de notre connaissance. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/417D191E-77F7-4E2C-8A33-460AC3CFECC6%40comcast.net.

[Thomas Goreau]

In the conclusion, only emissions reductions were mentioned, but omissions of sinks is inadvertent because Jim Hansen is very aware of the potential of biomass and soil and has repeatedly said so. But that was not relevant to this paper, which is about ice melting responses. 

Each paper he has written has added an important new dimension to climate change modeling, and I’m sure he’ll do the same again when he has a chance to more fully explore soil carbon options. 

Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Coordinator, Soil Carbon Alliance

Coordinator, United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development Small Island Developing States Partnership in New Sustainable Technologies

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@bestweb.net
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

The Green Disc, New Technologies for a New Future: Innovative Methods for Sustainable Development

http://www.greenthindisc.org

No one can change the past, everyone can change the future

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/417D191E-77F7-4E2C-8A33-460AC3CFECC6%40comcast.net.

[Benoit Lambert]

I see a lack of precision regarding stable carbon and labile carbone potentially coming from big biomass generations around the world. 

Biomass in tropical regions can be huge, but how much soil organic matter will transform into humus and stable carbon, into a permanent sink? Obviously Amazonians did not have that in mind, but they sequestered, for good, a few GtC I suppose producing terra preta. It obviously depends on species too and their roots -- in the tropics they tend to go side way, no?

Most of the climate crisis comes from fossil fuels and the carbon from tilling 10’000 years. David Montgomery did his PhD about the impact on erosion of deforestation in the Pacific Northwest. To his surprise, and a bit contrary to what many think, he fund out it was mainly ploughing from agriculture that was the source of erosion, not deforestation per se. The reason is that trees grow back, even without reforestation — obviously not meaning there is no other problems associated with clear cutting. In the Amazon the Spaniards did not find the roads described by Orellana, only 70 years after...

While with restorative agriculture we can put back a lot of soil organic matter, humus and carbon thanks to root exudates — and even green some desserts or semi-arid areas (see John Liu and the Loess Plateau) — I wonder how much will have to be pyrolysed into biochar to accelerate the sequestration process?  

Anyone with clarifications on that? I would appreciate.

Best, Benoit

(from/de Soil Carbon Coalition)

As Vernadsky realized about 100 years ago, life (powered by photosynthesis and carbon cycling) is the most potent geologic force. Carbon cycling (which heavily influences water cycling) underlies almost all of our biggest challenges. Many now realize that humans have become a principle influence on carbon and water cycling, but our influence has been largely inadvertent, and often (e.g. changes in soil carbon in specific places) outside our awareness.

Comme l’a découvert Vernadsky il y a approximativement un siècle, la vie (générée par la photosynthèse et le cycle du carbone) est la plus puissante des forces géologiques. Le cycle du carbone (qui influence fortement le cycle de l’eau) est la principale force derrière tous nos plus importants défis. Plusieurs réalisent aujourd’hui que l’humanité est devenue la principale influence sur les cycles du carbone et de l’eau, mais notre influence s’est produite largement par inadvertance, et souvent (e.g. la diminution des niveaux de carbone des sols) en dehors de notre connaissance. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/2BAC83A0-F744-4FC1-BCF6-11B8C57F66DC%40bestweb.net.

[Thomas Goreau]

You are right, imprecise terminology confuses rather than enlightens.

The erroneous lumping together of soil carbon with very long and with very short lifetimes has bedeviled understanding of carbon sequestration. Simply using one number for soil organic carbon mixes them all, what should be presented is the complete spectrum of soil organic carbon according to thermal volatility, the most useful physical way to distinguish fractions with totally different behavior in soils. 

Intermediate volatility mature biochar binds to other organic soil compounds, promotes humification, adsorbs essential trace elements and makes them available to mycorrhizae and probiotic microbes symbiotic with plant roots (such as nitrogen fixers), and of course, retains water, extending the growing season and minimizing surface runoff and erosion. 

Biochar, produced very inefficiently at low yields by fires, makes up around half of the soil carbon in most areas that have historically been burned, i.e.. most agricultural, pasture, and dry forest soils. Modern methods produce it at around 50 times higher efficiency, and capture the energy released. 

Although it is widely claimed that glomalin is a new discovery, in fact it has been known for a hundred years. Selman Waksman’s great first book on soil microbiology points out that half of soil carbon is visible fungal hyphae. If we consider soil organic matter as that which is not living plant roots, fungi, animals, or recognizable biological fragments being decomposed, glomalin is part of the living soil biomass, not “humus”, another confusing anachronism that needs to be abandoned. These hyphal networks have been recently renamed as “glomalin” as a dominant component, but it is basically just a new name for live fungi biomass, crucial to healthy soils, and it is not yet clear how much of it becomes long-lived soil carbon.

We need to promote increase of all forms of soil carbon, but the longest lived are especially crucial. Highest temperature biochar is black elemental carbon, which lasts hundreds of millions of years in sediments. 

Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Coordinator, Soil Carbon Alliance

Coordinator, United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development Small Island Developing States Partnership in New Sustainable Technologies

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@bestweb.net
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

The Green Disc, New Technologies for a New Future: Innovative Methods for Sustainable Development

http://www.greenthindisc.org

No one can change the past, everyone can change the future

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEJ8%2BcrW14xYVjrmuOTz9%3DKb9kmjYT_iTUvYdiQ%2Br3N59PxH5Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Benoit Lambert]

wow, thank you Thomas!

I don't necessarily want to give you more work but a table "Stability and characteristics of soil organic carbon" would be useful. It could even be a site, with links, a 'work in progress' as obviously knowledge and analysis in carbon farming is making progress. The fast evolution is illustrated by this last article on holistic grazing management, co-authored by Ratten Lal. 

Conclusion says : "With appropriate grazing management, ruminant livestock can increase C sequestered in the soil to more than offset their GHG emissions, and can support and improve other essential ecosystem services for local populations. Affected ecosystem services include water infiltration, nutrient cycling, soil formation, C sequestration, bio- diversity, and wildlife habitat. Our assessment suggests that increasing SOC globally within food production systems will reduce the C footprint of agriculture much more than reducing domesticated ruminant numbers in an effort to reduce enteric GHG emissions. The simultaneous increase in production of agricultural goods indicates that integrating livestock into mixed agricultural systems and grazing management to increase SOC, biodiversity, and soil quality would enhance resilience of soil and agroecosystems against climate change and extreme events."

 

(from/de Soil Carbon Coalition)

As Vernadsky realized about 100 years ago, life (powered by photosynthesis and carbon cycling) is the most potent geologic force. Carbon cycling (which heavily influences water cycling) underlies almost all of our biggest challenges. Many now realize that humans have become a principle influence on carbon and water cycling, but our influence has been largely inadvertent, and often (e.g. changes in soil carbon in specific places) outside our awareness.

Comme l’a découvert Vernadsky il y a approximativement un siècle, la vie (générée par la photosynthèse et le cycle du carbone) est la plus puissante des forces géologiques. Le cycle du carbone (qui influence fortement le cycle de l’eau) est la principale force derrière tous nos plus importants défis. Plusieurs réalisent aujourd’hui que l’humanité est devenue la principale influence sur les cycles du carbone et de l’eau, mais notre influence s’est produite largement par inadvertance, et souvent (e.g. la diminution des niveaux de carbone des sols) en dehors de notre connaissance. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/27F8CFAB-5826-4332-AE4A-12BBE26A6F03%40bestweb.net.

[Denise Ward]

Great thread everyone. It's also great to hear Jim Hansen speak up now at this crucial time, a time for scientists to get antsy otherwise the public will not believe how dire the situation is.  But the point I wish to make here is that you must not fool yourselves...nothing will change until we change the mechanism that drives the world - money. I'm not suggesting that we abandon money entirely, but at the risk of sounding like a broken record - why do we not demand a currency based on carbon sequestration?  When I say "we" I mean we of the choir for earth restoration.  Or we could base money on some other value system that benefits humanity.  Surely you see how deranged it is to base a motivational system (which money is) on greed and competition?  Why must money be the only thing that we humans never seem to "upgrade"?  What else can you think of that hasn't changed in all these centuries? Money is you know, entirely a man-made construct.  It's not physics. 

I want to say (because I still can!) that it's silly and half-assed if we fight for a carbon tax when the basis of money is fallacious. We are NOT a greedy being, we humans. So if we're going to have to fight for something, let's fight for exactly what we want. Let's cut with the compromising and bending over backwards. It's about time we made some kind of simply-understood demand. I know this seems off the subject but another thing we could think about is why do we think we need anyone to represent us (by us I mean, citizens and humans) when now have the technology to represent ourselves via online voting, surveying, commenting etc. 

We need to stimulate people to work, do something that inspires us. Filling out stupid forms and bean counting only to give the best tricksters, the ones with the greatest propensity for avarice, to receive all the breaks. Try to imagine a world without poverty, hunger, war, well they all are based on money.  We should put our minds together and our wills, to demand another basis for money. And we should start considering such things if we want to get to the root of the problems on earth at this present time. 

Namaste!  We must not let nature down!  We must speak for nature and speak firmly. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEJ8%2BcqLmHUQMu8tOndW66oGCSr52TMQy2ZNV9Qn2QO95b8h7Q%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

http://freespeechproductions.info/RABrochureMasterpages13

The Reluctant Activist.org

The government is not your friend. ~ The Minuteman

[Erich Knight]

Dear All,

I risk, in copying all the "Big Heads" I do, them seeing my emails as "crying wolf", so please don't hit the "Reply all" unless it concerns all. As I try to do.
Since Lal & Kristine are concerned or cited, I copied them, not the Ag Sec. & Hansen with whom I don't want to wear out my emailing welcome.
Issues about off the subject fallacious money etc. don't need to go to Hansen, E.O. Wilson or Tom Vilsack.

Just for the record Glomalin is derived from dead hyphal networks, an almost literal shedding of their glomalin gloves, lasting 100 years+, so is a very large & recalcitrant fraction of SOM.

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Benoit Lambert benoit....@gmail.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

[Attachment(s) from Benoit Lambert included below]

__._,_.___

Attachment(s) from Benoit Lambert | View attachments on the web

1 of 1 File(s)

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation-2016-Teague-156-64.pdf

---

Posted by: Benoit Lambert <benoit....@gmail.com>

---

Reply via web post

•

Reply to sender

•

Reply to group

•

Start a New Topic

•

Messages in this topic (8)

---

Save time and get your email on the go with the Yahoo Mail App

Get the beautifully designed, lighting fast, and easy-to-use, Yahoo Mail app today. Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

---

Visit Your Group

• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___

[Denise Ward]

Why Erich shouldn't emails go to Hansen? He's asking for a carbon tax. He's also for nuclear energy. Let's have the debate shall we. Let's not be afraid to confront popularity. The fact that money can be changed may not ever have occurred to him, like it seems it hasn't occurred to many who are experts in one area but could be totally ignorant in other areas. I thought science was about curiosity. You want people to be interested in soil but you have not heard a word I've said. Because if you did, you would know the depth of the problem. The subject, every subject, has something to do with money. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEO_ii-CQcB5rdAisPzY4Ozqu1DzSUOSXZ3SDxJPoH0QygWGug%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Glenn Gall]

"...  so please don't hit the "Reply all" unless it concerns all."  

Soil-Age Google Group:  "The intention of this group is to explore ways in which grassland ecosystem restoration can help mitigate global climate change."   "Some general rules:     --  Stay on topic ...."

An unstated, but I hope understood, rule is to respect each other.  Erich adds considerable value by promoting the healthiest of soils due to his dogged pursuit of knowledge and relating to those who can benefit from that knowledge.  He made a simple, but important, request which was not honored.  He indicated it was risky for him to include some of his contacts.  Some of those important relationships which he developed may be strained by not complying with such a basic request from one of our members.  

Denise, I appreciate what you say and do, and I can accept your comment as part of a "Soil-Age" discussion, but certainly not for those cc'd by Erich when he requested otherwise.  I don't understand why you included them and risk losing Erich's trust, and the trust of all of us.  It would have been easy to hit Reply instead of Reply All, but you chose not to.  

Glenn

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CADCsQZbNg%3DwkNayJOsBojUwe4ht1LsmCTRoX5KZE6txGdsLqpg%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Glenn Gall

Oberlin, Ohio

[Benoit Lambert]

Dear Denise,

With all respect, I think you are confusing money with politic. And frankly it is not a commodity as carbon, that will, by itself, solve the issues you are raising. 

Money is not the problem, the capitalist system with no control, no inclusion of social and environmental needs, is the problem. Ask Bernie, he will tell you everything about it! Entrepreneurs can be intelligent, descent and well intentioned people (Elon Musk, Yvon Choinard, Jigar Shah). But it is to people to frame the economy, not a minority of entrepreneurs and business people, 3% of the population. I should underline that in recent years, in certain fields, the environment has done progress: recycling, protection of certain areas, animals are coming back all over Europe, FSC labelling, GMO interdiction in Europe, etc. But yes, it is far far from enough.

Now, you give me the chance to present again what this group has to convey in terms of message IMO. Reversing climate change is not a big cost, it is an investment, for better, more productive soils. And that investment is our of reach: it will be about 30 billion a year for the entire world, about what the solar industry represents today. It is, more or less, USD 1000 billions over 30 years… not the end of the world! 

In financial terms, reversing climate change, considering all co-benefits, is a no brainer! Using well known tools to promote carbon farming (LULUCF) with green fiscality, leasing to farmers (with some governments guarantees), cap and trade (international or national), we could do so much in putting carbon back where it belongs, in soils. By the way, agriculture is already the most subsidized domain of the economy, for mostly bad reasons. What needs to be done is subsidize it for the good reasons, the budgets are not even to be fund! 

Best, Ben

(from/de Soil Carbon Coalition)

As Vernadsky realized about 100 years ago, life (powered by photosynthesis and carbon cycling) is the most potent geologic force. Carbon cycling (which heavily influences water cycling) underlies almost all of our biggest challenges. Many now realize that humans have become a principle influence on carbon and water cycling, but our influence has been largely inadvertent, and often (e.g. changes in soil carbon in specific places) outside our awareness.

Comme l’a découvert Vernadsky il y a approximativement un siècle, la vie (générée par la photosynthèse et le cycle du carbone) est la plus puissante des forces géologiques. Le cycle du carbone (qui influence fortement le cycle de l’eau) est la principale force derrière tous nos plus importants défis. Plusieurs réalisent aujourd’hui que l’humanité est devenue la principale influence sur les cycles du carbone et de l’eau, mais notre influence s’est produite largement par inadvertance, et souvent (e.g. la diminution des niveaux de carbone des sols) en dehors de notre connaissance. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CADCsQZbNg%3DwkNayJOsBojUwe4ht1LsmCTRoX5KZE6txGdsLqpg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Glenn Gall]

Benoit -- Appreciate the comment, but as Erich requested, this probably should have stayed within the group.  g

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEJ8%2BcqexFo1HcdrM31BOBrkfbAbXvj73PBpm2mMX-jWL1-Vdg%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Glenn Gall

Oberlin, Ohio

[Thomas Goreau]

Thanks, Erich, agreed. 

Glomalin from dead hyphae is a major chemical precursor for the cross linking with lignins, biochar, and all the rest, including some of the short lived compounds, that creates humic compounds (humic acid, fulvic acid, humin) in soils. 

Nitrogen availability is a key determinant of the processes that produce and consume all of them, so the variability in the composition and lifetime of soil organic matter is enormous.

Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Coordinator, Soil Carbon Alliance

Coordinator, United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development Small Island Developing States Partnership in New Sustainable Technologies

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@bestweb.net
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

The Green Disc, New Technologies for a New Future: Innovative Methods for Sustainable Development

http://www.greenthindisc.org

No one can change the past, everyone can change the future

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEO_ii-CQcB5rdAisPzY4Ozqu1DzSUOSXZ3SDxJPoH0QygWGug%40mail.gmail.com.

[Erich Knight]

Dear Glenn,

Thanks for the dogged support, such complements makes my heart swell, and I don't mind copying the lesser "Big Heads" as Ben & Tom did. Since Glomalin is Kristine's bally wick, (she worked under Dr. Sarah Wright at USDA who first characterized Glomalin in 1996, responsible for 1/3 of soil stored C and integral to aggregation, also higher CO₂ levels in the atmosphere stimulate the fungi to produce more glomalin).

I can only imagine the email loads that Hansen, Vilsack & E.O. Wilson must carry and don't want to add to that burden or to distract them from their important work.

Your Dogged Knowledge Pursuer,