Comments on: Deconstructing Turnbull’s green near-miracle http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/deconstructing-turnbulls-green-near-miracle/ now with extra source Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:29:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Don Petersen http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/deconstructing-turnbulls-green-near-miracle/#comment-11770 Don Petersen Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-11770 If failing memory seves me, biochar is hardly a new concept. Some years ago National Geographic had a major (I think cover) story on how the ancients of the Amazon Basin were masters of it. Indeed it underpinned the success of their remarkable civilisation.<br /> If failing memory seves me, biochar is hardly a new concept. Some years ago National Geographic had a major (I think cover) story on how the ancients of the Amazon Basin were masters of it. Indeed it underpinned the success of their remarkable civilisation.

]]> By: soil carbon http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/deconstructing-turnbulls-green-near-miracle/#comment-11771 soil carbon Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-11771 First things first - we do NOT "measure" emissions as such in any sector, we estimate them. And while these estimates are pretty good, they do not have the level of certainty that the word 'measure" brings with it.<br />This is actually a critical issue, because it is the key reason most often cited for not including soil carbon as a climate change mitigator.<br />(iDoes anyone else find it incongruous to say the least that while we are constantly told it is too hard to measure emissions from the Agriculture sector, we are also told that the Agriculture sector is a major emitter???)<br />Leading Australian soil scientists acknowledge that we CAN apply the same degree of rigour to the "measurement" of soil carbon that is applied to the "measurement' of all other carbon emissions - that it to a level that would be acceptable to well-informed market participants.<br />As Tim Flannery pointed out so clearly we should be playing to our strengths as a nation - we have 448 million hectares of arid and semi-arid grazing lands that are crying out for changed management including the major part of the Murray Darling Basin. (see www.soilcarbon.com.au for more)<br />If the Government can find $600 million for work on an unproven carbon capture technology like CCS then surely they could find just 10% of this for some serious support for bio-sequestration.<br /> First things first - we do NOT “measure” emissions as such in any sector, we estimate them. And while these estimates are pretty good, they do not have the level of certainty that the word ‘measure” brings with it.
This is actually a critical issue, because it is the key reason most often cited for not including soil carbon as a climate change mitigator.
(iDoes anyone else find it incongruous to say the least that while we are constantly told it is too hard to measure emissions from the Agriculture sector, we are also told that the Agriculture sector is a major emitter???)
Leading Australian soil scientists acknowledge that we CAN apply the same degree of rigour to the “measurement” of soil carbon that is applied to the “measurement’ of all other carbon emissions - that it to a level that would be acceptable to well-informed market participants.
As Tim Flannery pointed out so clearly we should be playing to our strengths as a nation - we have 448 million hectares of arid and semi-arid grazing lands that are crying out for changed management including the major part of the Murray Darling Basin. (see http://www.soilcarbon.com.au for more)
If the Government can find $600 million for work on an unproven carbon capture technology like CCS then surely they could find just 10% of this for some serious support for bio-sequestration.

]]> By: JamesK http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/deconstructing-turnbulls-green-near-miracle/#comment-11772 JamesK Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-11772 Like many, I have found MT's challenge fascinating. <br /><br />And it cannot be dismissed out of hand, unless like McCallum, what grey matter left preserved after marination is that prone to reciting inveterate leftist hogwash.<br /><br />Both the ocean and land provide at least theoretically further greater powerful carbon fixation/ sequestration. Like many, I have found MT’s challenge fascinating.

And it cannot be dismissed out of hand, unless like McCallum, what grey matter left preserved after marination is that prone to reciting inveterate leftist hogwash.

Both the ocean and land provide at least theoretically further greater powerful carbon fixation/ sequestration.

]]> By: Ben Gilna http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/deconstructing-turnbulls-green-near-miracle/#comment-11773 Ben Gilna Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-11773 Interestingly, James Lovelock's interview in New Scientist this week sees him (briefly) talking up biochar. If you're curious, its here: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921.500-one-last-chance-to-save-mankind.html?full=true Interestingly, James Lovelock’s interview in New Scientist this week sees him (briefly) talking up biochar. If you’re curious, its here: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921.500-one-last-chance-to-save-mankind.html?full=true

]]> By: Evan http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/27/deconstructing-turnbulls-green-near-miracle/#comment-11774 Evan Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-11774 This all sounds very good, but where does the energy come from to make the biochar? I'd be interested to see this costed into the estimates.<br /><br />EB This all sounds very good, but where does the energy come from to make the biochar? I’d be interested to see this costed into the estimates.

EB

]]>