next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
>>>>> In an
Hi Dave P. & All, Apr 17, 2013
Yes, we differ only in the details of how to evaluate the carbon
emission merits of wood use.
When dealing with a complex system I think the first step must be to
simplify where possible; identify the driving forces, reinforce the positive
ones if possible and offset the negative ones if possible.
When forest is cut, broken and paved then the carbon released can not be
neutral. But when forest is cut and allowed or encouraged to grow back then
the carbon released from the soil and from burning the wood (after
adjustment for petrochemicals used) is, in my view, neutral because all
which is so released will in time be captured by soil and biomass. This is
just a micro-scale accordion version (small area long time) of the seasonal
and much larger net carbon capture during the growing season and net release
during the remainder of the year (large area short time).
Coming up with a foolproof system for granting carbon credits etc. is a
different matter because people will lay awake nights thinking up ways to
cheat. Shortly after the Enron scandal, a Frank & Ernst cartoon explained
all this when they smiled and asked their boss "Do you want our generally
accepted accounting practices to show a loss or a profit this quarter ?"
Terra preta (National Geographic Sept 2008, Our Good Earth, 88-107)
looks quite interesting as a method for sequestering carbon and will
hopefully be tested in a range of soils/climates. Charcoal does not
biodegrade and buried charcoal would likely increase productivity and
quality of our all too common shallow soils with compact and impermeable
subsoils.
Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Patriquin" <patriqui@dal.ca>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>; "David & Alison Webster" <dwebster@glinx.com>
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] tree biomass fuel ... calcium loss x Red Spruce &
Sugar Maple
> David W:
>
> Your thoughts are pretty much along the lines of those I expressed in a
> submission to the 2010 Energy Consultation:
>
> http://versicolor.ca/biomass/docs/NSEsubmission.html
>
> -David P
>
>
> Quoting David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com>:
>
>> Hi Dave P. & all Apr 15, 2013
>> Thanks for this but we have got off on a tangent that is not
>> especially relevant to the original question which is-- What fuel, given
>> a choice of biofuel, coal, natural gas and oil, is potentially most
>> desirable from a net carbon emissions per unit energy released viewpoint
>> ?
>> If we can agree that the answer to the above is biomass then the
>> second level question emerges-- As a source of biomass energy, which is
>> preferable, wild wood, grown wood, grown grass, cultured algae, peat...?
>> And clearly, no one of these will consistently be preferable but any
>> could be depending upon circumstances. Given idle farmland suited for
>> Miscanthus why not grow Miscanthus for biomass ? Given a biosolid
>> 'disposal problem' and idle farmland why not grow Hybrid Poplar for
>> biofuel ? Given Hybrid Poplar windbreaks in need of renewal why not
>> route the wood to biofuel ? Given overstocked stands of wild wood why
>> not thin them for biofuel ? Leaving stands to self thin can generate a
>> fire hazard and what is gained if dead trees, living trees, litter and
>> the organic layer goes up in smoke ? Given waste heat why not culture
>> algae for biofuel ? ...
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Patriquin" <patriqui@dal.ca>
>> To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>; "David & Alison Webster"
>> <dwebster@glinx.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2013 10:55 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] tree biomass fuel ... calcium loss x Red Spruce
>> & Sugar Maple
>>
>>
>>> Hi David & Alison Webster:
>>>
>>> I am not aware of effects of calcium addition on growth per se, but
>>> there is experimental evidence for positive effects of calcium
>>> addition on stress resistance, germination, mycorrhizae etc., e.g.,
>>> for two important species in our Acadian Forest, sugar maple and red
>>> spruce:
>>>
>>> --Tree Physiology 28, 855-862
>>> Calcium addition at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest increases
>>> sugar storage, antioxidant activity and cold tolerance in native red
>>> spruce (Picea rubens). JOSHUA M. HALMAN,ET AL.
>>> "...Our results suggest that low foliar sugar concentrations and APX
>>> activity, and reduced cold tolerance in trees in the reference
>>> watershed contributed to their high vulnerability to winter injury in
>>> 2003."
>>>
>>> ---Ecology, 87(5), 2006, pp. 1267-1280 2006
>>> RESPONSE OF SUGAR MAPLE TO CALCIUM ADDITION TO NORTHERN HARDWOOD FOREST
>>> STEPHANIE M. JUICE, ET AL.
>>> "...These results reinforce and extend other regional observations
>>> that sugar maple decline in the northeastern United States and
>>> southern Canada is caused in part by anthropogenic effects on soil
>>> calcium status..."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Quoting David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com>:
>>>
>>>> Hi Dave P. & All, Apr 14, 2013
>>>> The usgs article reflects an astonishing detachment from reality by
>>>> starting the first line of the Abstract with "Since the discovery of
>>>> acid rain in the 1970's..". Acidic precipitation was documented at
>>>> least as early as 1852 when it was described by Robert Angus Smith.
>>>>
>>>> The question remains, has anyone demonstrated increased growth of
>>>> forest trees in response to application of Gypsum ? Or limestone for
>>>> that matter.
>>>>
>>>> Soil chemistry in natural profiles can be quite baffling because it
>>>> can resemble a 4-dimensional marble cake. About 1975 I was preparing
>>>> to set up a Ca orchard trial and sampled leaves of 40 or so trees in
>>>> three orchards. In one orchard, leaf Ca was all over the map, making
>>>> it useless for a Ca trial but conceivably informative for leaf Ca to
>>>> soil Ca correlations. So the following year I sampled soil from 0-100
>>>> cm in 10 cm increments and again sampled leaves. For starters, the
>>>> soil Ca of few adjacent layers was correlated and the leaf Ca of
>>>> years 1 & 2 were poorly correlated !
>>>>
>>>> Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Patriquin" <patriqui@dal.ca>
>>>> To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>; "David & Alison Webster"
>>>> <dwebster@glinx.com>
>>>> Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2013 12:00 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] tree biomass fuel ... calcium loss also
>>>> critical in NS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi David & Alison,
>>>>>
>>>>> For an excellent overview of the forest calcium issue, see:
>>>>>
>>>>> Soil-Calcium Depletion Linked to Acid Rain and Forest Growth in the
>>>>> Eastern United States
>>>>>
>>>>> By Gregory B. Lawrence and T. G. Huntington
>>>>>
>>>>> available at
>>>>> http://ny.water.usgs.gov/pubs/wri/wri984267/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Related studies have been done in Nova Scotia by Paul Arp & Co.
>>>>> See 2010 poster presentation
>>>>> Quantifying the impacts of biomass harvesting on nutrient budgets
>>>>> across Nova Scotia
>>>>> (Search x Google to bring up PDF)
>>>>>
>>>>> The current government/DNR appears to be sitting on the details
>>>>> which may contain some inconvenient truths related to possible use
>>>>> of SW Nova Scotia forests as chemical feedstocks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Quoting David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Dave P. & All, Apr 13, 2013
>>>>>> Was this effect of Ca on tree productivity established by
>>>>>> experiment, e.g. application of Gypsum, or by association ? Genuine
>>>>>> Ca deficiency is, as I recall, just about unknown apart from
>>>>>> extreme conditions such as Serpentine soils or solution culture.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In an interesting experiment reported by Reich et al. (Ecology
>>>>>> Letters (2005) 8:811-818),14 tree species were grown for 30 years
>>>>>> in replicated plots of 'uniform' initial soil and a converse effect
>>>>>> was demonstrated; species with high Ca in their leaf litter
>>>>>> significantly increased soil Ca and soil pH.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [BTW, soil pH usually increases as soil Ca increases (there is
>>>>>> only so much exchange capacity to go around) but the two can be
>>>>>> manipulated independently, e.g. Gypsum will increase soil Ca while
>>>>>> having almost no effect on pH.]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Patriquin"
>>>>>> <patriqui@DAL.CA>
>>>>>> To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>; "Mary Macaulay"
>>>>>> <marymacaulay@hotmail.com>
>>>>>> Cc: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 12:35 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] tree biomass fuel ... calcium loss also
>>>>>> critical in NS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In addition to concerns raised by the Nature article, a
>>>>>>> multi-authored paper published in the Policy Forum of Science in
>>>>>>> 2009 pointed out that there is a critical accounting error in the
>>>>>>> Kyoto Protocol that allows biomass energy to be treated as carbon
>>>>>>> neutral, regardless of the source. The error is very large for
>>>>>>> forest biomass.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Searchinger. T.D. et al T.D. et al., 2009. Fixing a Critical
>>>>>>> Climate Accounting Error Science 23 October 2009: Vol. 326. no.
>>>>>>> 5952, pp. 527-528
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In addition, we should be concerned about calcium losses in NS. NS
>>>>>>> forests are the most or amongst the most intensively harvested in
>>>>>>> Canada, half or more of our soils by area are very calcium poor
>>>>>>> and highly susceptible to soil acidification, and the area is
>>>>>>> stressed by acid rain. There are worrying signs that for large
>>>>>>> areas of Nova Scotia (esp in the SW), significant declines in
>>>>>>> productivity or other effects of low calcium may be only 1 or 2
>>>>>>> rotations away, if not already beginning to happen. Further,
>>>>>>> climatic warming can be expected to exacerbate these stresses,
>>>>>>> e.g., because the deciduous species expected to be favoured have
>>>>>>> higher calcium requirements than softwood.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Intensive forest harvesting can only exacerbate this problem, both
>>>>>>> by direct removal of nutrients and though increased losses from
>>>>>>> leaching.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Loss of salmon from many of our rivers is attributed to acid rain
>>>>>>> but also reflects reduced levels of calcium in the upland soils.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Birds are also affected, see
>>>>>>> http://news.psu.edu/story/155790/2011/09/15/research-shows-soil-calcium-limits-forest-songbirds
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...we have many reasons to be concerned about continued
>>>>>>> clearcutting in NS, and the obscurification of this issue by the
>>>>>>> current government.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quoting Mary Macaulay <marymacaulay@hotmail.com>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One of The Economist leaders this week warns against the trend
>>>>>>>> toward using forest biomass as fuel (they call it environmental
>>>>>>>> lunacy). It's a great article on page 71 for those who subscribe
>>>>>>>> or at this link
>>>>>>>> http://www.economist.com/news/business/21575771-environmental-lunacy-europe-fuel-future
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please circulate this widely. It's nice to see this highly
>>>>>>>> respected journal calling an axe an axe.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mary Macaulay
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>>>> Version: 2013.0.3272 / Virus Database: 3162/6236 - Release Date:
>>>>>>> 04/10/13
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>> Version: 2013.0.3272 / Virus Database: 3162/6243 - Release Date:
>>>>> 04/13/13
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>> No virus found in this message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 2013.0.3272 / Virus Database: 3162/6245 - Release Date:
>>> 04/14/13
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.3272 / Virus Database: 3162/6245 - Release Date: 04/14/13
>
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects