Sentences with phrase «than carbon sequestration»

[Response: Geoengineering involves much bigger technical challenges than carbon sequestration which in turn involves much bigger challenges than simply reducing emissions.

Not exact matches

Coffee, especially shade coffee, is a global crop that has a relatively lower impact on greenhouse gas emissions and a more positive impact on carbon sequestration than many other crops.There is potential for shade coffee farms to contribute to the mitigation of climate change and generate income for farmers at the same time; I have a previous post that outlines the basics.

Current geologic carbon - sequestration techniques aim to inject carbon dioxide into the subsurface some 7,000 feet below the Earth's surface, a depth equivalent to more than five Empire State Buildings stacked end - to - end.

The University of California, Davis, estimates that the cost per gram of hydrogen produced from the electrolysis of water will remain more expensive than hydrogen produced from natural gas with carbon capture and sequestration well through the end of the decade.

Rather than raising alarm, new study results could help pave the way toward better methods for monitoring geologic carbon sequestration areas and detecting CO2 leaks

When combined with a separate, related sequestration project starting this fall on the same corn processing plant, the initiative will pump more industrially captured carbon dioxide underneath the earth for permanent storage in deep saline rock reservoirs than ever has been attempted in the United States.

The U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification estimates that soil, as a sink for carbon dioxide, provides a larger reservoir than either vegetation or the atmosphere, calling its sequestration capabilities «unparalleled.»

«These long turnover times suggest that root production and turnover in forests have been overestimated,» the authors write, «and that sequestration of anthropogenic atmospheric carbon in forest soils may be lower than currently estimated.»

«Now we know that droughts in arid pine forests reduce carbon sequestration from the atmosphere by gigatons more than we had been estimating,» he said.

It would further allow for greater use of biofuels, which combined with carbon capture and sequestration techniques could drastically reduce the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere and keep global temperature increases to less than two degrees Centigrade in 2100.

In focussing on CO2 rather than carbon, it requires the capture and sequestration of 3.664 times the gigatonnage of material for a given impact on airborne CO2 stock.

So doing carbon sequestration out of a natural gas [power plant] flue is a lot easier than out of a coal flue, because there isn't the sulfuric acid.

Back in 2003, I felt that the technology to establish credits for «carbon removal» from the atmosphere was not sufficiently developed to warrant inclusion of such a system in an offset system proposed for Canada — even though removal of carbon from the atmosphere and long term sequestration seemed to have more merit than simple emission reduction.

But two things became clear to me: Burning the wood pellets immediately releases more CO2 than coal (easy to figure out), and producing wood pellets for Europe's power plants is causing a lot of trees to be chopped down in the U.S. (surprisingly difficult to figure out), which immediately reduces carbon sequestration.

Finally, as I have understood the claims for holistic management, carbon sequestration occurs (to the extent that it in fact occurs) primarily in soils rather than in the biomass of the grasses themselves.

As regards carbon capture and sequestration, the Government Accountability Office estimates clean coal will cost 78 percent more than traditional methods.

Noting that rock star farmer Joel Salatin of Polyface Farms has built up 6.5 % of additional carbon in his soils, Bane argued that truly maximizing soil carbon sequestration across all the world's agricultural soils could literally soak up more carbon than we release each year.

By basing the levy on emissions rather than carbon all greenhouse gases stand on a common level, sequestration is strongly encouraged as well as such simple things as capturing methane from oil wells and garbage dumps (that gets built into the cost of disposal).

Adding phosphorous to the ocean via existing activities may have greater long - term carbon sequestration potential than iron or nitrogen fertilization schemes.

Anyway, in architecture as in so many other subjects, there is so much more to the wider ecology debate than the current fixation with carbon reduction and sequestration.

«(i) absent carbon capture and sequestration, would emit greater than 50,000 tons per year of carbon dioxide;

-LSB-...] changes in natural emissions or sequestrations swamp the human emissions Read the rest here http://joannenova.com.au/2011/08/blo…ls-not-humans/ There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than the carbon -LSB-...]

In other words carbon taxes and renewables are more important than direct action on planting trees and soil sequestration.

This result sheds new light on the effect of long - term fertilization by iron and macronutrients on carbon sequestration, suggesting that changes in iron supply from belowâ as invoked in some palaeoclimatic and future climate change scenarios11â may have a more significant effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations than previously thought.

But capping emissions on a fixed schedule would produce its own uncertainties: if alternatives to fossil fuels (e.g., renewables, efficiencies, carbon sequestration) materialized more slowly than planned, demand would not be met and price rises would ensue.

EFFECT OF NATURAL IRON FERTILIZATION ON CARBON SEQUESTRATION IN THE SOUTHERN OCEAN Nature, Vol 446 26 April 2007 doi: 10.1038 / nature05700 The efficiency of fertilization, defined as the ratio of the carbon export to the amount of iron supplied, was at least ten times higher than previous estimates from short - term blooms induced by iron - addition experiCARBON SEQUESTRATION IN THE SOUTHERN OCEAN Nature, Vol 446 26 April 2007 doi: 10.1038 / nature05700 The efficiency of fertilization, defined as the ratio of the carbon export to the amount of iron supplied, was at least ten times higher than previous estimates from short - term blooms induced by iron - addition expericarbon export to the amount of iron supplied, was at least ten times higher than previous estimates from short - term blooms induced by iron - addition experiments.

«In short,» Trull wrote me in an e-mail, «it is not obvious that iron can stimulate carbon sequestration, and it is likely that it will lead to a different phytoplankton community than normally present (rather than just a faster growing normal community), the composition, properties and desirability of this new community is unknown.»

In less than eight months, humanity has used up nature's budget for the entire year, with carbon sequestration making up more than half of the demand on nature.

OSW LCOE values are only slightly higher than coal - fired power plants utilizing 30 % carbon capture and sequestration, but are markedly (i.e. two - thirds) higher than LCOE values for onshore wind installations (whether subsidized or not) and advanced and conventional natural gas combined cycle plants.

• Scale: Achieving the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's long - term sequestration goals means boosting deep geological carbon dioxide storage from about 5 megatons per year to more than 22,000 megatons annually by the end of the century — an «unprecedented» undertaking that Mr. Thomson says will involve extensive new facilities and pipelines that would rival the world's oil industry infrastructure.

Little is known about the potential of such burning to thaw and release stored carbon faster than would occur solely from broader, landscapescale decomposition, but the magnitude of carbon loss due to fire is significant and potentially offsets the increased carbon sequestration through Arctic greening (Mack et al., 2011).

Thus, the problem with the proposals currently being discussed in Congress: They will, for the foreseeable future, direct private investment toward the least expensive emissions reductions (such as burning methane from landfills, purchasing forest land for carbon sequestration, or retrofitting power plants and buildings so they operate more efficiently) rather than toward breakthrough technologies (like low - cost solar energy and carbon capture and storage), which are too expensive to become widely adopted today but which are vital for creating a new energy economy and thus drastically reducing emissions.

E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause»... carbon sequestration in soil is important for mitigating global climate change» (4a) No position Does not address or mention the cause of global warming (4b) Uncertain Expresses position that human's role on recent global warming is uncertain / undefined «While the extent of human - induced global warming is inconclusive...» (5) Implicit rejection Implies humans have had a minimal impact on global warming without saying so explicitly E.g., proposing a natural mechanism is the main cause of global warming»... anywhere from a major portion to all of the warming of the 20th century could plausibly result from natural causes according to these results» (6) Explicit rejection without quantification Explicitly minimizes or rejects that humans are causing global warming»... the global temperature record provides little support for the catastrophic view of the greenhouse effect» (7) Explicit rejection with quantification Explicitly states that humans are causing less than half of global warming «The human contribution to the CO2 content in the atmosphere and the increase in temperature is negligible in comparison with other sources of carbon dioxide emission»»

Few exceptions, like the disappointing attempt at ocean iron fertilisation (theoretically (Nature) enhancing carbon sequestration — no more than 1 Gt per year under full implementation, Australian research group) could indeed affect ecosystems.

By contrast, in mid - to high latitudes on all continents, substantial shifts in forest structure toward more rain - green, summer - green or deciduous rather than evergreen forest, and forest and woodland decline, underlie the overall drop in global terrestrial carbon sequestration potential that occurs post-2030, and approaches a net source by about 2070 (Figure 4.2; 4.3).

, the effort involved in carbon capture might pay for itself, rather than just being a prelude to the further expenses entailed in piping the CO2 hundreds of kilometers to the site of sequestration.

For truly boreal systems (further north than Adirondacks), my understanding is that there is enough evidence for a strong warming albedo effect of forests (counter-acting the cooling effect of C sequestration) that we probably should not attribute carbon offsets to boreal reforestation based simply on carbon accounting of tree biomass.

He should also try to rally the nation and globe in support of an international Manhattan Project, in which the best scientific minds would devise carbon - sequestration technologies that could clean the air of the heating elements we've put there — rather than simply seeking to limit the damage.

Also, this demand for carbon sequestration is greater than the entire biocapacity of crop land and grazing lands on the planet combined.»

While we've just learned that over 80 % of new farmland in the tropics came at the expense of forests, another new study shows us that when it comes to calculating how much carbon tropical forests store, variable on the ground conditions make estimating how much sequestration potential forests have more tricky than thought.

«What we are doing in these tropical forests is really a massive problem,» said Kurz.Bruce McCarl, an agricultural economist at Texas A&M; University, argues that simple changes in forest management and agricultural practices could lower the risk of severe global warming much more rapidly than proposed technological solutions like carbon sequestration.

«Coal with carbon sequestration emits 60 - to 110 - times more carbon and air pollution than wind energy, and nuclear emits about 25 - times more carbon and air pollution than wind energy,» Jacobson said.

I propose some biocoal sequestration as far less risky and less expensive than sequestering carbon dioxide (which also affects the active carbon cycle).

«Rather than comparing carbon sequestration with other alternatives,» Juanes told LiveScience.

Charlie A - So by your understanding an abstract discussion the importance of carbon sequestration in mitigating climate change (implying sequestration of CO2 to reduce climate change), with CO2 increases coming from anthropogenic emissions (more evidence than needed) is in some fashion not implicitly stating that that AGW is the major cause of recent climate change?

Using perennial bioenergy crops (e.g., switchgrass, silver grass, willow, eucalyptus) rather than annuals (e.g., corn) reduces emissions and raises carbon sequestration in soil.