permaculture

[Rain Tenaqiya <raincascadia@yahoo.com>]

I really appreciate all the efforts that are being made to find ways to 
sequester carbon (Darren Doherty's posts are always inspiring), and these 
efforts make sense on a lot of levels, but I just want to put a reminder out 
there that we need to pay attention to the latest science and not get overly 
optimistic.  While they are still duking it out, this NOAA report from over a 
year ago denies the possibility of reversing climate change within any 
reasonable time frame:  
 
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090126_climate.html
 
A new scientific study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration reaches a powerful conclusion about the climate change caused 
by future increases of carbon dioxide: to a large extent, there’s no going 
back. 
The pioneering study, led by NOAA senior scientist Susan Solomon, shows how 
changes in surface temperature, rainfall, and sea level are largely 
irreversible for more than 1,000 years after carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions 
are completely stopped. The findings appear during the week of January 26 in 
the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
 
Geoengineering to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere was not 
considered in the study. “Ideas about taking the carbon dioxide away after 
the world puts it in have been proposed, but right now those are very 
speculative,” said Solomon.



>From tpj@life.ku.dk  Mon Apr 26 16:16:27 2010
Return-Path: <tpj@life.ku.dk>
X-Original-To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 64CD24C017; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:16:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,
        REMOVE_BEFORE_LINK autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
Received: from smtp.life.ku.dk (smtp.life.ku.dk [130.226.170.37])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C817D4C016
        for <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:16:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from gwia2.kvl.dk (gwia2.kvl.dk [10.108.1.117])
        by smtp.life.ku.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0FE12C9DD
        for <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Mon, 26 Apr 2010 22:16:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from DOMGWIA-MTA by gwia2.kvl.dk
        with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 22:16:24 +0200
Message-Id: <4BD610B1020000660001D3AF@gwia2.kvl.dk>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 8.0.1
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 22:16:17 +0200
From: "Thomas Paul Jahn" <tpj@life.ku.dk>
To: <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: [permaculture] Svar:  climate change possibly irreversible
X-BeenThere: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Id: permaculture <permaculture.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>,
        <mailto:permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture>
List-Post: <mailto:permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>,
        <mailto:permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 20:16:27 -0000

As much as I appreciatethe link to the study about possibly irreversible
climate changes byNOAA, the observation made does by no means deserve
more attentionthan the efforts being done here to increase carbon
sequestration.Carbon farming and carbonsequestration are not meant to
only offset emissions, but first ofall to create fertile soils.
I feel that drawing theattention to the possible catastrophe instead of
encouraging bestpractice in carbon farming will lead to confusion. The
press articleabout the study by NOAA touches upon geoengineering as a
potentialsolution of the problem. I think it can be dangerous to push
thediscussion in that direction.
No! A major problem is ourrelation to growing food. And building soil is
the foundation to growfood. The article also mentions drought future
scenarios and winderosion as in North America in the 1930th. Proper land
usewill help preventing erosion by wind and rainfall. All these
changesin land use, that people here are concerned about, have not
beentaken into consideration by the authors of the study.
I wish, science would bemore progressive and consider some really
radical approaches likepermaculture in their future scenarios. The
presented study is morelikely to give support for geoengineering as a
last option andpoliticians may feel pressured to follow such ideas.




>>> Rain Tenaqiya  26-04-10 21:27 >>>
I really appreciate all the efforts that are being made to find ways to
sequester carbon (Darren Doherty's posts are always inspiring), and
these efforts make sense on a lot of levels, but I just want to put a
reminder out there that we need to pay attention to the latest science
and not get overly optimistic.  While they are still duking it out, this
NOAA report from over a year ago denies the possibility of reversing
climate change within any reasonable time frame:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090126_climate.html

A new scientific study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration reaches a powerful conclusion about the climate change
caused by future increases of carbon dioxide: to a large extent, there’s
no going back.
The pioneering study, led by NOAA senior scientist Susan Solomon, shows
how changes in surface temperature, rainfall, and sea level are largely
irreversible for more than 1,000 years after carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions are completely stopped. The findings appear during the week of
January 26 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Geoengineering to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere was not
considered in the study. “Ideas about taking the carbon dioxide away
after the world puts it in have been proposed, but right now those are
very speculative,” said Solomon.



_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Google command to search archives:
site: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring
More information:
http://venaurafarm.blogspot.com
permaculture forums  http://www.permies.com/permaculture-forums
And: http://www.richsoil.com