I’m probably going to irritate some people with this post. I apologize in advance because that is not at all my intention. For those readers that don’t think climate change is a real problem, I respect the fact that there is uncertainty in that science, but if the majority position of climate scientists is true, the stakes in terms of human suffering among the poor are too high not to act. For those who think Organic farming is the answer, I’m not trying to argue the whole issue here - I just want to talk about the science associated with climate change and farming. I have spent months reading the scientific literature on this topic. That science points to some very specific changes in how we need to farm. If those changes were compatible with Organic I’d be a big promoter. The short answer is “Organic farming is not the best option from a climate change point of view.”
I know this sounds like heresy in the “Green Blogosphere,” but before you react, please read on. I agree in advance that the Organic/non-Organic discussion is much broader than climate change. In fairness, climate change was never something that “Organic” was designed to address either during its origins in the early 20th century or during the development of the USDA Organic rules between 1990 and 2000. I have no desire to get in the way of Organic growers making a living (including my good friends who grow Organic of the old school category) or get in the way of Organic customers getting what they want. I simply believe that it is critical that we, the declining subset of people who take climate change seriously, be accurately informed about this issue. If we believe we “have the answer” for farming when that answer is wrong, that keeps us from continuing to find the real answer.
Focusing on the Major Crops
Because it would be far too complex to discuss this question for all crops, I’ll only be talking about the “carbon footprint” of the major row crops (see the pie chart above) - the wheat, corn, hay, barley, oats, corn, soybeans, hay, oats, dry beans, lentils… that make up the bulk of our calorie intake, our vegetable protein intake, and our animal feeds for meat and dairy. Those crops also make up the vast majority of farmed land, so they are what matters for climate change. Fruit and vegetable crops are extremely important for health and food enjoyment, but not much for climate change. Organic today is heavily weighted to the fruit and vegetable segment and beyond that, it is extremely small. Actually, all of Organic only represents 2.6MM acres ( ~0.7% of US cropland), so it has almost no effect on climate either way. This is only a discussion about the widely held opinion that Organic would help in a climate change sense.
The appeal of shortwave, geoengineering is in it’s purportedly rapid, remediation impact (although no global experiments have been conducted yet). However, the combined climate impact of GHG increases with a geoengineered reduction in shortwave radiation is not known, but, it is feared, could result in environmental “winners” and “losers”–meaning some regions of the planet could experience severe drought, and even increased conflict over water resources.
While carbon capture and sequestration technology remains controversial, studies to delve deeper into it are ongoing in hopes of presenting one way to alleviate emission levels. A team from MIT has been studying a carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technique called pressurized oxy-fuel combustion. This process converts the carbon dioxide emissions of a power plant into a pressurized liquid stream meant to be pumped underground. Team leader Ahmed Ghoniem of MIT claims that his team is the only one conducting an academic study of “pressurized combustion system for carbon dioxide capture.”
The World Agroforestry Centre has recently released a paper titled ” Trees on Farm: Analysis of Global Extent and Geographical Patterns of Agroforestry.” The researchers used five global geodata sets to estimate the percent tree cover on 22 million square kilometers of agricultural land around the world. They were surprised to find that nearly half of that land had 10% or more tree cover (which is considered “significant” from an agroforestry point of view). The area involved is vast - as large as the Amazon basin.
Even for North America, the percentages were surprisingly high (39% over 10% cover, 17% over 30%). Values in Europe were similar. The highest levels are in central America (98% above 10% cover), South America (81%), and Southeast Asia (82%). Overall, the lowest tree cover is in the most arid areas, but even there >20% of the farmland has 10% tree cover.
Bio-char pioneers are revisiting their projections to ensure that the development of bio-char programmes won’t cause inadvertent harm to other environmental projects
Pennsylvania’s Department of Conservation and Natural Resources announced yesterday it is working to explore and promote Carbon Sequestration. The process seeks to capture and store carbon dioxide produced from the burning of fossil fuels.
The department is accepting bids for contracts to investigate sites in Pennsylvania as suitable holding cells for the captured CO2. The work would consist primarily of mapping out geologic formations below the earth’s surface to determine the most suitable spots for storing the gases. The bid deadline is Feb. 20.
Pennsylvania is among the most polluting of US states, ranking third in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. It is estimated the state produces 1 percent of the world’s total climate change pollutants. The carbon capture and storage plan is an effort to improve the state’s standing and combat climate change.
The CO2 – a major cause of global warming - would be stored about a half mile underground and come mainly from coal fired and other fossil fueled electrical plants. A risk assessment and cost study are set to begin this spring.
Energy tax provisions slated for the massive economic stimulus bill include expanded incentives for plug-in electric vehicles.
Now that’s some seriously good news even though gas prices are the lowest they have been in a long time.
The Senate unveiled yesterday that they would mark up the $272 billion tax measure as they are a promising way to help curb reliance on oil imports by effectively allowing electric power to substitute for oil-based transportation fuels. The energy provisions total more than [...]
Bowing to pressure from environmental groups, the German science ministry has suspended a planned ocean fertilization experiment in the Southern Ocean and asked the researchers to commission an independent analysis of the project’s environmental impact before dumping anything in the ocean.
Corporate image ads are scattered around political news. They’re often masked as green tech, but their pitch more often advances corporate self-interest.
This week, our eco-vlogging friends at ZapRoot take a thorough look at animal rights, food labeling, and sequestering carbon in middle eastern rocks. Mix in some of their trademark snark and - poof! You’ve got a finished product that is both educational and entertaining.
The department is accepting bids for contracts to investigate sites in Pennsylvania as suitable holding cells for the captured CO2. The work would consist primarily of mapping out geologic formations below the earth’s surface to determine the most suitable spots for storing the gases. The bid deadline is Feb. 20. 
