SOIL
CARBON AND CLIMATE CHANGE NEWS
From
Consortium for Agricultural Soils
Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases (CASMGS)
http://soilcarboncenter.k-state.edu
Charles W. Rice, K-State Department of
Agronomy, National CASMGS Director
(785) 532-7217 cwrice@ksu.edu
Scott Staggenborg, K-State Department of
Agronomy (785) 532-7214 sstaggen@ksu.edu
Steve Watson, CASMGS Communications (785)
532-7105 swatson@ksu.edu
May 28, 2009
No. 68
Research:
* Protecting
soil carbon levels when switching from grass to corn production
* New
analysis shows warming could be double previous estimates
National:
* Duke Energy invests in
* What’s next for federal climate
change legislation?
**********
Protecting soil carbon levels
when switching from grass to corn
production
The national push for biofuels may encourage
farmers to plant corn where environmentally friendly grasses are now grown. But
those making the switch can still sequester soil carbon and reduce greenhouse
gas emissions by not tilling the soil, according to Agricultural Research
Service (ARS) scientists.
Ron Follett, a senior supervisory scientist at the ARS Soil Plant Nutrient
Research Unit in
The effort is one of the most comprehensive field studies yet to address a
major issue in agriculture: the effects of replacing native grasses with corn.
Bromegrass became a popular alternative in the 1990s for Midwestern farmers
trying to save erodible soils, enhance habitats and increase soil organic
carbon. Under conventional tillage, much of this carbon is released into the atmosphere
as carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming.
Nationwide, there are 35 million acres of bromegrass and other plants
grown in exchange for $1.8 billion in annual payments as part of USDA’s
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).
But as demand for biofuels raises corn prices and CRP contracts end, farmers
may replace grasses with corn.
Follett and his team used herbicide to kill the grass in the fall of 1998 and
planted no-till corn the following spring. They collected soil samples at three
depths to analyze the total amount of soil carbon at each depth and determine
whether the carbon was previously sequestered by bromegrass or newly
sequestered by the corn.
Follett’s results, recently published in Agronomy Journal, show the benefits of
no-till when making the switch. The researchers found yields were decreased
because of extended drought conditions, but the total amount of carbon didn’t
change. The rates of loss of soil organic carbon previously sequestered in the
top two depths by the bromegrass were offset by similar rates of increase in
newly sequestered carbon from the corn. There also was little or no
change in the amount of soil organic carbon from either the bromegrass or the
corn at the third depth.
For more details, see:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2009/090527.htm
-- Dennis O’Brien, USDA-ARS
News Service, May 27, 2009
**********
New
analysis shows warming could be
double
previous estimates
The most comprehensive
modeling yet carried out on the projected changes in the Earth's climate this
century shows that without rapid and massive action, the problem of global warming
will be about twice as severe as estimated six years ago -- and could be even
worse than that.
The study uses the MIT
Integrated Global Systems Model, a detailed computer simulation of global
economic activity and climate processes that has been developed and refined by
the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change since the early
1990s.
Study co-author Ronald
Prinn, the co-director of the Joint Program and director of MIT's Center for
Global Change Science, says that, regarding global warming, it is important “to
base our opinions and policies on the peer-reviewed science.” And in the
peer-reviewed literature, the MIT model looks in great detail at the effects of
economic activity coupled with the effects of atmospheric, oceanic, and biological
systems. “In that sense, our work is unique,” he says.
The new projections,
published in May 2009 in the American Meteorological Society's Journal of
Climate, indicate a median probability of surface warming of 5.2 degrees
Celsius by 2100, with a 90% probability range of 3.5 to 7.4 degrees. This can
be compared to a median projected increase in the 2003 study of just 2.4
degrees. The difference is caused by several factors rather than any single big
change. Among these are improved economic modeling and newer economic data
showing less chance of low emissions than had been projected in the earlier
scenarios. Prinn says these and a variety of other changes based on new
measurements and new analyses changed the odds on what could be expected in this
century in the “no policy” scenarios -- that is, where there are no policies in
place that specifically induce reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Overall,
the changes all “stacked up so they caused more projected global warming.”
While the outcomes in the “no
policy” projections now look much worse than before, there is less change from
previous work in the projected outcomes if strong policies are put in place now
to drastically curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Without action, “there is
significantly more risk than we previously estimated,” Prinn says. “This
increases the urgency for significant policy action.”
The odds indicated by this
modeling may actually understate the problem, Prinn says, because the model
does not fully incorporate other positive feedbacks that can occur, for
example, if increased temperatures caused a large-scale melting of permafrost
in arctic regions and subsequent release of large quantities of methane, a very
potent greenhouse gas. Including that feedback “is just going to make it worse,”
Prinn says.
Prinn stresses that the
computer models are built to match the known conditions, processes and past
history of the relevant human and natural systems, and the researchers are
therefore dependent on the accuracy of this current knowledge. Beyond this, “we
do the research, and let the results fall where they may,” he says. Since there
are so many uncertainties, especially with regard to what human beings will
choose to do and how large the climate response will be, “we don't pretend we
can do it accurately. Instead, we do these 400 runs and look at the spread of
the odds.”
Because vehicles last for
years, and buildings and power plants last for decades, it is essential to
start making major changes through adoption of significant national and
international policies as soon as possible, Prinn says. "The least-cost
option to lower the risk is to start now and steadily transform the global
energy system over the coming decades to low or zero greenhouse gas-emitting
technologies."
This work was supported in
part by grants from the Office of Science of the U.S. Dept. of Energy, and by
the industrial and foundation sponsors of the MIT Joint Program on the Science
and Policy of Global Change.
-- David Chandler, MIT News
Office, May 19, 2009
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/roulette-0519.html
**********
Duke Energy Invests in
Duke
Energy announced it is the lead
investor in “GreenTrees,” a program that aims to reforest one million acres in
the
GreenTrees
seeks to transform open and marginal farmland in this seven-state region into a
sustainable ecosystem that captures large quantities of carbon dioxide, creates
habitat for wildlife, and benefits landowners who commit to the long-term
reforestation of their property. Duke Energy's initial investment will result
in the planting of more than one million trees on approximately 1,700 acres in
GreenTrees’
approach involves the inter-planting of 302 cottonwood and 302 hardwood trees
per acre. The fast-growing cottonwoods provide a canopy that promotes hardwood
growth and helps transform the land into a forest setting in as few as three to
five years.
Duke
Energy expects the federal
government will soon implement an economywide cap-and-trade program to control
carbon dioxide emissions. The company also believes that high-quality,
verifiable carbon offsets derived from reforestation efforts will play an
important role in such a program, since trees and other plant life naturally
absorb carbon dioxide as they grow.
“Federal
climate
change legislation will set the stage for an active carbon offset market in
which the demand for domestic offsets will significantly exceed supply,” said
Keith Trent, Duke Energy's chief policy, strategy and regulatory officer. “Duke
Energy's investment in this project affirms our commitment to doing business in
a sustainable way that benefits customers, the environment, our shareholders
and the economy.”
GreenTrees
(www.green-trees.com), which is
privately managed by Virginia-based C2I, LLC, has been endorsed by a variety of
conservation and wildlife organizations, including the National Wildlife
Federation. “The GreenTrees program enables private landowners to benefit from
helping us establish a verifiable carbon offset market in the
Under
the program, GreenTrees enters into 70-year carbon offset lease agreements with
willing landowners. These long-term agreements minimize the risk of future
deforestation and encourage the long-term storage of carbon dioxide in the
trees, roots and soil on the land. Landowners retain land use and can
simultaneously benefit from multiple revenue streams generated by their
property, including: recreational revenue; conservation tax benefits; potential
access to federal funds (such as the USDA Conservation Reserve Program); and
the right to harvest and sell select amounts of timber within the guidelines of
the program.
--
Greg Efthimiou, Duke Energy 704-382-1925, May 28, 2009
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/duke-energy-invests-in-greentrees,840624.shtml
**********
What’s next for federal
climate change legislation?
The U.S. Senate
environment committee will start dissecting the Waxman-Markey now that it has
cleared a House vote, its chairman, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), said. As
soon as the comprehensive energy and climate draft is reported out of the House
energy committee, “we’ll start doing some workshops on their bill,” she said.
Boxer’s
committee has jurisdiction over drafting climate change legislation in the
Senate, and last year took the first step in Congress to move a cap-and-trade
bill through the legislative process.
The
cap-and-trade bill she sponsored with Independent Senator Joe Lieberman and
retired Republican Senator John Warner, made it to the Senate floor for
consideration last summer but fell well short of the 60 votes it needed for
passage. Now, Boxer’s committee will look for guidance from the House energy
committee, and learn from Chairman Henry Waxman’s successes and failures with
his bill. Boxer told reporters her committee would look at the Waxman-Markey
bill together with the Lieberman-Warner bill, “compare some of the structure,”
and “pick the best aspects.”
“I am
proceeding to write a bill (that is) in our committee’s jurisdiction,” Boxer
said, noting she only has responsibility for the climate change portion of a
comprehensive energy and climate change bill.
The Senate
energy committee, chaired by Senator Jeff Bingaman, has jurisdiction over
drafting an energy bill, including measures to implement a national renewable energy
standard, like the one found in Waxman-Markey.
Boxer was not
able to specify a timeline for action to pass a cap-and-trade bill in the
Senate, leaving those decisions “up to Senator (Harry) Reid,” the majority
leader. Boxer said she is “networking” with Senate
Republicans,
such as
In addition,
she said Lieberman has been in talks with former Republican presidential
nominee Senator John McCain about cap-and-trade legislation. Boxer said she
learned from her experience with the Lieberman-Warner bill and had advised
Waxman to reach out to coal-state senators to win their support early. She
applauded Waxman for reaching compromises with Democratic colleagues from
coal-reliant and manufacturing states to ensure support for his bill.
-- Carbon Market
http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/cmna/1.1123346
**********
MEETINGS OF INTEREST
July 5-9
Global Conference on Global
Warming 2009
http://www.gcgw.org/gcgw09/index.php?conference=gcgw09&schedConf=gcgw09&page=index
July 15-17
3rd Annual Carbon
Capture: Status & Outlook
http://www.infocastinc.com/index.php/conference/carbon09/registration
November 2-4
Carbon Markets Insights
http://www.pointcarbon.com/events/
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or send comments
or items for the newsletter, email Steve Watson at: