- The trouble with carbon credits for reducing deforestation.
- Cargill brings its unsustainable style (in food production) to new housing in the Bay Area. Speaking of that "The number of native fish and aquatic insects, especially those that are pollution sensitive, declines in urban and suburban streams at low levels of development"
- The origin of tipping points to more money for workers. Not anymore, say I.
- DWR releases a poll that says Californians are willing to use less water, but DWR doesn't get close to using higher prices, and these "stated preference" polls on good behavior are crap. In other words, DWR hopes that people do the right thing while DWR continues to fail at water management -- let alone getting a handle on NON-urban water.
- Using mobile phones to track water supply and use in LDCs. Cool.
18 June 2010
Speed Blogging
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The Case for Tipping Well -
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/06/the-case-for-tipping-well/58310/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-qV9wVGb38
'The trouble'
There are not only lumber pirates and ownwership difficulties but mature forests do not sequester any more carbon over time. They just sit there without absorbing or emitting net carbon.
One way to get them to absorb more carbon, a method successful around the world, is to burn them down. Some of managed forests are much more susceptible to forest fires. We had the 49,000 acre Cerro Grande fire just to our west as proof of this.
Then you can regrow the forest. Unfortunately the carbon of the last forest is now back in the atmosphere.
Eric, you make a decent point, although the net from natural wildfires (at least in California) is still unkown. Also in California, second-growth redwoods will sequester gigantic amounts of carbon for hundreds of years as they try to re-establish themselves.
Really, we'd need to do some serious reforestation, globally, to even start to have a real offset for emissions, PLUS I can see a lucrative carbon-stand insurance market which, when it needs to pay out, may pay the year's carbon value as "mitigation", but will do nothing to curb the total emissions of actual carbon from the fire.
Post a Comment