| Revision as of 03:55, 10 October 2009 edit121.127.207.75 (talk) minor edit← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:01, 9 February 2023 edit undoMdewman6 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,715 edits rcats |
| (376 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
#REDIRECT] |
|
'''Biosequestration''' is the capture and storage of the atmospheric ] ] by an increased volume or quality of ] (through practices such as growing more trees and genetic engineering respectively), as well as enhanced soil carbon in agriculture. It has been crucial to the initiation, evolution and preservation of life and is a key policy concept in the ] debate.<ref>Ross Garnaut. The Garnaut Climate Change Review. Cambridge University Press. Melbourne (copyright held by Commonwealth of Australia) 2008 p558. Garnaut (p609) defines biosequestration as involving greenhouse gases in general.</ref> It does not generally refer to the sequestering of carbon dioxide in oceans (see ]) or rock formations, depleted oil or gas reservoirs (see ] and ]), deep saline ], or deep coal seams (see ]) (for all see ]) or through the use of industrial chemical ] (see ]). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{R category shell| |
|
|
|
|
|
{{R from merge}} |
|
== Reforestation == |
|
|
|
{{R to section}} |
|
Candell and Raupach argue that there are four primary ways in which ] and reducing ] can increase ''biosequestration''. First, by increasing the volume of existing forest. Second, by increasing the carbon density of existing forests at a stand and landscape scale. Third, by expanding the use of forest products that will sustainably replace fossil-fuel emissions. Fourth, by reducing carbon emissions that are caused from deforestation and degradation.<ref>Canadell, J. G and Raupach, M. R. Managing Forests for Climate Change. Science. 2008; 320: 1456-1457</ref>A recent report by the Australian ] found that forestry and forest-related options are the most significant and most easily achieved ] making up 105 Mt per year CO2-e or about 75 per cent of the total figure attainable for the Australian state of Queensland from 2010-2050. Among the forestry options, the CSIRO report announced, forestry with the primary aim of carbon storage (called carbon forestry) clearly has the highest attainable carbon storage capacity (77 Mt CO2-e/yr) and is one of the easiest options to implement compared with ] plantings, pre-1990 ], post 1990 plantations and managed regrowth.<ref>CSIRO An Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Carbon Biosequestration Opportunities from Rural Land Use. Canberra. 2009. http://www.csiro.au/resources/carbon-and-rural-land-use-report.html, last accessed 8 October 2009</ref> Legal strategies to encourage this form of ] include permanent protection of forests in ] or on the ], properly funded management and bans on use of ] timbers and inefficient uses such as ] ].<ref>Mark Diesendorf. Climate Action. UNSW Press. Sydney. 2009 p116</ref> |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
== Enhanced photosynthesis == |
|
|
Biosequestration may be enhanced by improving ] by modifying ] genes in plants to increase the catalytic and/or oxygenation activity of that enzyme.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Spreitzer RJ, Salvucci ME |title=Rubisco: structure, regulatory interactions, and possibilities for a better enzyme |journal=Annu Rev Plant Biol |volume=53 |issue= |pages=449–75 |year=2002 |pmid=12221984 |doi=10.1146/annurev.arplant.53.100301.135233 |url=http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.arplant.53.100301.135233?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3dncbi.nlm.nih.gov}}</ref> |
|
|
One such research area involves increasing the earth's proportion of ] photosynthetic plants. C4 plants represent about 5% of Earth's plant biomass and 1% of its known plant species,<ref>Bond, W.J.; Woodward, F.I.; Midgley, G.F. (2005). "The global distribution of ecosystems in a world without fire". New Phytologist 165 (2): 525–538.</ref> but account for around 30% of terrestrial carbon fixation.<ref>Osborne, C.P.; Beerling, D.J. (2006). "Review. Nature's green revolution: the remarkable evolutionary rise of C4 plants". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 361 (1465): 173–194</ref> |
|
|
In leaves of C3 plants, captured ] of solar energy undergo ] which assimilates ] into ] (triosephosphates) in the] of the ] cells. The primary CO2 fixation step is catalysed by ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (]) which reacts with O2 leading to ] that protects ] from ] but wastes 50% of potentially fixed carbon.<ref>Leegood RC. C4 photosynthesis: principles of CO2 concentration and prospects for its introduction into C3 plants. Journal of Experimental Botany 2002; 53: 581-590</ref> The C4 photosynthetic pathway, however, concentrates CO2 at the site of the reaction of ], thereby reducing the ''biosequestration''-inhibiting photorespiration. <ref>Mitsue Miyao. Molecular evolution and genetic engineering of C4 photosynthetic enzymes Journal of Experimental Botany. 2003; 54 (381): 179-189.</ref>A new frontier in crop science consists of attempts to ] C3 staple food crops (such as wheat, barley, soybeans, potatoes and rice) with the "turbo-charged" photosynthetic apparatus of C4 plants.<ref>David Beerling. The Emerald Planet. How Plants Changed Earth's History. Oxford University Press. Oxford 2007 pp194-195.</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Biochar == |
|
|
] (charcoal created by ] of ]) is a potent form of longterm (thousands of years) ''biosequestration'' of atmosphereic C02 derived from investigation of the extremely fertile ] soils of the ].<ref>Laird, David A., The Charcoal Vision: A Win–Win–Win Scenario for Simultaneously Producing Bioenergy, Permanently Sequestering Carbon, while Improving Soil and Water Quality, Agronomy J 2008; 100: 178-181</ref> Placing biochar in soils also improves water quality, increases soil fertility, raises agricultural productivity and reduce pressure on ].<ref>Glaser, Bruno, Johannes Lehmann, and Wolfgang Zech, Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of highly weathered soils in the tropics with charcoal – a review. Biology and Fertility Soils 2002;35:219</ref> As a method of generating ] Rob Flanagan and the EPRIDA biochar company have developed low-tech cooking stoves for developing nations that can burn agricultural wastes such as rice husks and produce 15% by weight of biochar; while BEST Energies in NSW Australia have spent a decade developing an ] technology that can combust96 tonnes of dry biomass each day, generating 30-40 tonnes of biochar.<ref>Chris Goodall. Ten Technologies To Save The Planet. Green Profile. London 2008 pp 210-231</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Improved agricultural and farming practices == |
|
|
Zero-till farming practices occur where there is much ] but ] is not used, so that the carbon-rich organic matter in soil is not exposed to atmospheric oxygen, or to the leaching and erosion effects of rainfall. Over grazing is reduced by moving cattle and sheep away from grazed areas for several months.<ref>Chris Goodall. Ten Technologies To Save The Planet. Green Profile. London 2008 pp 236-247</ref> Ceasing ploughing has been alleged to encourage more ] to become predators of wood-eating (and C02 generating) ], allows weeds to regenerate soils and helps slow water flows over the land.<ref>Peter Andrews. Beyond the Brink. ABC Books. Sydney. 2008 p40</ref> Dedicated biofuel and biosequestration crops, such as switchgrass (]), are also being developed.<ref>Biotechnology Industry Organization (2007). pp. 3-4.</ref> It requires from 0.97 to 1.34 GJ fossil energy to produce 1 tonne of switchgrass, compared with 1.99 to 2.66 GJ to produce 1 tonne of corn. <ref>Dale, B., Kim, S. Cumulative Energy and Global Warming Impact from the Production of Biomass for Biobased Products. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 2004; 7(3-4):147-162</ref> Given that switchgrass contains approximately 18.8 GJ/ODT of biomass, the energy output-to-input ratio for the crop can be up to 20:1.<ref>Samson, R. et al. Developing Energy Crops for Thermal Applications: Optimizing Fuel Quality, Energy Security and GHG Mitigation. In Biofuels, Solar and Wind as Renewable Energy Systems: Benefits and Risks. D. Pimental. (Ed.) Springer Science, Berlin, Germany. 2008. 395-423</ref> ''Biosequestration'' can also be enhanced by farmers choosing crops species that produce large numbers of ]. Phytoliths are microscopic spherical shells of ] that can store carbon for thousands of years.<ref>Parr JF and Sullivan LA. Soil carbon sequestration in phytoliths. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 2005; 37:117-124.</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Implications for climate change policy == |
|
|
Industries with large amounts of C02 emissions (such as the ]) are interested in ''biosequestration'' as a means of offsetting their ] production.<ref> Tom Fearon. Australia’s ‘massive advantage’ in bio-sequestration. Environmental Management News. Monday, 3 August 2009 </ref> In Australia, university researchers are engineering ] to produce ] (hydrogen and biodiesel oils) and investigating whether this process can be used to ''biosequester'' carbon. Algae naturally capture sunlight and use its energy to split water into hydrogen, oxygen and oil which can be extracted. Such ] production also can be coupled with ] using salt-tolerant marine algae to generate fresh water and electricity.<ref>Guy Healey. Pond life fuels bio research The Australian. July 23, 2008</ref>Many new bioenergy (]) technologies, including cellulosic ethanol biorefineries (using stems and branches of most plants including crop residues (such as corn stalks, wheat straw and rice straw) are being promoted because they have the added advantage of ''biosequestration'' of C02. <ref>International Energy Agency (2006). p. 8.</ref> The ] recommends that a carbon price in a ] scheme could include a financial incentive for ''biosequestration'' processes.<ref>Ross Garnaut. The Garnaut Climate Change Review. Cambridge University Press. Melbourne (copyright held by Commonwealth of Australia) 2008. p558</ref> Garnaut recommends the use of ] biosequestration (see ]) to absorb the constant stream of ] emissions from coal-fired ] and ].<ref>Ross Garnaut. The Garnaut Climate Change Review. Cambridge University Press. Melbourne (copyright held by Commonwealth of Australia) 2008 p432.</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Barriers to increased global biosequestration == |
|
|
The ] notes many such barriers. "There must be changes in the accounting regimes for ]. Investments are required in research, development and commercialisation of superior approaches to ''biosequestration''. Adjustments are required in the regulation of land use. New institutions will need to be developed to coordinate the interests in utilisation of ''biosequestration'' opportunities across small business in rural communities. Special efforts will be required to unlock potential in rural communities in developing countries."<ref>Ross Garnaut. The Garnaut Climate Change Review. Cambridge University Press. Melbourne (copyright held by Commonwealth of Australia) 2008. p582 </ref> Saddler and King have argued that ''biosequestration'' and agricultural greenhouse gas emissions should not be handled within a global ] because of difficulties with measuring such emissions, problems in controlling them and the burden that would be placed on numerous small-scale farming operations.<ref>Saddler H and King H. Agriculture and Emissions Trading: The Impossible Dream. Australia Institute Discussion Paper 102. Australia Institute, Canberra. 2008.</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== References == |
|
|
{{Reflist}} |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|