The Science Is Wrong: It's Soil, Not Oil (Climate)(ddebernardy.substack.com) |
The Science Is Wrong: It's Soil, Not Oil (Climate)(ddebernardy.substack.com) |
TL;DR for those who don't click links:
- Corporate green solutions are shams
- Promote gardening if you care about fossil fuels
- An accounting chicanery keeps natural emissions out of view
- The hockey stick is actually about canopy loss
- Switching to alley cropping would reverse it
Happy to answer questions.
If you look into the atmospheric carbon dioxide data, you'll observe seasonal up and downs with the low point that takes us back to around where the high point from about a decade earlier. This means that we could resolve the issue very quickly in a scenario where farms keep enough plants around to soak up the soil emissions during tilling and harvesting operations.
Alley cropping is just one option to do so, btw. As I explain in a separate article [1], any well designed intercropping scenario should do the trick. The point is to not have a wide open field with no plants that could keep the fungi alive, block the wind to keep the carbon dioxide around, and soak up the carbon dioxide.
It can't be perfect because of night emissions and because trees eventually lose their leaves in the fall, but we can do far better than what we're currently doing.
[1]: http://ddebernardy.substack.com/p/stop-climate-agenda-soil-n...
I feel like this goes for so many issues as well. Sure, we can fight cholera in developing countries by providing clean water sources and administering vaccines, but we can also do so by providing universal education and economic opportunity. There is no one solution to these large problems.
There are plenty of good reasons to not like fossil fuels, mind you. But the carbon hockey stick is not one of them.