tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post1758121469181949097..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: An Easy Call: The Norwegian SWF Should Divest from Fossil FuelsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-19126815932222467752014-06-27T12:28:40.941-04:002014-06-27T12:28:40.941-04:00Re: "humans can't do much about it -- ex...Re: "humans can't do much about it -- except prevent the carbon that was buried hundreds of millions of years ago from being dug up and reintroduced into the process."<br /><br />That statement seems fair enough. Heating and cooking problems remain, in that respect. I was thinking in terms of conversion to solar heat banks for heating and solar cooking facilities. <br /><br />I don't think that this will be a straightforward revolution, however. In the end it will probably be that a wide range of technologies are employed to address both climate change and peak energy and resources. Solar refrigerators that don't need batteries (they exist already). Sunny decks that are designed for the erection and use of solar cookers and dryers, underground cool stores, insulated window shutters and insulated doors... Myrtle Blackwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07427043367624101075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-39494304051621854832014-06-26T20:04:33.907-04:002014-06-26T20:04:33.907-04:00Myrtle, without getting into the details of this o...Myrtle, without getting into the details of this or that biomass activity, the main point to bear in mind is that terrestrial and aquatic systems have carbon cycles. The carbon may be temporarily in one sink (such as a forest) but the process of carbon exchange moves it through the entire system. Humans can tweak these fluxes (through burning rather than allowing decomposition, for example), but we can't shut them down. What governs the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in the medium to long run (in human terms) is the amount of previously sequestered carbon we haul/pump out of the earth and inject into biospheric cycles.<br /><br />As someone who spends a lot of time with scientists who study this stuff, I am struck by the disconnect between the mental frameworks of those familiar with biogeochemical cycling and those who aren't -- which include nearly all economists. Economists think this is a "pollution" problem that you can fix by controlling the movement of the "pollutant" from point A (a forest, a farm, a factory) to point B (the atmosphere). Nope. There is lots of flux back and forth and humans can't do much about it -- except prevent the carbon that was buried hundreds of millions of years ago from being dug up and reintroduced into the process.<br /><br />Every time I see the phrase "carbon pollution" I want to cringe.Peter Dormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00093399591393648071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-87631968394411089832014-06-26T11:58:15.138-04:002014-06-26T11:58:15.138-04:00Re: "...the point of mitigation measures is ...Re: "...the point of mitigation measures is to leave fossil fuels in the ground..."<br /><br />There is great danger in a single focus on fossil fuels. About 40% of the world's CO2 emissions come from the burning of biomass (or so I've read).<br /><br />When the Greek government recently raised the cost of heating oil vast numbers of people turned to wood to heat their homes. The triple whammy of heavy air pollution, high CO2 emissions and loss of forests (and their beneficial functions) hit home.<br /><br />Much more focus needs to go on alternative heating and cooking solutions.Myrtle Blackwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07427043367624101075noreply@blogger.com