Are prairie farmers Really Sequestering more Carbon than they Emit ??

[bucket]

Yes we sequester more than we emit.....

[furrowtickler]

What does nitrous oxide have to do with CO2 ?

[tweety]

Got some actual science there bucket? citations of any actual detailed studies?

[bucket]

Tweety

No but there was a firm that was paying for carbon credits years ago and basing that payment on zero till and farming practices....

Nature conservancy gets paid on there accumulated land base in the form of donations from emitters for offset purposes.


I could look it up but I think you know farms and forests are sequestering carbon...


Or here is some from a quick Google search.....forgive me for the long post.


Low tillage systems are being entrenched on Canadian farms

Canadian farmers who have adopted conservation farming practices such as zero tillage and direct seeding over the past 20 years are contributing to Canada's overall objectives of reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.

The techniques, which eliminate or reduce tillage in crop production play a dual role in capturing and storing carbon in the soil. First, plants such as grain, oilseeds, corn and forage crops take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis and store it in plant structures.

Second, the absence of tillage slows the breakdown of plant material both on the soil surface and in the root zone, therefore slowing the release of carbon back into the atmosphere. The carbon taken from the atmosphere is stored in the soil.

Important contribution
Carbon sequestration is an important process in reducing GHG emissions, say soil scientists and soil conservation specialists. Through chemical conversion, one tonne of soil carbon can produce 3.67 tonnes of carbon dioxide. The more carbon stored, the less carbon dioxide being released.

Research on Canadian climate change estimate Canadian cropland can store or sequester as much as 22 million tonnes of atmospheric carbon dioxide per year by using best management practices such as zero tillage. It's further estimated that grazing land can store another three million tonnes of carbon dioxide through improved grass production and proper grazing management.

Zero till and direct seeding production practices, along with reduced use of summer fallow, can store from 0.3 to 0.5 tonnes of carbon per hectare per year to the soil depending on the weather and moisture patterns.

"In short, practices that increases carbon storage are usually good," says Dr. Henry Janzen, a research scientist specializing in soil biochemistry with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's Lethbridge Research Centre. "They are good for the environment and good for producers."

Multiple benefits
The main benefit of sequestering carbon, says Janzen, is to improve soil quality and productivity. The amount of soil carbon is directly related to soil organic matter, which affects the soil's quality, tilth, ability to resist erosion and nutrient supplying characteristics.

"We've been looking at building soil organic matter for many decades and we've done it for many important reasons other than reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide," says Janzen. "We do it for reasons of productivity, conserving soils and ensuring soils are productive for generations to come. And if we can reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide at the same time, so much the better."

Different approaches
Approaches to zero tillage and conservation farming need to be modified for different regions of the country. The benefits of using a zero till drill to seed directly into standing wheat and barley stubble has been demonstrated across much of Western Canada. However, new approaches are being evaluated through Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada, which produce different crops, with different cropping techniques under higher moisture weather regimes.

Adoption of zero till farming practices varies by region and crop. In Ontario it's estimated about 10 percent of corn, about 50 percent of soybeans and about 75 percent of wheat are produced under no-till, while in Quebec it's estimated 20 to 25 percent of soybean and grains are no till. Figures are higher if reduced tillage production is included.

Zero till has generated limited interest among corn growers in Eastern Canada.

Slower adoption of zero till is due in part to some earlier demonstrations which showed negative results. In New Brunswick, for example, zero till corn projects showed growers can reduce equipment and field operating costs, but at the expense of reduced yields, says Pat Toner, a soil management specialist with New Brunswick Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Aquaculture. That's mostly blamed on the crop residue keeping the soil cool in spring, which may slow the growth of the heat-loving crop. A renewed effort is being made to demonstrate the value of zero and reduced tillage to Atlantic Canada farmers using new techniques such as zone or strip tillage.

As well, maintaining ground cover is also important to reducing water erosion," says Susannah Banks, field co-ordinator for New Brunswick of the federally funded Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Program (GHGMP).

However, in areas were potatoes are a main crop, for example, little crop residue remains after harvest. Techniques such as seeding winter wheat or other cover crop after potatoes to prevent soil erosion during early spring runoff and after major rainfall events, may be a more viable option.

"We have to find ways to demonstrate to producers in Atlantic Canada the value of zero and reduced tillage and maintaining ground cover," says Jerome Damboise, Project Co-ordinator for the Eastern region of the GHGMP who works out of the Eastern Canada Soil and Water Conservation Centre.

Prairie producers adopt technique
Depending on the region and weather patterns Western Canadian producers have been buying into conservation farming practices for more than two decades. In Manitoba, where zero tillage was pioneered about 25 years ago, the practice has been adopted in the drier parts of the province. Of about 12 million cropped acres, about two million are cropped under zero till systems.

In Saskatchewan, about 50 percent of the seeded acres, or 16 million acres, are farmed under zero till. While in Alberta about 27 percent or 7 million acres are cropped under zero till practices. British Columbia reflects both trends in the country with producers in the Peace River region adopting similar conservation farming practices as the Prairies, while farmers in the Lower Mainland face similar challenges as producers in Eastern Canada.

Research proves the point
The value of zero till and direct seeding in increasing stored soil carbon has been documented through research. A three-year study by the Prairie Soil Carbon Balance Project confirmed "direct seeded crops take more carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and have more carbon to store," than conventionally tilled crop land. Researchers also observed a slight increase in crop yields.

Recognizing differences in moisture patterns across the Prairies, the project found direct seeding in the drier open prairie captured about one-third of a tonne of carbon per acre per year in the top 12 inches of soil, while in the more moist parkland areas nearly two-thirds tonne per acre of carbon was stored.

Carbon flow similar to a lake
Carbon storage is a dynamic process, says Janzen. "Organic matter is continually being added to and lost from the soil. It's really a flow we're talking about...like a lake with water coming in and going out. And it is the difference - the body of the lake - that amounts to the storage." The lake level or amount of carbon storage can be influenced by either increasing the "inflow" or by decreasing the "outflow."

Prairie soils lost much of the organic matter from the surface layer, soon after they were first broken, says Janzen, estimating between 20 and 30 percent or soil organic matter has been lost. "Part of that can be recovered with improved management practices," he says. "Within a few decades, carbon storage will again reach a plateau or a point of stability."

Adopting conservation tillage or other practices that preserve organic matter is an important part of a sustainable agriculture system, he says. "Carbon sequestering is only one part of the whole process. The main objective is to enhance the resilience and productivity of our farm land."

From the soil conservation of canada

[furrowtickler]

The other side of the story .....
Crop Disease levels have increased dramatically due in part to zero till and higher moisture levels . There are good and bad sides to every story

[mcfarms]

Tweety
If you are questioning the assertion that we do, then I would think we are to take it you have data that says we do not. Please share I am sure the others on here would find it interesting.

[bgmb]

Your thread title is about carbon then you start talking about nitrous? whatever to answer you question about prairie farmers and carbon.... who the **** cares its ****ing carbon and carbon is not a pollutant.

ps floating bare urea as a plan A is a really bad idea.

[tweety]

Tweety
If you are questioning the assertion that we do, then I would think we are to take it you have data that says we do not. Please share I am sure the others on here would find it interesting.

McFarms, i do not. And that's the problem. Many farm organizations have been repeating it over and over yet i fail to see solid evidence. Rather just opinions.

Show me how much a protilled and blackened seed master/hawk/conserva field is releasing/fixing compared to all the carbon released from fert, chemical, equipment, transportation, nitrous, mining, release etc.

A whole life cycle of all greenhouse gases in ag. Has this work been done? Some times a question is just a question.

[mustardman]

bgmb as farmers I do think we sequester More Carbon ,
BUT I think we are putting way TOO much greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. In the form of nitrous oxide (which is way worse than co2)

Comprende ?

[blackpowder]

Kinda proves to me that the "carbon as a poison" cape is gonna get hard to wear.
Create an artificial market. Claim saint hood. Die by the sword when the "science" changes!
Ah, the fat nation luxury of farming fads!

[SASKFARMER3]

Not even close to as much as one big Chinese city

You do get that


No carbon n tax their and they don't give a shit either economy is first environment third after people

[tweety]

Kinda proves to me that the "carbon as a poison" cape is gonna get hard to wear.
Create an artificial market. Claim saint hood. Die by the sword when the "science" changes!
Ah, the fat nation luxury of farming fads!

No one is saying its poison. It climate change, not climate devastation. Some gases affect it more than others, like nitrous. Good for some, bad for others. But industrialization has doubled the carbon in the atmosphere during the industrial era to what it has ever been. And yes, it can be measured. And that can not be refuted.

[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png"]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png[/URL]

The politics is in the shoulda woulda coulda and that's where it gets ugly.

[fjlip]

Your thread title is about carbon then you start talking about nitrous? whatever to answer you question about prairie farmers and carbon.... who the **** cares its ****ing carbon and carbon is not a pollutant.

ps floating bare urea as a plan A is a really bad idea.

Agree CARBON is NOT pollution! Smokescreen again, ya BS keep repeating till it is true.

[foragefarmer]

Sask3


Heard a a quick blurb on the news, so I googled what China does regarding spending on renewable energy. It took a minute You should do a little reading and you may see that China is in fact concerned about CO2 and air quality. Not hard to do


"China intends to spend more than $360 billion through 2020 on renewable power sources like solar and wind, the government’s energy agency said on Thursday."

"China blazed ahead of the rest of the world in terms of investment in renewable energy last year, spending a total of $103bn, or 36% of the world total."

[sumdumguy]

They can tell the press anything they want to hear.