Renew On Line (UK) 34

Extracts from the November-December 2001 edition of Renew
These extracts only represent about 25% of it

3. CLA push for Rural Renewables - and sinks

The Country Land and Business Association, previously known as the Country Landowners Association (or CLA), has proposed radical measures to improve the rural economy’s contribution to combating global warming. The CLA says the countryside is the “front line” of the battle against climate change, and calls for the expansion of renewable energy sources. Its 102 proposals include growing elephant grass and willow to replace fossil fuels (see later for a project proposed in Cumbria).

It notes that agriculture is responsible for much of the methane and nitrous oxide emissions through intensive fertiliser use and livestock production. Emission levels are falling but more could be done, says the CLA, which criticises the government for failing to give enough encouragement to “carbon sinks” - soil or crops able to soak up carbon dioxide and prevent it warming the atmosphere. “The UK government is currently concentrating on emission reductions rather than carbon sinks to meet the commitments under the Kyoto protocol. We consider a twin-track approach to reducing emissions by actual emissions reduction and the use of carbon sinks would be more effective”.

..but the Royal Society says sinks won't be enough

Forests and farmlands cannot be relied on to soak up greenhouse gases, and cuts in emissions are the only long-term way to reduce global warming, according to a report by the Royal Society. It said that too little is known about how much farmlands and forests can absorb carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, from the atmosphere. Carbon sinks have of course been a major issue in the debate over the Kyoto accord, with the USA withdrawing from the negotiations last year in part because the US could not get agreement on counting its huge potential sinks against its emissions education targets.

The Royal Society report seems to support the EU view against the US, that better methods are needed to verify the impact of carbon sinks on global warming, and that reducing the amount of CO2 from burning fossil fuels should be the main way to reduce global warming. “These carbon sinks are of rather limited size and also will only work for a relatively short duration, a few decades. That means they can’t make a major contribution to reducing carbon emissions and solving the global warming problem,” said Professor John Shepherd, an author of the report. Shepherd, the director of Britain’s Tyndall Centre for Climate Research, said carbon sinks were diverting the talks from the main issue which is cutting emissions. According to the report, carbon sinks and soil absorb about 40% of CO2 emissions and could soak up as much as 45%. But it added that the maximum that could be absorbed would only be equivalent to a quarter of that needed by 2050 to prevent major rises in global temperature. “Our view is that the argument is being diverted into what is really a rather unproductive area and people should get back to talking about carbon emission reductions at source by use of renewable (fuels) and whatever else they think is necessary”.

The Royal Society team also warned that in the future carbon sinks could become a source of CO2. They could release greenhouse gases, such as methane. “The primary benefit of land carbon sinks is that they can be effective immediately and provide a financial incentive for the preservation and sustainable use of forests and agriculture land”. But the long-term solution must they say be cuts in CO2 emissions through energy saving and replacing fossil fuels with renewable - and, they add, nuclear. But that’s another story.

www.royalsoc.ac.uk/news/index.html