[GWSG] Bad gas legislation; Manchin's interests; Mulkey responds on soil C

[Tilley, Al]

1. Florida has new laws which aim to prevent cities from making the transition to renewable energy. The gas industry appears to be behind it. 24 states have passed laws preventing local governments from restricting the use of gas in buildings.  https://grist.org/cities/tampa-wanted-renewable-energy-resolution-florida-lawmakers-made-sure-it-couldnt-gas-ban-preemption/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=daily

2. Last year Senator Joe Manchin made $500,000 from the dirtiest coal plant in West Virginia. The money flowed into a blind trust managed by his son. Senator Manchin has said that his coal interests have absolutely no influence on his political positions, including his opposition to climate action in the proposed infrastructure package. He chairs the Senate energy and natural resources committee. https://www.vice.com/en/article/z3x8bw/joe-manchin-senator-millions-coal-grant-town-west-virginia?utm_source=email&utm_medium=editorial&utm_content=news&utm_campaign=210729

3. Stephen Mulkey had some reactions to the items on soil and carbon in the last news list:
There are three things that bother me about Quanta article. (1) The headline is inflammatory and not accurate. As mentioned at the end, the field of soil science is searching for new paradigm. That the role of microbe release of carbon has only now been shown to be important is a statement about the inadequacy of the field, not wisdom to be received. The papers that are cited in the article are either lab studies of systems that are isolated from any connections with an ecosystem, or they are studies of warming soils under conditions that are intended to reflect future global warming. (2) The assertions in the article do not reflect the carbon dynamic that occurs in intact ecosystems. We know that retention of carbon is enhanced when old growth is left intact, natural grasslands are not plowed, and warm peatland hydrology is maintained. We already know that melting permafrost adds to emissions, so the results cited in this article are rather silly because we already know that increased microbial activity releases “soil” carbon, although permafrost represents an early stage of soil formation. (3) Biochar represents an endpoint in organic carbon in the sense that independent of any attachment to an ecosystem it is stable under a wide range of heat and humidity. It is very likely stable on at least a centennial scale.

As an ecologist, the bottom line for me is that ecosystems must be maintained and developed. The evidence that intact ecosystems enhance carbon retention is unequivocal. That retention is not permanent, and this is not news. Such all or nothing reporting in the semi-science literature is becoming a serious problem for climate change communication. I spend a lot of my classroom time debunking or qualifying such articles.

Allen: Thanks to Stephen for his illuminating comments.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.unf.edu/pipermail/gwsg/attachments/20210730/288f40c1/attachment.htm>