The international initiative "4 per 1000", launched by France on 1 December 2015 at the COP 21, consists of federating all voluntary stakeholders of the public and private sectors (national governments, local and regional governments, companies, trade organisations, NGOs, research facilities, etc.) under the framework of the Lima-Paris Action Plan (LPAP).
The aim of the initiative is to demonstrate that agriculture, and in particular agricultural soils can play a crucial role where food security and climate change are concerned. Supported by solid scientific documentation, this initiative invites all partners to state or implement practical actions on soil carbon storage and the type of practices to achieve this (e.g. agroecology, agroforestry, conservation agriculture, landscape management, etc.).
Increasing SOM (Soil Organic Matter) by itself isn't a sustainable solution for maintaining sufficient yields.... you must also QUIT KILLING THE SOIL MICROBIOME... so that Soil Microbes can assist plants in acquiring BALANCED amounts of all requuted NUTRIENTS.
Impressive research effort clearly presented, thank you and well done! Nevertheless, is it fair to talk 1h on soil carbon without mentioning living soil/soil life: a KEY actor in the soil carbon to yield system?? We mix carbon added in (bio)char and organic carbon input (biomass): 2 very different forms of carbons with very different roles... One habitat for microorganisms and ion exchange surface, the other food for soil microorganisms! Is it fair to look at the role of soil C levels on yield in systems with external/direct nutrient input given to the crop, bypassing therefore the need for plant-microorgnism exchanges, while one of the major role of soil C is to feed soil food web that, in turn, should feed the plant/give it access to all the required nutrient, build soil structure (and water retention as shown indeed)? Or am I miss understanding what I thought to be The major role of soil C (i.e.life along with water and nutrient retention)
Thanks for throwing light on this complex subject. As Prof. Cherubin emphasized, increasing soil organic content is not an option, it is a necessity. Great webinar! Looking forward to next one. #SaveSoil
Il oublie surtout la speculation (les conflits ont bon dos) Ils ont brade notre industrie et s'attaque maintenant à notre agriculture. Ce ministre défend juste les lobbies et les ultra riches
Stable Fungi Fixed Organic Matter (Humates... stable for centuries) can ACCUMULATE almost without limit. Soil Regeneration Projects ROUTINELY achieved increasing Organic Matter from 1% to 10% in 3 to 4 years (and then increases naturally if healthy plants are Cultured on these lands). Sound like your group is unfamiliar with Soil Regeneration... that results in Soil BETTER than when man started DESTRUCTIVE CHEMICAL AGRICULTURE. Your "Saturation" numbers are NOWHERE NEAR what's Routinely Achieved.....BY FUNGAL MICROORGANISMS MAKING STABLE HUMATES.
Hi there Here is a concept I have been posting online recently Its a global carbon tax , Where the polluters pay $ too The United Nations Global Carbon Fund UNGCF Then they distribute funds 10 billion yearly to 195 countries and territories Throughout the globe, leaving 50 billion for the UN to administer and regulate this scenario allowing us to truly fight climate change 40 GT co2 @ 50$ per tn = 2 trillion per year Take this to COP and demand action this year We need a global carbon tax and we need it now. The time for talk, BLA BLA BLA is over The planet is at a tipping point, It can't wait, Time to stand up and make a legend of yourself. Vote as one and please pass this bill Worldwide carbon tax @ 20 % carbon tariff should apply to all greenhouse gas polluters Eg 20 % on a barrel of oil Eg 20 % on a Tn of coal Eg 20 % on a kg of meat Eg 20 % on, a Tn cement produced, Eg 20 % on a Tn Steel produced. EG 20 on a tn of coal produced Etc. Etc. ETC Carbon tax worldwide Paid to a central carbon fund UNGCF. Administered and regulated by the United Nations Global Carbon Fund. UNGCF fund A 20 %of total sales of greenhouse gas Emitteing, polluters should pay for the mess Creating a yearly fund of 2 trillion dollars 40 GT @ 50$ per tn = 2 trillion per year That is 10 billion per year For 195 countries and territories, SO they can have any chance of reaching their net zero targets and fifty billion for the UNGCF, this will fund all the UN's global, humanitarian projects I am shaw you will all agree, that they deserve this fund and they do a great job and who better to perform this very in portant task for all the planet's occupants 2 trillion per year For 50 years That's 100 trillion dollars to repair climate change. That is less than 2% of the global yearly gross GDP, So we can build and create utility infrastructure for hundreds of years.I can't make it any simpler than that, please Global ambassadors help your people The countries can utilize their funds to build the infrastructure required for a clean green future carbon capture and storage facilities, organic carbon sinks Research and development into CO2 reduction technology Atmospheric reduction strategy Ocean reduction strategies The polluters must pay the free ride must end, and everyone should receive, This is a global problem and requires a global solution, all working together as one. Absolutely. T www.theglobalgorilla.com
30 yers working in baif 1987 to 20021 but from mangement preser bay reigine I totaly nolege livley hood program but rajsthan ridama bisld not at promoted may work liability I'm harad worker Ai horticulture agro products and under EU projects TAD programe got programe land base activity। most regene education not understand experience only ego bay HRD so Regine so said
There is no reason to reach peak sequestration. The Carbon Cycle is not a clean orderly process. Some soil must be dead so that other soils can thrive. Attempting to quantify the maximum capacity of soil to store carbon will undermine the goal of storing atmospheric carbon in living ecosystems. The Amazon's soil, for example is nearly all void of nutrients. Life is what stores the carbon. And Life has its own roadmap we don't understand yet. We have to be willing to allow a natural ecosystem to develop. The act of measurement will change the results, in many unforeseeable ways. And quite a few foreseeable ways we would do well to avoid if at all possible. There's 1500 gigatons of potential carbon storage in the diminished farmlands of North America. Attempting to put the maximum amount of carbon into each individual acre in order to minimize land use will, in fact, destroy the ecosystems that would otherwise develop into semi-permanent carbon storage. Natural fertilizers (worm castings) need to be spread thinly and in small batches over millions of acres for a period of several years. Too thick and rot develops. Too thin and the organic material dries up and blows away. And it must be done in small batches on the scale of a 3-5 acre farm to avoid rot, gassing, and catastrophic collapse of the worm populations. It works out to be a very simple farming model. You feed livestock, mix their waste with a proper mix of organics to feed worms, then spread the fresh castings over the surface of surrounding land. 5 acres and 3 years at a time. After 3 years you turn the land over to a management service that appropriately curates a sustainable semi-wild ecosystem between connected wild lands or permaculture farm model. Life is the solution to the carbon crisis. We simply have to repair a small amount of the harm to global life our agriculture industry has caused. And we need to start processing about 25% of our organic waste back into living soils, properly. This process does not, and cannot scale to an industrial process. It must be done a single small farm at a time, and through simple unskilled human labor. There's absolutely no need consolidate this process or increase its efficacy. We have a billion years of fossil record to prove it works without us. Or we can keep pretending there's a scientific solution to a natural problem until there is no nature left.
You make me want to drain the Scottish blood out of me. I bet my grandfather would be disgusted at the lack of men left in Scotland. How sad. I do hope the vengeance is wild.
Merci pour votre soutien en faveur des sols. Puisse les actions de régénération des sols être mises en œuvre à grande échelle et rapidement... #SaveSoil
Measuring carbon is notoriously difficult. Why bother. A healthy plant needs carbon so why not just do a sap analysis if you must measure something.Carbon farming is fantastic to drawdown CO2 but that's not the only benefit because the re-greening of the earth can change the water cycle and reverse the frequent droughts and floods. Plants cool the earth through transpiration. Many different ways to reverse climate change! What if the Green New Deal was really Green!?
This 42-minute film -- called "Growing Solutions" -- profiles farmers who are using the regenerative practices you've highlighted here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-79kfJmuv6fU.html
