GeoEngineering Monitor - Revision history

Eric: Added some more links under the "Internal Links" section

2020-12-10T01:24:10Z

Added some more links under the "Internal Links" section

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:24, 10 December 2020
Line 20:		Line 20:

	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=
			*[[Biochar]] / [[Biochar Burial]]
	*[[Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage]]		*[[Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage]]

Eric: Added some more links under the "Internal Links" section

2020-12-10T01:23:49Z

Added some more links under the "Internal Links" section

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:23, 10 December 2020
Line 20:		Line 20:

	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=
	*		*[[Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage]]

	=External Links=		=External Links=

Eric: Added a Category to the Page

2020-12-10T01:22:31Z

Added a Category to the Page

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:22, 10 December 2020
Line 26:		Line 26:
	*[http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2020/01/what-we-have-learned-about-biochar-since-2011/ Their 2020 Update on Biochar Stance]		*[http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2020/01/what-we-have-learned-about-biochar-since-2011/ Their 2020 Update on Biochar Stance]

	[[Category: ~~Biofuels~~]]		[[Category: Biofuel]] [[Category: Pollution]]

Eric: Added a Category to the Page

2020-08-03T23:21:34Z

Added a Category to the Page

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:21, 3 August 2020
Line 25:		Line 25:
	*[http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/ Their Website]		*[http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/ Their Website]
	*[http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2020/01/what-we-have-learned-about-biochar-since-2011/ Their 2020 Update on Biochar Stance]		*[http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2020/01/what-we-have-learned-about-biochar-since-2011/ Their 2020 Update on Biochar Stance]

			[[Category: Biofuels]]

Eric: Moved some stuff around

2020-08-03T23:21:15Z

Moved some stuff around

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:21, 3 August 2020
Line 4:		Line 4:
	**Granted pressurized gas storage underground is a huge unknown admittibly, and enhanced recovery negates the purpose of css tech OBIOUSLY		**Granted pressurized gas storage underground is a huge unknown admittibly, and enhanced recovery negates the purpose of css tech OBIOUSLY
	*Need to look into their criticism of CSS, Biomass, and Biochar itself		*Need to look into their criticism of CSS, Biomass, and Biochar itself

	*They may have good data on meta-analysis of biochar effects		*They may have good data on meta-analysis of biochar effects
	*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there

	*
	=Their Stance=		=Their Stance=
	*Anti Geo-Engineering (makes sense in most cases, ie ocean fertilization will cause DO drops, and essentially be a red tide, makes sense. And solar is odd, but it could be argued as a complementary tool WITH SIMUTANIOUS proper emission reduction efforts		*Anti Geo-Engineering (makes sense in most cases, ie ocean fertilization will cause DO drops, and essentially be a red tide, makes sense. And solar is odd, but it could be argued as a complementary tool WITH SIMUTANIOUS proper emission reduction efforts

Eric: Moved some stuff around

2020-08-03T23:20:59Z

Moved some stuff around

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:20, 3 August 2020
Line 8:		Line 8:
	*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there		*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there

	* "Biochar enthusiasts usually insist they won’t cut forests or convert ecosystems to provide burnable biomass. Just like the biomass electricity industry, they prefer to talk about burning “wastes and residues.” But there is no such thing as “waste” in a forest ecosystem — all is recycled, via decay, to support regeneration and regrowth. In many places, definitions of waste have been expanded to include virtually any wood that is not valued as sawlogs, so timber harvests are more intense and destructive. In agriculture, there are often better options for residues, such as compost, mulch, animal fodder, and bedding. In any case, industrial forestry and agriculture practices have already wreaked havoc on ecosystems. Creating a market for the waste products of unsustainable practices hardly seems a step in the right direction."		*

	=Their Stance=		=Their Stance=
	*Anti Geo-Engineering (makes sense in most cases, ie ocean fertilization will cause DO drops, and essentially be a red tide, makes sense. And solar is odd, but it could be argued as a complementary tool WITH SIMUTANIOUS proper emission reduction efforts		*Anti Geo-Engineering (makes sense in most cases, ie ocean fertilization will cause DO drops, and essentially be a red tide, makes sense. And solar is odd, but it could be argued as a complementary tool WITH SIMUTANIOUS proper emission reduction efforts
	*Anti (Centralized) Biomass (not sure on decentralized stance)		*Anti (Centralized) Biomass (not sure on decentralized stance)
	*Skeptical of Biochar (seems to be more against it's use as a gimmick/cure all, not it as a tool?)		*Skeptical of Biochar (seems to be more against it's use as a gimmick/cure all, not it as a tool?)
			** Quote: "Biochar enthusiasts usually insist they won’t cut forests or convert ecosystems to provide burnable biomass. Just like the biomass electricity industry, they prefer to talk about burning “wastes and residues.” But there is no such thing as “waste” in a forest ecosystem — all is recycled, via decay, to support regeneration and regrowth. In many places, definitions of waste have been expanded to include virtually any wood that is not valued as sawlogs, so timber harvests are more intense and destructive. In agriculture, there are often better options for residues, such as compost, mulch, animal fodder, and bedding. In any case, industrial forestry and agriculture practices have already wreaked havoc on ecosystems. Creating a market for the waste products of unsustainable practices hardly seems a step in the right direction."

	*Anti-GMO ? (need to double check this)		*Anti-GMO ? (need to double check this)

Eric: Moved some stuff around

2020-08-03T23:20:17Z

Moved some stuff around

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:20, 3 August 2020
Line 4:		Line 4:
	**Granted pressurized gas storage underground is a huge unknown admittibly, and enhanced recovery negates the purpose of css tech OBIOUSLY		**Granted pressurized gas storage underground is a huge unknown admittibly, and enhanced recovery negates the purpose of css tech OBIOUSLY
	*Need to look into their criticism of CSS, Biomass, and Biochar itself		*Need to look into their criticism of CSS, Biomass, and Biochar itself
	*They seem to think community focus, and non-industrial farming practices can't go hand in hand with ccs/biochar (again need to read more on if this is how they feel on this)
	*They may have good data on meta-analysis of biochar effects		*They may have good data on meta-analysis of biochar effects
	*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there		*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there
Line 18:		Line 18:
	=Bias Probe=		=Bias Probe=
	*"geoengineering Monitor is a joint project of Biofuelwatch and ETC Group, with support from Heinrich Boell Foundation."		*"geoengineering Monitor is a joint project of Biofuelwatch and ETC Group, with support from Heinrich Boell Foundation."
	*A Search for decentralized in their in browser search engine came up twice, with it in relation to "decentralized renewable energy"		*They seem to think community focus, and non-industrial farming practices can't go hand in hand with ccs/biochar (again need to read more on if this is how they feel on this)
			**A Search for decentralized in their in browser search engine came up twice, with it in relation to "decentralized renewable energy"

	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=

Eric: Moved some stuff around

2020-08-03T23:17:12Z

Moved some stuff around

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:17, 3 August 2020
Line 7:		Line 7:
	*They may have good data on meta-analysis of biochar effects		*They may have good data on meta-analysis of biochar effects
	*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there		*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there
	*A Search for decentralized in their in browser search engine came up twice, with it in relation to "decentralized renewable energy"
	* "Biochar enthusiasts usually insist they won’t cut forests or convert ecosystems to provide burnable biomass. Just like the biomass electricity industry, they prefer to talk about burning “wastes and residues.” But there is no such thing as “waste” in a forest ecosystem — all is recycled, via decay, to support regeneration and regrowth. In many places, definitions of waste have been expanded to include virtually any wood that is not valued as sawlogs, so timber harvests are more intense and destructive. In agriculture, there are often better options for residues, such as compost, mulch, animal fodder, and bedding. In any case, industrial forestry and agriculture practices have already wreaked havoc on ecosystems. Creating a market for the waste products of unsustainable practices hardly seems a step in the right direction."		* "Biochar enthusiasts usually insist they won’t cut forests or convert ecosystems to provide burnable biomass. Just like the biomass electricity industry, they prefer to talk about burning “wastes and residues.” But there is no such thing as “waste” in a forest ecosystem — all is recycled, via decay, to support regeneration and regrowth. In many places, definitions of waste have been expanded to include virtually any wood that is not valued as sawlogs, so timber harvests are more intense and destructive. In agriculture, there are often better options for residues, such as compost, mulch, animal fodder, and bedding. In any case, industrial forestry and agriculture practices have already wreaked havoc on ecosystems. Creating a market for the waste products of unsustainable practices hardly seems a step in the right direction."

Line 18:		Line 18:
	=Bias Probe=		=Bias Probe=
	*"geoengineering Monitor is a joint project of Biofuelwatch and ETC Group, with support from Heinrich Boell Foundation."		*"geoengineering Monitor is a joint project of Biofuelwatch and ETC Group, with support from Heinrich Boell Foundation."
			*A Search for decentralized in their in browser search engine came up twice, with it in relation to "decentralized renewable energy"

	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=
	*		*

Eric: Added some more information

2020-08-03T23:16:45Z

Added some more information

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:16, 3 August 2020
Line 10:		Line 10:
	* "Biochar enthusiasts usually insist they won’t cut forests or convert ecosystems to provide burnable biomass. Just like the biomass electricity industry, they prefer to talk about burning “wastes and residues.” But there is no such thing as “waste” in a forest ecosystem — all is recycled, via decay, to support regeneration and regrowth. In many places, definitions of waste have been expanded to include virtually any wood that is not valued as sawlogs, so timber harvests are more intense and destructive. In agriculture, there are often better options for residues, such as compost, mulch, animal fodder, and bedding. In any case, industrial forestry and agriculture practices have already wreaked havoc on ecosystems. Creating a market for the waste products of unsustainable practices hardly seems a step in the right direction."		* "Biochar enthusiasts usually insist they won’t cut forests or convert ecosystems to provide burnable biomass. Just like the biomass electricity industry, they prefer to talk about burning “wastes and residues.” But there is no such thing as “waste” in a forest ecosystem — all is recycled, via decay, to support regeneration and regrowth. In many places, definitions of waste have been expanded to include virtually any wood that is not valued as sawlogs, so timber harvests are more intense and destructive. In agriculture, there are often better options for residues, such as compost, mulch, animal fodder, and bedding. In any case, industrial forestry and agriculture practices have already wreaked havoc on ecosystems. Creating a market for the waste products of unsustainable practices hardly seems a step in the right direction."

			=Their Stance=
			*Anti Geo-Engineering (makes sense in most cases, ie ocean fertilization will cause DO drops, and essentially be a red tide, makes sense. And solar is odd, but it could be argued as a complementary tool WITH SIMUTANIOUS proper emission reduction efforts
			*Anti (Centralized) Biomass (not sure on decentralized stance)
			*Skeptical of Biochar (seems to be more against it's use as a gimmick/cure all, not it as a tool?)
			*Anti-GMO ? (need to double check this)

			=Bias Probe=
			*"geoengineering Monitor is a joint project of Biofuelwatch and ETC Group, with support from Heinrich Boell Foundation."
	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=
	*		*

Eric: Added some more information

2020-08-03T23:12:02Z

Added some more information

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:12, 3 August 2020
Line 8:		Line 8:
	*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there		*Need to dig for bias/groups they are tied to, obiously not some oil company lol, but bias may be there
	*A Search for decentralized in their in browser search engine came up twice, with it in relation to "decentralized renewable energy"		*A Search for decentralized in their in browser search engine came up twice, with it in relation to "decentralized renewable energy"
			* "Biochar enthusiasts usually insist they won’t cut forests or convert ecosystems to provide burnable biomass. Just like the biomass electricity industry, they prefer to talk about burning “wastes and residues.” But there is no such thing as “waste” in a forest ecosystem — all is recycled, via decay, to support regeneration and regrowth. In many places, definitions of waste have been expanded to include virtually any wood that is not valued as sawlogs, so timber harvests are more intense and destructive. In agriculture, there are often better options for residues, such as compost, mulch, animal fodder, and bedding. In any case, industrial forestry and agriculture practices have already wreaked havoc on ecosystems. Creating a market for the waste products of unsustainable practices hardly seems a step in the right direction."

	=Internal Links=		=Internal Links=