WHAT IS THE ROLE OF ORGANIC WASTES IN SUB-SOILS TO GLOBAL WARMING?

The experience in our agriculture %26amp; forestry practice with regards to soil rehabilitation %26amp; reforestation is that they still suffer the effects of global warming by droughts %26amp; forest fires. In this vein, the Philippine technology has an approach distinct to our common %26amp; current methods. Unlike top soil rehabilitation of arable land (loam to clay) as suitable in agriculture, the Philippine technology (known as implantation) will aim the subsoil of non-arable land %26amp;/or wasteland (sandy). And contrary to chemical fertilizers, it will use pure %26amp; natural organic waste materials such as post harvest crop waste materials, forest litters, etc. As such, there is no question that organic materials will improve the soil鈥檚 fertilization but the author Winston Kayanan claims that this technology has a secondary effect, a bigger role in the improvement of the biosphere and that is curtailing heat or global warming.





As the organic components are deposited in the sub-soil, the heat of the soil鈥檚 surroundings (especially in extremes of arid region, including temperate %26amp; tropical zones) will gradually fall as the earth鈥檚 heat, emanating from the core, will radiate to the implanted wastes by thermal energy transfer as the 1st action instead of escaping to the outer atmosphere because dark-colored leaves absorb heat more than light green leaves. Moreover, the organic wastes will still contain its coolness because of its remaining moisture content in the 3-meter or 10-foot depth horizon, and will stabilize somewhere at the temperature of 15 to 25 degrees Celsius.





As the wastes decompose, the absorption of carbon (for energy) and release of new CO2 (carrying out specific heat) by decay microorganisms (thriving at 25 to 40 degrees Celsius) will further reduce latent heat in the top soil as the 2nd action in the beginning. The wind will help bring or push the heat absorbing CO2 out coming from the soil as the 3rd action via physiological process due to the stocking design of the one-hectare implantation stand, for being aerobic %26amp; permeable (i.e., fully ventilated, with good aeration). But simultaneously, beneficial microorganisms such as the O2-producing photosynthetic bacteria in the sub-soil (conducive to their environment at 20 to 25 degrees Celsius) will reproduce %26amp; propagate more and come into play by taking back CO2 in aside from chlorophyll production and carbonic acid reaction as the 4th action in regenerating O2.





If large hectareage of land will be implanted, a canopy of O2 would also serve as soil cover, barrier, shade or shield in lowering thermal expansion or radiant energy (together with their gas pressure) due to higher concentration of O2 produced in the subsoil. And therefore, this will also bring down extensive physical weathering %26amp; rock cycle (like soil cracks, erosion, landslides, etc.) due to warming as the 5th action.





As such, implantation will give a dramatic effect in desertified ecosystems (that are usually low in water content at about 1/6 of clay soils) because the organic wastes (with its retained moisture content less the bulk of its excess water, percolating down to the water table, not mentioning surfaced-supplied water) will settle down with O2. These will reduce temperature of hot air entering the soil and internal heat going out of earth by about 5 to 10 degrees Celsius or to a level equally or evenly suitable to meet an equilibrium for both top soil temperature and surface air temperature, conducive to organisms鈥?environment.|||Organic wastes have no role whatsoever assuming you mean natural waste from animals or plants. They are part of the carbon cycle. That is basic science not that science matters to alarmists since they consider cattle to be a cause as well. I realize you are aren't an alarmist but you seem to make up your own science like them.|||The net storage or release of soil carbon is something that varies by region, and remains an area of ongoing research. Carbon stored for a long time in subsoil obviously isn't a very active component of the carbon cycle. Any "reservoir" that releases carbon, or sink that releases significantly more than it takes up, can become a net contributor to atmospheric carbon accumulation. Including the release of the carbon via land use change or a feedback effect of warming (like thawing permafrost). And a population of grazing cows kept in check by a natural food source would be entirely within the natural carbon cycle. That doesn't appear true of conventional mass livestock production, which tends to generate more methane, and CO2 related to energy consumption and land use change.