CENTRAL AMERICA - YUCATAN TO PANAMA

dark green = current reserves, light green = developing reserves scale: one pixel = five kilometers

I wouldn’t call Lobo mean.

He was more crazy than mean.

Any animal that came across his path would put him in a frenzy whether it be a cat, opossum, iguana, coati or another dog. He’d get wild-eyed, froth at the mouth and chase it down wherever it went, through brush, water, into holes and over embankments. He really went nuts, and when he caught em he killed em, always.

Lobo was off somewhere that day when we spotted the young capuchin monkey crossing the pasture. I remember thinking how out of place it looked 200 meters from the nearest tree. We stopped working and watched as the monkey skip-loped by. It paused briefly to look at us, then moved on in its awkward gait. I caught sight of the charging dog at the same moment I heard Osvaldo shout. “Lobo, no!! Lobo, quitase, no, no!! Lobo quite hihweputa.” But Lobo didn’t stop.

Lobo ignored his master’s call and kept barreling toward the capuchin. I shuddered in anticipation of the carnage. That big dog hit the monkey full force, but it seemed as if the primate bounced into the air and came down on top of the dog. A flurry of squeals, flying fur and blood ensued. The monkey rode Lobo like a bronco, gouging his eyes, biting his ears and head and scratching his flanks all at the same time. I can only describe the dog’s voice as a scream, a frantic plea for mercy. He bucked, twisted and rolled on the ground trying to rid himself of the torment. The fight ended abruptly. The capuchin jumped clear of the terrified dog who took off wailing and crying until he reached Osvaldo’s house, where he crawled into a space under the floor, covered his face with his paws and whimpered. Lobo never chased another animal as long as he lived.

That was back in 1973 when Hacienda Baru was a cattle ranch. There was an estuary with a mangrove forest near the mouth of the Baru River, two small wetland forests on the coastal plain and a large primary rain forest in the highlands. These islands of vegetation were all separated from each other by at least half a kilometer of pasture. Small troops of white-faced capuchin monkeys (Cebus capucinus) inhabited each of the lowland forests and several larger troops lived above in the primary rain forest. At some point during their physical development the mere presence of young male capuchins became intolerable to the troop’s dominant male, who then expelled them from their little forest home. Their only hope for survival was to reach the larger primary rain forest, but to do that these post-adolescents had to run across pastures.

That year I planted trees as living fence posts. I was pleasantly surprised to see that once these tree-posts reached a height of a few meters the monkeys began using them as pathways rather than crossing open pastures. I planted more and longer lines of trees which were later used by a variety of arboreal fauna including monkeys, sloths, kinkajous, opossums, iguanas, and olingos. I still wanted to raise cattle and horses, but I loved seeing fauna too. As my fascination with tropical nature expanded so did these wildlife corridors.

By 1990 there were five forested corridors on Hacienda Baru where a monkey could travel from the beach to the highlands without leaving the trees. That was the year I sold all the cattle. In 1995 Costa Rican President Jose Maria Figueres signed the decree creating Hacienda Baru National Wildlife Refuge. By that time sloths, pacas, anteaters and even collared peccaries were seen in the lowlands, and spider monkeys had migrated along neighboring forested corridors from distances of over 17 kilometers to settle at the refuge. Environmental groups began working on local, regional, national and even international biological corridors which facilitated the migration of wildlife and enhanced biodiversity. Now the monkeys don’t have to descend to the ground unless they want to.

Central American Rainforest Canopy

BIOCORRIDORS

THE BIRTH OF AN IDEA

The concept of biological corridors was born in Florida where environmentalists were searching for solutions to the shrinking and fragmentation of wildlife habitat. The creation of corridors of natural vegetation between larger reserves was seen as a way to allow wildlife more freedom of movement and access to a wider variety of natural vegetation.

When groups of any particular species are confined in isolated patches of habitat with limited area, they become subject to a variety of environmental stresses. The diversity of food plants may not be sufficient to provide sustenance through all of the seasons. Isolated populations of animals with limited gene pools tend to become inbred, resulting in loss of fertility, vigor and resistance to disease. Social pressures may increase, as was the case with the young capuchin expelled by the dominant male.

In the 1980s researchers in Brazil, Florida and elsewhere determined that as the size of a parcel of rainforest increases, the biodiversity it harbors also increases but by a factor higher than the increase in area. For example, a forest reserve of 1000 hectares might have 100 species of beetles, whereas one of 2000 hectares might have 300 species. By doubling the size of the reserve, the biodiversity could triple. Please note that these are not actual figures. The results of studies vary and scientists don’t agree on any one formula for the relation between parcel size and biodiversity. I use them here for the sole purpose of illustrating the principle.

Mexico

If we take this idea a step further, simple logic tells us that one reserve of 1000 hectares, separated from another of 2000 hectares by 20 km of fragmented habitat, will increase considerably in biodiversity if we can connect the two together with a wide swath of natural vegetation — a biological corridor. But how wide?

This frequently asked question doesn’t have a simple answer. As we saw in the example of Hacienda Baru a single line of trees served as a corridor for several species of arboreal mammals, and certainly enhanced their living conditions, chances of survival and populations, but I doubt if it would do much to increase biodiversity in the forest reserves at either end of the line. For a corridor to be truly effective and biologically beneficial to the reserves it connects, it needs to be wide enough to permit the safe passage of most species of fauna, large and small. This includes everything from large predators to tiny litter frogs. It must be wide enough to provide an environment conducive to the existence of wide varieties of epiphytes, fungi, molds, insects and microorganisms. But how wide is that?

A biologist friend once put it this way: If there are houses anywhere near the corridor, there will be house cats, which will kill any small animal or bird they can catch. House cats seldom venture more than 400 meters from home. Therefore, 800 meters is the absolute minimum width for a fully functional biological corridor, but of course, wider is better. Not only house cats, but predators of all kinds, learn that the corridor is a narrow stretch between larger reserves, and this bottleneck is the perfect place to lie in ambush. Prey animals quickly learn of the danger and are wary of crossing. Ideally, a corridor would be several tens of kilometers wide, but this is not always possible. I think it is important to remember that even if it is less than 800 meters wide, any corridor is better than no corridor. A single line of trees is better than an open pasture.

Hacienda Baru, Costa Rica, in 1972 The entire coastal lowlands have been deforested

A CENTRAL AMERICAN BIOLOGICAL CORRIDOR

By the early 1990s most biologists agreed that biological corridors could be a useful tool for increasing biodiversity and enhancing the ecology of large protected areas.

It was about that time when a vision emerged of an immense biological corridor that would connect the forests of southern Mexico to those of all the rest of Central America and eventually reach the Panama Canal, a biological bridge between continents.

The visionary who came up with this concept was Archie (Chuck) F. Carr III, and he called his idea the “Path of the Panther,” in recognition of the Florida Panther (Felis concolor,) also known as cougar, mountain lion and puma. These majestic cats are symbolic because they survive throughout the region wherever sufficient habitat remains.

In order to fully understand the origins of the proposed biological bridge between North and South America, we need to look briefly at the origins of another bridge, Central America itself. When the geological processes that culminated in its creation began, more than 50 million years ago, the two American continents were separated by several thousand kilometers of ocean and a channel over 2000 meters deep. The movements of five different tectonic plates modified the earth’s crust bringing the two enormous land masses closer together, lifting the sea floor and fomenting volcanic action.

By fifteen million years ago the deep water channel between the American continents had risen considerably and significantly modified ocean currents. The diminishing of ocean currents brought many consequences including the alteration of global climate. By ten million years ago, an ice age cycle of approximately 100,000 years was well established and was causing sea levels to rise and fall during interglacial and glacial periods, respectively.

MESOAMERICAN BIOCORRIDOR PARTNER

Guatamala

By eight million years ago Central America looked like an archipelago during glacial periods. At that time two species of giant ground sloths swam about 60 kilometers to become the first South American mammals to reach North America. By three million years ago the gap closed, completing the land bridge and bringing on a tremendous biological upheaval as flora and fauna traveled in both directions, mixed, adapted, competed for niches and gradually settled into an ecological balance as they populated both continents. A mere 10,000 years ago humans arrived, and within a millennium, most of the large game animals, such as mammoths, toxodonts, giant bison, giant ground sloths and others were hunted to extinction.

By 2000 years ago humans had domesticated many species of plants and animals, and agriculture had replaced hunting and gathering as the main source of food. It is only logical to believe that indigenous peoples deforested vast regions of Central America. In fact, deforestation has been postulated as a contributing cause to the fall of the great Maya Civilizations over 1000 years ago. When Europeans arrived in the western hemisphere, the population of Central America was about the same as it is today, 40 million people. It is simply not possible for that many people to live in an area of 750,000 square kilometers without destroying vast amounts of natural habitat. Nobody knows with any accuracy the extent of that wave of deforestation, but it was probably comparable to that of the 20th century.

Small pox and other European diseases brought an end to the deforestation. The population of Central America plummeted, and Mother Nature reclaimed the land. Enormous tracts of land throughout the region remained relatively undisturbed for more than four hundred years, until Central American populations again expanded to a level where deforestation became a significant threat to biodiversity. By 1980 the Central American tropical forests had been severely fragmented by agriculture, cattle ranching and urbanization. Olga F. Linares in the foreword of Central America, A Natural and Cultural History, stated it very well, referring to the area to be influenced by the Path of the Panther as: “…a biological corridor that took more than 60 million years to develop and is taking less than a century to be destroyed.”

a young tree planter adds another

REBUILDING THE CORRIDOR

At the end of the 1980s, when the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Caribbean Conservation Corporation took on the challenge of promoting the Path of the Panther Biological Corridor, the project was, and still is, seen as the reconstruction of ecosystems throughout the region. The remaining forested areas, which were, for the most part, confined to national parks, wildlife refuges, forest reserves and other protected areas, contained a very high percentage of the biodiversity. The challenge was not only to halt the destruction of these tropical forests, but also to restore swathes of natural vegetation between them, connect them together biologically, and create an effective and sustainable system of environmental protection.

Because of the volcanic origin of Central American soils and continued volcanic activity the restoration of natural forests is feasible. Fortified by an invisible blanket of constantly settling, nutrient-rich volcanic dust, the land, when left to the whims of Mother Nature, will sprout into a mass of natural vegetation that quickly evolves into secondary forest. This, in turn, creates a suitable environment for a multitude of organisms which almost immediately begin migrating into the newly reclaimed habitat. In places like the Amazon, plagued with nutrient poor soils, such a project would probably not be possible.

The name “Mesoamerican Biological Corridor” (MBC) was coined in 1992 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, and the importance of regenerating natural habitat and connecting the natural areas of the region was recognized as a top priority.

MESOAMERICAN BIOCORRIDOR PARTNER

Belize

A treaty signed by the governments of Mexico and all the Central American nations, at a 1997 summit meeting, officially established the corridor. The document describes the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor as:

“…a system of territorial organization, comprised by the interconnection of the Central American System of Protected Areas and surrounding buffer and multiple use zones, that offers a combination of environmental goods and services to the Central American and world community, and promotes investment in the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources; all by way of ample social consensus, with the objective of contributing to the improvement of the quality of life of the inhabitants of the region.”

The Central American Commission on Environment and Development (CCAD) was charged with coordinating the project at a regional level. Most of the signatories formed commissions responsible for implementing the project at a national level. Soon thereafter, funding became available from a number of sources including the United Nations Environment Program, United Nations Development Program, World Bank, US AID, European Community and others.

Hacienda Baru Wildlife Refuge, Costa Rica, 2005 the forest is completely restored

THE COSTA RICAN EXAMPLE

Costa Rica has taken the biological corridor challenge very seriously. The government formed the National Commission for the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor in 1997. A strategy for the implementation of the project was elaborated. It was decided that the creation of a number of local corridors was more feasible than one national corridor.

Costa Rica’s commission determined that the responsibility for the creation of local biological corridors would be delegated to rural communities and non governmental organizations (NGOs,) with the national commission to coordinate amongst these groups.

Early on it was recognized that strong, well organized community organizations were of paramount importance to the accomplishment of the Costa Rican sector of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor. The strategy elaborated by the commission was:

Identify the zones where corridors are needed

Identify NGOs within those areas that are willing to take on a corridor project

Train and strengthen these groups

Provide local organizations with the tools to accomplish their objectives.

The National System of Protected Areas (SINAC) determined priority areas for the creation of corridors. The MBC commission with the help of the National University and the World Conservation Union (IUCN,) began looking for NGOs capable of creating local biological corridors. In many cases, this meant first teaching the organization what a biological corridor was, why it was important and how it would help local communities, and then motivating them to take on the project.

In 1999 the World Wildlife Fund financed a campaign to publicize the mesoamerican biological corridor and create public awareness about its importance and the benefits it would produce. Financing for NGOs and corridor friendly local projects became available from several international organizations of which the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) was the most active. There were differences between corridors, but many of the same tools were used in different places and by different groups to create local corridors.

a reforesting tradition begins

Teaching and Motivating –

When building a house, the first step is laying a solid foundation. Likewise, the construction of a corridor begins with environmental education. In order to change the way people relate to their environment it is important to convince the youth.

Once the younger generation has been enlightened the general public attitude about the environment begins to change. I remember a phone call from an irate father accusing a local environmental group of “poisoning children’s minds.” When questioned further, it turned out that the man’s eight year old daughter would not allow him to poach or consume the eggs of endangered marine turtles, something he had done all of his life. Though he didn’t change his mind, he did accede to his daughter’s wishes. In some areas, local NGOs have been carrying on environmental education for 15 years. The first students to receive the material have now matured, and some have become leaders in their communities.

Environmental education is important for adults as well as youth. Many people would like to protect the environment, but feel helpless to do so. Government enforcement of laws is often weak or nonexistent. One solution to this problem in Costa Rica is a program which makes it possible for private citizens to become voluntary game wardens. In order to acquire the official identification card, they must attend two training workshops and pass an exam on environmental law. These non salaried game wardens have almost as much authority to enforce environmental laws as a full time park ranger. Many property owners have acquired this status in order to protect their own property from poachers. The program has worked well in some places and not in others. The determining factor seems to be the presence of strong NGOs that sponsor the training programs and follow up with refresher courses and motivation for the volunteers.

MESOAMERICAN BIOCORRIDOR PARTNER

Honduras

At least one NGO has taken this idea one step farther and sponsored training and motivational workshops for local police officers. Many times police in rural communities are ignorant with regard to environmental legislation. When they are given basic training and motivation and backed up by a group of volunteer game wardens, they become a very positive force in controlling environmental abuses and enforcing laws.

The strengthening of local NGOs goes hand in hand with education. Environmental awareness alone doesn’t accomplish much when community organizations are weak and poorly financed. The UNDP has taken the lead in funding projects that fortify communal groups, women’s groups and indigenous groups. Once organized, trained and motivated, many of these groups have gone on to play key roles in the creation of biological corridors. Without their support the accomplishment of project objectives would be extremely difficult.

Making Conservation Profitable

Simply educating, organizing and strengthening rural community organizations is not enough. The people must benefit tangibly, and in the short term, from a healthy natural environment. Everyone has to make a living, and conservation will not work on a large scale if people don’t profit from it. The two main ways in which this has been accomplished is through Environmental Service Payments and Ecological Tourism.

Paying for Environmental Services –

Learn Much More: Buy Books from Amazon!

Monkeys are made of Chocolate by Jack Ewing

In Costa Rica, Environmental Service Payments are cash incentives given to people who protect environments that provide services for people. Woody plants remove carbon from the atmosphere, tie it up in wood fiber and release oxygen. Therefore people who plant trees or forgo development and leave their property forested, are providing a service for everyone: air-cleaning and oxygen production. The Costa Rican Environmental Service Payments program pays these people for that service.

Funds to pay tree planters are provided by a fuel tax. That way people who burn fossil fuels - everyone who drives a car - which release carbon into the atmosphere, end up paying for its removal. At present, the environmental service payment for forest conservation is about $60 per hectare per year, not enough to make anybody rich, but certainly enough to discourage deforestation for the purpose of raising cattle.

Another type of Environmental Service Payment charges water users a fee for the protection of the watershed where their potable water originates. This program is relatively new and has not yet been widely implemented, but it is certain to become an important method of environmental protection in the future.

Ecological Tourism –

When done well, ecological tourism can be a very effective means of making conservation pay for itself. In Costa Rica tourism is the number one foreign exchange earner, and ecological tourism is the most important sector. Though the country has close to a thousand kilometers of coastline, more tourists visit the national parks and wildlife refuges than visit the beaches. In southwestern Costa Rica, where I live, few people doubt the importance of wildlife and rainforest to the local economy. Where 20 years ago there was nothing but cattle ranches, agriculture and scattered patches of forest, today there are seven national wildlife refuges, one national park and at least 30 private nature reserves.

The many protected areas are the biggest tourist attraction in southwestern Costa Rica. Ecological tourists and bird watchers visit the region year after year, do no damage to the environment, purchase goods and services and take away only their memories. As a general rule, ecological tourists tend to respect local customs and cultures. Everybody wins including Mother Nature. In 1976, when I first prohibited hunting at Hacienda Baru, less than two percent of the local population supported me. Today the figure is more like 85%. A big part of the difference is that today rainforests and wildlife help people make a living.

MESOAMERICAN BIOCORRIDOR PARTNER

El Salvador

Land Purchases –

Corridor projects that involve very large forested areas have sometimes used a strategy of raising money to purchase large tracts of land, which are then given some sort of permanent official protection. This method works well when the area to be protected is sparsely inhabited. The land purchased may be protected in one of three methods:

Donation to the national parks system and declaration as a national park

Declaration as a national wildlife refuge which remains the property of the local NGO promoting the project

The placing of environmental easements on the purchased properties. This may be done in conjunction with the first two methods of protection.
These methods give both security and permanency, so that all parties involved are confident that the land use will not be changed.

An example of a corridor where this strategy is being applied is the Osa Biological Corridor, which will connect the Corcovado National Park in the Osa Peninsula to the Piedras Blancas National Park on the mainland. Conservation International and The Nature Conservancy are some of the international organizations that help raise money for land purchases.

MESOAMERICAN BIOCORRIDOR PARTNER

Nicaragua

COSTA RICA — MEASURING RESULTS

In the last two years the Costa Rican commission for the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor has given financial assistance to local corridor projects for the monitoring of species of flora and fauna within their respective corridors. At this early stage available data is insufficient to come to any conclusions, but on a subjective level we can make some general observations. As my personal experience has been with the Path of the Tapir Biological Corridor (PTBC,) the following comments relate to that particular southwest Costa Rica project:

Biology and Ecology:

Spider monkeys and howler monkeys that have long been absent from many parts of the PTBC are migrating along corridors and establishing breeding populations where they haven’t been observed in over 50 years.

Squirrel monkeys, a species formerly completely absent from the area have now moved into the corridor and at least one reproducing group is well established on a wildlife refuge.

White-lipped peccary are moving back into the region where they have been locally extinct since the 1960s.

In three years of Audubon Society sanctioned Christmas Bird Count, the PTBC count has increased steadily: 2003 — 340 species; 2004 — 383 species; 2005 — 395 species.

Populations of species such as pacas, agoutis, coatis, collared peccary, five species of felines, great curasows have all increased noticeably in the last ten years.

The area of forest cover has more than tripled in the last thirty years.

MESOAMERICAN BIOCORRIDOR PARTNER

Costa Rica

Social Organization:

126 voluntary game wardens have been trained and approved.

32 schools receive environmental education

7 National Wildlife Refuges and more than 30 private nature reserves have been established since 1995.

8% of the land area is protected by Environmental Service Payment Contracts

Ecological Tourism has replaced ranching and agriculture as the number one economic activity.

Problems and Threats:

The value of land has increased to a level where only foreigners can afford to own property in the region and local Costa Ricans who were once property owners are being displaced or have become employees of the new land owners.

Due to weak or nonexistent enforcement of environmental laws developers are able cut illegal roads through rainforests, level off home sites and cause serious environmental damage with few if any consequences.

MESOAMERICAN BIOCORRIDOR PARTNER

Panama

Real estate developers with little respect for tropical ecosystems, have seemingly unlimited funds with which to destroy natural areas, while local environmental groups who wish to conserve habitat are severely under-funded.

Many property owners would like to inscribe their properties in the Environmental Service Payment program but limited funding has prevented extending the incentives to everyone who is conserving forests.

The original projection for financing for the MBC by international funding institutions such as UNDP was 10 years, of which eight have already elapsed. Many projects have reached a level where they are effective but not yet sustainable. If funding dries up in the next few years these projects will collapse.

MESOAMERICA - THE PATH OF THE PANTHER

Central America forms a bridge between north and south America which throughout its three million year history has served as a natural corridor connecting the two continents biologically. In the last century much of that corridor has been destroyed. Biologists have determined that biological corridors are an effective method of conserving and enhancing biodiversity in fragmented ecosystems.

The idea that the tropical forests of Central America could be reconstructed and joined together in a corridor was originally promoted by the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Caribbean Conservation Corporation. The project was called the Path of the Panther. Governments throughout the region later adopted the project and changed the name to the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC.)

Responsibility for regional coordination was given to the Central American Commission on Environment and Development (CCAD) and headquartered in Managua, Nicaragua. Implementation of the project in each country became the responsibility of national MBC commissions. Each of these commissions works in a different manner. Some have been very effective and others less so.

Costa Rica is the only country that has elected a strategy of working with community and environmental organizations to create a chain of local biological corridors. As a result Costa Rica has experienced a higher level of success in establishing the MBC than most other countries in Central America. Nevertheless, environmental destruction by real estate developers poses a serious threat to the environment and the government seems to be incapable or unwilling to control it.

In the final tally, the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor has made significant advances, but much more is needed. If funding from international agencies is diminished or discontinued in the near future, it could mean the death of the reconstruction of the Central American biological corridor.

For further reading:

Central America: A Natural and Cultural History

Anthony G. Coats, Editor, Yale University Press, New Haven and London

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed

Jared Diamond, Viking Penguin Group, New York

The Sixth Extinction

Richard Leakey, Doubleday, New York

New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, 1491

Charles C. Mann, Alfred A. Knopf, New York

Online References:

Central American Commission on the Environment and Development (Spanish)

http://www.ccad.ws

Pro Diversitas (Spanish)

http://www.prodiversitas.biotica.org

United Nations Development Program

http://www.undp.org

Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (English and Spanish)

http://www.cbm.org

Path of the Tapir Biological Corridor (Spanish)

http://www.pasodeladanta.org

Web site of Hacienda Baru National Wildlife Refuge

http://www.haciendabaru.com

With fuel-efficient stoves alone, the rate of deforestation can be cut by half

Trees Water & People is a non-profit organization dedicated to helping communities protect and manage natural resources.

Their work is based on, in their own words, two core beliefs: (1) That natural resources are best protected when local people play an active role in their care and management; and (2) Preserving local trees, wetlands, and watersheds is essential for the ongoing social, economic, and environmental health of communities everywhere.

Trees, Water and People… from the beginning, it sounds like this NPO, based in Fort Collins, Colorado, has got its priorities straight. And the more we learned about the work they are doing in the American West and around the world, the more we were convinced.

We’re not the only ones, either– this year, TWP, along with their partner group ADHESA (Honduran Association for Development), won one of eight internationally coveted Ashden Awards, also known as the green Oscars. The British Ashden Trust gives the awards, which recognize organizations who have excelled in bringing sustainable energy solutions to
the developing world.

Indoor cooking in much of Central America is over open fires with poor ventilation

Of their many projects, it is the Honduran Micro-Enterprise Stove Project in particular that caught the eye of the Ashden Trust, and earned TWP co-founder and international director Stuart Conway the honor of shaking the hand of Prince Charles, not to mention a grant of £30,000– about $54,000– for the program.

For the last 20 years, Conway has been working with indigenous and low-income communities throughout Latin America. TWP’s innovative community-based reforestation and development programs focus on environmental as well as financial sustainability, in one stroke helping communities move towards empowerment and independence and addressing the needs of the environment.

The ecological problem that the stoves address is the fact that most families in Central America - about 80% - cannot afford electric or gas stoves, and while their kitchens may be indoors, they have to cook on open wood fires. When entire communities and cities are considered, the rate at which the forests are destroyed for firewood is phenomenal. In the last thirty years, more than 2/3 of Central American forests have been destroyed, and the rest would be gone by 2050 if nothing were being done to save them.

People are suffering from this cooking situation too, almost as much as the trees are. The smoke that is inhaled by women, equivalent on average to smoking about two packs of cigarettes a day, leads to respiratory infections, tuberculosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, eye disease and complications like low birth weight in pregnancy.
Their young children, who also spend a lot of time in the kitchen, are even more vulnerable– lung disease is the number one cause of death for children under five, and they are also constantly at risk for burns from the fire.

According to the World Health Organization, about 1,600,000 women and children around the world die each year from the toxic smoke of indoor biomass-burning stoves used for cooking and heating; in Honduras, these are the stoves that 90% of rural families and 50% of urban families still use. 90% of the potential wood energy is wasted, and the burning contributes to global warming as well. What TWP did, with the help of ADHESA and the Aprovecho Research Center, was develop the Justa stove.

The Justa stove uses half the fuel and burns far cleaner than open cooking fires

Built of bricks or adobe, the Justa stove uses 50% less firewood than an open cookstove, with a chimney to carry 95% of the smoke out of the house.

Because they burn hotter than traditional stoves, they also save up to 70% on cooking time. For villagers, it also saves hours spent searching for and carrying firewood, and for urbanites, the money spent on it. Those whose livelihoods depend on cooking, like women who make and sell tortillas, have less overhead and see a jump in profit. Or, for an ordinary laborer, the stove can mean about 20% of the family’s income no longer going up in smoke.

In Nicaragua, another version, called the Ecostove, has been developed with the Wood Energy Development Association (PROLENA), with similar results. The main difference is that these are made of metal and assembled in workshops ready to install, rather than being literally built in the kitchen like the Justa model.

The Honduras program, however, has gotten the most attention– the Ashden Award, of course, and also a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of $132,000. The money has been used to start a micro-credit program in Honduras, allowing families to pay back the cost of the stove with monthly installments over the course of a year. At $65-70 per stove, the cost of a Justa stove may not look like much, but if, like an average Honduran laborer, your monthly income is about $100, it remains out of reach, no matter what the savings will be. The micro-credit program will make the stoves available to families like these.

The goal of TWP in this and their other international and domestic projects is to create self-sustaining programs, and they are slowly getting there. Although the Honduran Micro-Enterprise Stove Project is a commercial enterprise, 70% of its funding was
originally coming from TWP, Rotary Clubs and other local NPO’s.

Now, however, TWP and ADHESA, with technical support from the Aprovecho Research Center, are training four stove producers to make 720 new stoves in urban areas this year. “There is more incentive to build the stoves in urban areas, where people have to pay for
firewood,” said Conway. “Now farmers and companies are getting interested, too.”

26 vendors will sell the stoves to the public in markets, bus stations, and shops. ADHESA is also promoting the stoves and spreading awareness of their advantages with demonstrations, TV and radio ads, and brochures.

The Ashden award is only given to projects that are up and running, not to good ideas. To date, the Stove Project has installed over 8,000 stoves in Central America– Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala alone. In 2003, the program expanded to include Mexico, Brazil, and Bolivia. The total, since TWP was founded in 1998, is over 14,000 stoves. Conway said one of the most rewarding experiences of the project has been visiting the people.

Stuart Conway TWP Co-Founder & Director International Programs

“If I go back and visit a woman’s home after she’s had the new stove for a month or six months, it’s a day-night difference, she’s not coughing… it’s a great joy to go down and talk to them.”

The most difficult thing, Conway said, has been getting people convinced to try something new. “How food is made is central to culture; it’s not easy to change. The best way we have found is to find women who are community leaders, and they convince the others.”

As part of the publicity surrounding the Ashden Awards, the BBC aired a 5-minute video this August about the Honduran Stove Project, which can be seen online at http://www.handsontv.info/series6/programme_4.html.

As TWP’s international director, the other program Conway is involved with is community reforestation, a fitting piece to Central America’s ecological puzzle.

In Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua combined, the reforestation projects currently contribute to the planting of about 250,000 trees each year; the total since 1998 is over 1,000,000 trees (just see the momentum).

The programs are different in each country, but all of them involve working with local people and NPO’s, establishing nurseries, replanting trees in deforested areas and moving towards self-sustaining enterprises.

In Nicaragua, working again with PROLENA, three Forest Replacement Associations (FRA) have been developed since 2000. The model of FRA’s came from Brazil, where there are now many successful programs.

Stuart Conway in a new grove of Leucaena trees

An FRA is basically a legal partnership between farmers and commercial builders, like lime producers or brickmakers, who depend on large amounts of firewood for their business. The way it works is that seedlings raised in nurseries are given to farmers for free (paid for by the builders), with a guarantee that the builders will buy it at market price when the wood is harvested. Farmers generally have some amount of land and labor to spare, so it is not a big investment for them, which returns a profit. The farmers are furthermore not obligated to sell the wood to the industry, but can keep it or sell it to the highest
bidder. In times of flood, drought or other emergency, the cash crop of wood provides valuable insurance to the farmers.

FRA’s have many obvious benefits for the farmers, but the difference between Brazil and Nicaragua is this: in Brazil, the government requires commercial industries to be financially responsible for the deforestation they cause. These laws are enforced, and
the industries were forced to pay fees for replacing the trees they had destroyed; thus the FRA system was born, which was less expensive than the government fees, and the FRA’s flourished.

The problem with duplicating the system in Nicaragua is that the Nicaraguan government has no resources to enforce forest sustainability policies, and thus there is no financial incentive for the commercial builders to participate in the program. Although the forestry authorities are slowly gaining interest, commercial responsibility for deforestation is not yet a reality. For this reason, international aid, NPO’s and TWP have been essential to getting the FRA’s off the ground.

Over the next year, Conway said, two Nicaraguan nurseries will be moving toward privatization, and TWP’s goal is to establish 2-3 more Forest Replacement Nurseries.

In the community reforestation project in Guatemala, fast-growing, nitrogen-fixing seedlings are not given but rather sold to farmers in a particular package– one fruit tree and three forest trees for only about US$1.00. The fruit (generally citrus fruits like orange, lemon or mango) can be kept for the family or sold, like the wood from the forest trees.

In all the Central American reforestation programs, TWP provides training and micro-enterprise loans to establish self-sufficient tree nurseries with local
seedlings and replant them in deforested areas.

The other co-founder of TWP, veteran arborist and environmentalist Richard Fox, directs TWP’s domestic projects. He and Conway, both Colorado natives, met in Washington, D.C., and decided to move their families back to the Rockies and start the NPO together.

Richard Fox TWP Co-Founder & Director United States Programs

One of Fox’s main projects is called the Tribal Lands Renewable Energy Program.

Similar in spirit to the Latin American projects, the program gives Native American communities a practical way to lower their bills, create industry, beautify their land, and practice their ancient tradition of honoring the Earth.

“The program has two main approaches,” Fox explained. “One is treeplanting in the springtime, and the other is building solar heaters to help lower utility bills
in winter.”

The work started in 2002, on the Pine Ridge Lakota Reservation in South Dakota. In the sweltering summers and freezing winters on the barren prairie, residents were spending up to 70% of their income on heating and cooling their homes. Because electricity is so
expensive, many people have to heat their homes with firewood, which is scarce, or propane, a pollutant.

Communities apply for the program. In the spring, at the home of an individual or family who has been selected, a half-dozen 5-7 foot-tall trees are planted on the Northwest side as a windbreak; in the fall, Cottonwoods are planted on the Southwest side for shade. These trees alone lower utility bills by about 20%.

With partners Oglala Lakota College, the Pine Ridge Chamber of Commerce, Youth Build, and the Youth Opportunity! Organization, the goal of the project is to provide the idea and technical training so that the community can carry on the work on its own after TWP is gone. This provides a great experience for young people, and employment opportunity, which is scarce on the Reservation. The trees are bought from a Lakota tree farm, so that money stays in the community, too.

Richard Herman and his solar heater installation

The other part of the program is installing a supplemental solar heater, which saves up to 30% more on winter heating costs ($100- 200 per year). The heater, which runs on a 12-volt fan, pumps hot air whenever the sun is out; its lifespan is about 20 years, and it currently costs about $1000.

Even though the heaters save money, it is too much for most people to spend up front, and TWP is still trying to find more funds for the project. So far, funding has come from individuals and grants from the Bush Foundation (no relation to the presidential family) and others. The Alternative Gifts Catalog, which makes it possible for an individual to make a donation to the program in someone’s name as a gift, provided $46,000 in funding this year.

“We are building up the Lakota crew,” Fox said. “It will be a business operation for them. By next summer, they will be building the solar units on Pine Ridge. The cost will go down to $700 per unit; they will take over, and TWP will move on to Rosebud[another
Reservation].”

“In three years, we did 12 workshops and demonstration projects,” Fox said. “It takes time to build up respect. You have to start off slow, and do one thing at a time.”

Slowly but surely, it has worked. So far, TWP has been involved in planting over 200 large trees at five different reservation communities, and has installed about 30 solar heaters. The momentum is growing: by June 2007, TWP hopes to put in at least 200 more, and other Native American communities, like the Shoshone and Arapaho, have given permission to put in demonstration models on their reservations as well.

The Tribal Lands Renewable Energy Program was recently the cover story for Worldwatch Magazine (read it online at http://worldwatch.org/pubs/mag/2005/184, and in early October, CNN did a video shoot at Pine Ridge for their environmental show “Earth Matters.”

TWP has also received funding from the U.S. Forest Service to make a video about how to establish a tree-planting program on a Native American Reservation. 400 distribution copies of the video, called, “Honoring the Earth: Planting Trees in Native American Communities” will be out in the summer of 2006.

TWP’s biggest effort in the “water” category is their Rocky Mountain Watershed Training Program. This program answers the call to protect the “Headwaters of America,” the runoff from the snowy mountains of the West that provide drinking water for over a million people.

As the area has developed and the population quickly increased, many small watershed protection groups have sprung up to try to protect the supply and quality of the water, most with small staffs and limited funding. What TWP is doing is providing them with technical and organizational training, so they have a better chance of succeeding at protecting water at its source.

“This is the cutting edge of democracy,” Fox said. “These watershed protection groups are the most important thing that has happened for natural resource management since the formation of the U.S. Forest Service– it is about how people work with the
government.”

The groups are mostly NPO’s made of stakeholders: federal, state and local government agencies, landowners, ranchers, environmentalists, and any other interested individuals. Their goal is to seek cooperative ways to approach watershed problems and potential problems.

“There is less separation between the government and the people, “Fox continued. “They work together in a collaborative process.”

In Colorado alone, there are more than 40 of these groups, each with their own individual goals and projects. TWP is helping them become sustainable by teaching them tricks of the NPO trade– how to go about fundraising, find and use volunteers, form a board of directors, etc. They also provide technical training in areas like water quality analysis: how to get samples, analyze watershed data, and turn it into usable information.

The National Watershed Health Project, funded by the EPA and managed at the national level by Rivernetwork.org, is basically an extension of the same work. There are four pilot sites, in Wisconsin, Ohio, New Mexico and Colorado; TWP manages the Colorado pilot.

“It has given us access to more experts, and more training. We are able to learn from the other pilot states, and since it’s a project on the national level, it has the potential to grow even more,” Fox said.

Planting trees in Ft. Collins, Colorado

Finally, TWP’s Community Resource Protection Program is literally rooted in their own backyard of Fort Collins, Colorado. Over the last seven years, they have helped put together 160 different natural resource volunteer events in the town and around Northern Colorado, ranging from tree-planting and wetland restoration to riverbed cleanups; between 20 and 120 youth and other volunteers per day show up for
the events.

Partnered with the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, and the Poudre School District, TWP has created four outdoor science labs called “living laboratories.” This project has transformed local storm water detention ponds, which were before just breeding grounds for mosquitoes and disease, dangerously located in suburban neighborhoods.

Trees and berry bushes are planted and walkways are built. Eggs are nestled in the grass. Even a “bat box” is brought in and placed in a dead tree, 30 feet in the air. Suddenly, the cesspool is a tiny wetland teeming with life– ducks, foxes, other birds (who eat mosquitoes), and even the occasional mountain lion.

Schools are also near the living labs. Children come to take samples for water quality analysis, see the bugs and monitor wildlife. By participating in these and other local environmental projects, kids get a hands-on experience of the natural world, and a sense
of responsibility for it, that can go deeper in them than the dirt under their nails. These feelings and impressions can benefit them, and the Earth, long after we are gone.

To conclude, Trees, Water and People’s complex and innovative programs, which span the spectrum from local to global involvement, can all be summed up in this simple, heartfelt statement from Richard Fox: “When local people can see progress, they’re absolutely willing to get involved and make long-term commitments to protect natural resources. People love doing things where they can really see a difference– they get excited about it, and it’s excited me too.”

For more information on TWP and to find out how you can get involved, go to:

www.treeswaterpeople.org

By phone: 877-606-4TWP (toll free), 970-484-3678

By fax: 970-224-1726

By email: twp@treeswaterpeople.org

By regular mail:

Trees, Water & People

633 Remington St.

Fort Collins, CO 80524

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

One kilogram of uranium fuel yields 20,000 times more energy than one kilogram of coal (photo: US EPA)

When I declare that the U.S. desperately needs to become more like France, some of my friends get upset. But hold your anger, keep eating your Freedom Fries, and let me explain. The real reason to emulate the French is that 75% of their electrical power use is derived from nuclear reactors.

The U.S. right now generates about 50% of its electric power from coal and only about 15% from nuclear reactors. No new nuclear plants have been built in the U.S. since the early 1970s, thanks in part to misguided environmental activists reacting to the Three Mile Island (3MI) meltdown, but also to really cheap natural gas and oil in the 70’s and 80’s. We will never see cheap oil and gas again thanks to huge increases in demand from India and China that is here to stay. We need to start building new nuclear power plants and catch up with our erstwhile friends those French, without whom we never would have won the American Revolution.

While the only by-product of a nuclear power plant that finds its way into the surroundings is hot water, coal fired plants spew out about 90% of all the pollutants given off by power production in the U.S. These include sulfur dioxides (acid rain), various nitrogen oxides (read smog), mercury, lots of carbon dioxide, (greenhouse gas, anyone?), and more radioactive gases than the virtually zero amounts given off by nuclear plants. Even relatively clean natural gas fired power plants still release significant amounts of pollutants and lots of carbon dioxide.

Opponents of nuclear power always point out that operating nuclear reactors create radioactive gases that are released into the atmosphere. Not true! The radioactive gases generated by a nuclear reactor are held in holding tanks until they decay into harmless, non-radioactive gases. Only then are they released into the atmosphere.

One large nuclear plant easily equals the 1.2 gigawatt output of Hoover Dam (photo: Idaho National Labs)

Along with coal, another energy choice we might consider in lieu of nuclear is hydroelectric. Building big new dams is probably even more expensive than building new nuclear plants, but the advantage is there is no waste or emissions at all. In the bargain, however, we lose all those wild rivers that rafters, kayakers, and myriad wild creatures love so much. In addition, we create huge new lakes that not only ruin the local environment, but also give jet boaters a place to zoom around in and make lots of noise. Let’s not forget about what dams do to migrating fish populations such as salmon. As for “green” dams? Well if you think a regular dam costs a lot…

Remaining alternatives to nuclear power, such as wind and solar, are promising technologies but can’t offer constant baseload power generation like hydroelectric and nuclear power. Moreover, solar power is still far too expensive to be developed on a scale sufficient to replace coal or nuclear power and meet growing worldwide energy demands. Also, windmills, as do new oil refineries and nuclear plants, evince the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) response. It is estimated that photovoltaic solar power costs about 23 cents per kilowatt hour (could get cheaper as new technologies evolve), while conventional coal and natural gas plants cost about half that. Nuclear power weighs in at less than 2 cents per kilowatt-hour.

I was against the widespread use of nuclear power back in the hippy sixties and seventies for the usual reasons at the time: China Syndrome meltdowns, what to do with radioactive waste, Homer Simpson like reactor workers, and poor regulation and corruption. That was then, this is now. Several icons of the environmental movement, apostates like me, believe that the aforementioned nuclear power problems have been solved. Nuclear power is simply the most environmentally friendly way to generate electrical power, cleanly and economically.

The Three Mile Island accident could not have happened in today’s modern nuclear power plants (photo: US EPA)

No less a luminary than Patrick Moore, the founder of Greenpeace, recently endorsed developing nuclear power.
In his testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee on Energy and Resources, he said he now believes that the majority of environmental activists (his former friends) have become so blinded by their extremist policies that they fail to consider the enormous and obvious benefits of harnessing nuclear power to meet and secure America’s growing energy needs. His testimony in essence boils down to that we need to get away from the fossil fuels that are responsible for most all of the air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions we are inundated with, and get with nuclear power that is clean and safe.

Other pioneering environmentalists have also embraced nuclear power, including Stewart Brand, founder of the Whole Earth Catalog, and James Lovelock, who put forth the Gaia theory (basically, Earth is a huge living, self-regulating organism in itself). Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore went on to say, “The industry is mature. Problematic early reactors like the ones at Three Mile Island (3MI) and Chernobyl can be supplanted by new, smaller-scale, meltdown-proof reactors like the ones that use the pebble-bed design. Nuclear plants are high yield, with low cost fuel that offer the best avenue to a hydrogen economy.” Well said, Mr. Moore. So let us now visit the questions of 3MI and Chernobyl, and what is “pebble bed”, anyway? And lastly, the big gorilla always put forth by nuclear opponents, what to do with all that dangerous radioactive waste from a reactor’s spent fuel rods.

US EPA

In 1979, at the 3MI nuclear plant near Harrisburg, Pa., a reactor overheated and a partial meltdown of the uranium core occurred. Hydrogen gas was released raising fears of a BIG explosion that would release radioactive water, solids and gases into the atmosphere. The crisis lasted 12 days, and some radioactive water and gases were released, while thousands of people were evacuated from the area (for you trivia buffs, the movie, “China Syndrome” was released just days before the real thing happened at 3MI). The explosion never happened, but the incident effectively ended construction of new nuclear power plants in the U.S. Various celebrities and politicians at the time demanded the shutdown of all nuclear plants and predicted cancer epidemics of every kind. Well, after 25 years, no other such accidents have occurred and no adverse health effects on the people exposed to the radioactive materials have emerged. The whole incident was due to human error. The operators reacted to a completely manageable problem with safety valves by shutting down the emergency cooling system, ultimately causing a reactor to overheat, resulting in the infamous meltdown. Wrong move, Homer Simpson and pals!! Anyway, the incident caused the industry to fix some design flaws, and actually give plant workers rigorous training, MUCH more rigorous than before the accident.

Chernobyl from orbit. The dark elongated area area is the 12 kilometer long cooling pond. The reactor complex is just to the left of the pond (photo: NASA)

O.K., but what about Chernobyl, the poster child for nuclear power opponents? The worst nuclear reactor accident in history occurred there, and the Ukrainian city is to this day a ghost town. In April of 1986, engineers (probably including “Homeri Simpsonov”) disabled emergency backup systems and then proceeded to test one of the plant’s four reactors. Who knows why? They only succeeded in initiating an uncontrolled chain reaction in the core of the reactor, which resulted in blowing up the whole containment building. This “minor misjudgment” on the part of the plant workers resulted in about 8 tons of highly radioactive materials being spewed all over Eastern Europe and beyond. About 35 people were killed immediately from the explosion itself and acute radiation poisoning, while hundreds of others suffered from severe radiation sickness (the unlucky ones, as it is a slow, painful death).

Nuclear energy experts I have talked to say such an accident is impossible for reactors of the design used in the rest of the world. Only the old Soviet Union used the Chernobyl design, which is fatally flawed and susceptible to such accidents even when the engineers working there know what they’re doing. In the 20 years since, there has been a large rise in thyroid cancers in people who were heavily exposed, especially in children. This is predictable because ingested radioactive iodine from the explosion is all concentrated in the pea sized thyroid gland. The good news is that it is one of the most curable of cancers. The cancerous gland is surgically removed and a thyroid hormone pill must be taken for the remainder of one’s life. Even better, no increase in any other types of cancers has been detected in the exposed population (yet).

US DOE

Now for the big gorilla, what to do with highly radioactive, long half-life, spent nuclear fuel. For the conventional nuclear plants that are operating today all over the U.S., the answer is Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The area has already been subject to about 900 nuclear bomb tests, NIMBY doesn’t apply because nobody lives anywhere near there, and the area is so arid that there is virtually no groundwater for any potential waste to leech into, even if the containers of the waste do fail in only 500 years or so. It has been approved by the government as a very, very, long-term safe disposal site for all nuclear waste, but its status is now in limbo because of all those former friends of Patrick Moore. Opponents cite the danger of vehicles transporting encapsulated waste being involved in some accident that might release radioactive waste all over the place. Firstly, transport will be by rail, not trucks, so the NIMBY folks needn’t worry about a truck hauling radioactive waste driving through their neighborhood. According to one of my favorite columnists, George Will, in the last 40 years more than 2,700 shipments of spent nuclear fuel have been transported more than 1.6 million miles in the U.S. Of those shipments, 4 rail and 4 highway accidents have occurred with no failure of any of the nuclear containers. Sounds like pretty good odds to me.

Yucca Mountain is being developed as a central repository for America’s nuclear waste (photo: Sandia)

At present, radioactive waste is stored at hundreds of temporary sites around the country. How secure are those sites against a possible theft by some terrorist determined to set off a “dirty bomb” in Manhattan? Nellis Air Force Base, next door to the Yucca site, will supply ample security. Because nobody lives anywhere near the site, a terrorist would have a hard time explaining why he just happens to be in the area, maybe counting mutant gila monsters (from all those nuclear bomb tests), or even house hunting? Finally, we could again follow the lead of our European friends, and use new technologies to re-cycle nuclear waste. They have been doing it for years, why not us? Perhaps because it’s cheaper to mine new uranium? The process ultimately reduces the amount of waste by about 80%. We recycle paper and aluminum, why not uranium?

Finally, let’s consider why newly built reactors should use that pebble bed reactor design as an alternative to conventional nuclear plant designs. The pebble bed uses pool ball sized uranium fuel, not rods. They produce less waste material, and are more easily disposed of. The most important thing is this: if the engineers running a conventional plant are abducted by terrorists or aliens, the reactor might eventually overheat, meltdown, and explode, just like Chernobyl. The pebble bed reactor would shut itself down! Accidents such as occurred at 3MI and Chernobyl are impossible! In addition, helium is used as the coolant instead of water, yielding hydrogen as the by-product, which could be recovered to power fuel cells for the hydrogen economy of the future.

International Atomic Energy Agency

America’s politicians and regulators need to drastically reform the process that a company must go through to get government approval for new construction. It would take about 2 years to build a new nuclear reactor and get it up and running. It now takes about 11 years to go through all the government red tape, paperwork, hearings (featuring eco-radicals screaming and obstructing at every turn), environmental impact statements with more words than the entire encyclopedia Britannica, and other political baloney that it would take to get approval, before construction can even begin. Saving the planet today starts with using nuclear power instead of coal, as the transitional fuel to the tomorrow’s totally clean and sustainable energy economy, whatever it may be.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dear Editor:

Let me first thank you for an informative and thought provoking article about nuclear power from an environmental point of view. As one of many “environmentalists for nuclear power” I appreciate the way that you have provided a new way of looking at old issues. I laughed out loud at the following comment with regard to using hydroelectric damns for power production:

“In addition, we create huge new lakes that not only ruin the local environment, but also give jet boaters a place to zoom around in and make lots of noise.”

As one of the kayakers that loves wild rivers, I appreciated your point of view.

I also enjoyed reading about pebble bed reactors, a technology that I have studied intensively for the past dozen years.

One minor correction - though pebble bed reactors use helium for coolant, and though it is possible for them to be used in a system that produces hydrogen, they do not produce hydrogen as a “by-product”.

In other words, there is no chemical or physical process that is an inherent part of the closed cycle helium cooled pebble bed reactor that results in hydrogen production. The helium remains helium throughout the cycle, and all fission products remain locked inside the pebbles. As in other nuclear power systems, the only real byproduct that is normally emitted is heat.

Hydrogen production is often mentioned in association with pebble bed or other high temperature gas cooled reactors simply because it is a process that can be aided with a heat source in excess of 800 degrees C. Conventional water cooled reactors do not reach that temperature.

Any kind of electrical power reactor can be used to produce hydrogen from water by using electrolysis, but many observers think that process is not efficient enough for wide scale use.

Keep up the good work, I am going to point to your article from my Atomic Insights Blog.

Best regards,

Rod Adams

Editor, Atomic Insights

www.atomicinsights.com

www.atomicinsights.blogspot.com

NORTHERN WATERS SAVE THE SEA

Canals (in red) move water to the Aral Basin

Why Save the Aral Sea?

To spend somewhere between 25-50 billion dollars to refill the Aral Sea and turn the Aral Basin into a cornucopia of fishing, agriculture, forestry - a new example to the world of the old adage “water, wealth, contentment, health” - does seem like a bargain. And that’s about all it would cost to build two canals to drain water from the Volga and Ob rivers and move enough south to refill the Aral Sea in about 25-50 years. But maybe this international effort could yield additional benefits - saving the banks of the Caspian Sea from rising waters, and removing fresh water from the Arctic Ocean to preserve the gulf stream current? Now would it be worth 25-50 billion dollars?

Each spring these days, the Arctic Ocean must adjust to larger than ever amounts of fresh water from the melting icecap. What if during this same period, some of the freshwater runoff from rivers were diverted south? It is especially Eurasia, with its massive Siberian watersheds, that contributes the most fresh water to the Arctic Ocean. In particular, from the northern flowing Ob-Irtush river on the Central Siberian plain.

The ability to regulate ice-formation appears to be a worthwhile human capacity, whether the Earth is warming or cooling and regardless of why. And at the same time as the Arctic chokes on too much fresh water, the Aral Sea withers away. Up until 50 years ago the Aral was the fifth largest inland sea in the world, nearly 70,000 square kilometers. And the draining of the Aral Sea has adversely affected weather and land quality throughout Central Asia - the Aral basin encompasses seven nations and well over two million square kilometers! The draining of the Aral Sea once was the poster child for environmental destruction, now it is nearly forgotten.

How to Save the Aral Sea:

Saving the Aral Sea will only work if fresh water is drained from the Ob-Irtysh and the Volga Rivers. As the map indicates, canals (in red) would drain water from each of these rivers and move it south to the Aral Sea. At the same time as the Ob river pours a staggering 385 cubic kilometers of water into the Arctic Ocean, the Volga River pours an also whopping 240 cubic kilometers of water per year into the Caspian Sea. This is about 10% above normal and has gone on for years. The Caspian Sea is rising, threatening to inundate cities that have thrived on its banks for centuries.

The table below shows how much water reached the Aral Sea before diversions began in 1950, and how water would get there if new canals were built to divert water south from the Volga and Ob.

WATER TO THE ARAL SEA - ORIGINAL, TODAY, PROPOSED

At this point almost any increase will cause the Aral Sea to expand again

In 1950, the Aral Sea received about 50 cubic kilometers per year from the Amu Darya and Syr Darya. Because of canal diversions for agriculture, these rivers currently deliver at most 6 cubic kilometers per year into the Aral Sea. It is clear these farms are often growing water-intensive low margin crops. By improving the quality of the canals, including upgrades as basic as concrete lining, by making other water efficiency improvements, and by eliminating growing water intensive low margin crops, the Amu Darya and Syr Darya can at least double their input into the Aral Sea. It is estimated at best the Aral Sea could get as much as 20 cubic kilometers of water per year from its original rivers, while still preserving a viable agricultural economy in central Asia. This would be 40% of the original, but would be a 15x increase over today’s flow. The Aral Sea would immediately begin to expand from its current state.

Since there are no mountain formations or uplands between the Volga and the Aral Basins, a gravity-fed canal can move water from the Volga to the Aral Basin, and a 200 meter wide canal five or more meters deep would be able to move 25 cubic kilometers per year. This could be a highly innovative, possibly navigable canal that would literally siphon water into the Aral Basin. Why did canals once criss-cross Europe, yet none can be built today? Are they all so incorrect? Adding another 20 cubic km of water from the Volga to the Aral Basin per year would get the inflows almost to normal. With water going into the Aral Sea sustaining itself at 80% of normal, the Aral Sea could expand back to as much as 50,000 square kilometers.

Why the Ob Canal is Necessary:

To refill the Aral Sea completely, however, would require building a canal from the Ob river, and this would require costly pumping stations to move the water over the crest that separates the Central Siberian Plain from the Aral Basin. While the cost of such a pumping station would be about 2-3 billion dollars, it would allow inter-basin transfers of truly massive amounts of water. Not only does the Ob-Irtysh drain 385 cubic km of fresh water each year northwards across the low-lying plains of Central Siberia, but just to the east on this same watershed is the Yenisy river, which drains hundreds of cubic km into the Arctic and which could be part of a system of canals to divert excess flow into the Aral Basin.

If there were a compelling need to remove fresh water from the Arctic Ocean, this Ob to Aral canal would be an obvious solution. But developing the Aral Basin could be an international effort, and nations that might harvest fresh water from the sources of these rivers, whether they be the Syr Darya and Amu Darya, or the Volga, Ob, Irtysh or Yenisy, could participate in investment in the new agricultural and fishing industries in the Aral Basin. The Ob canal would make refilling the Aral Sea easy, adding up to 20 cubic km of water per year to the Aral, bringing the total inflow to the Aral Sea 60 cubic km, 20% above normal. After some years, the flow from the Ob canal could be slowed, or the extra water could be used for agriculture in the Aral Basin. Gentlemen, start your bulldozers.

The Ob Pumping Station - How Much Electricity?

To calculate the electric power required to move 20 cubic kilometers of water from Arctic watersheds to the Aral Basin, first assume a “lift” for this water of 1,000 feet, or just over 300 meters. That’s how much altitude the pumps will need to raise that volume of water, year after year. For this calculation it is assumed the pumping station will operate constantly, 365 days per year, but altering those assumptions don’t necessarily affect the power required, although they will affect the amount of generating capacity required (the work one 1.0 GW plant might do all year around would require three 1.0 GW plants operating only during the four month flood season). But only the water volume (20 cubic km/year) and the lift (300 meters) affect the total power calculation. If the electricity were coming from the grid, seasonal power requirement fluctuations might be mitigated.

The next step is to determine what amount of power, expressed in terms of “water horsepower,” would be required to run these pumps at the level of power required based on lifting the water 300 meters, and moving a water volume of 20 km3 through the pumps each year.

On the table below, the goal is to express the power requirement as how many “megawatts per 1.0 km3 per year,” it would take to move 1.0 cubic kilometers of water. So for each calculation the amounts are based on the volumne of 1.0 km3 per year.

HOW MUCH POWER WILL THE PUMPS NEED?

Every km3 of water lifted 300 meters will require 124 MW year-round output

The formula for how calculating water-horsepower requirements for water lift is as follows: Total dyamic head (TDH, the sum of the lift of the water, measured in feet, plus the friction loss encountered, expressed as additional feet) times gallons per minute, times 3960 (a constant). Rather than vary the constant, we must therefore plug into this formula the gallons per minute required to move a cubic kilometer per year.

The first calculation on the table, therefore, water volume required, converts km3 per year into gallons per miinute. As shown, one km3 per year is 502,607 gallons per minute. By knowing this figure, as well as the lift plus friction (total dynamic head) expressed as 1,010 feet, we can plug in the figures and make the second calculation, the water horsepower requirement.

As the second calculation on the table shows, therefore, it requires 255,051 water horsepower to lift a cubic kilometer of water 1,000 feet (or 300 meters). It is a reasonably safe assumption that the total lift required will not exceed this if the canal proceeds along the headlands of the Tobol (an Ob tributary) and passes into the Aral Basin just south-east of the foothills of the Ural Mountains.

The third calculation on the table determines how many megawatts of electric power are needed to generate the water horsepower with the pumping system. This depends on a constant, kilowatts per horsepower, as well as an assumption regarding the efficiency of the pumps. For very large pumps that run constantly, the efficiencies can get pretty good. In this example we assume a pump efficiency of 77%, meaning that 77% of the electrical energy input into the pumps is returned in the mechanical energy of water horsepower. The rest is lost to heat and friction.

Based on these calculations, it would take a constant input of 124 megawatts to move 1.0 cubic kilometer of water up 300 meters using giant pumps and pipes. As the final calculation shows, this means moving 20 cubic kilomters of water per year up 1,000 feet in altitude would require a 2.5 gigawatt electrical input. This is the equivalent of two Hoover Dams, or about one-sixth the output of the Three Gorges Dam. Put another way, it is the equivalent of about 5 very large nuclear reactors. It is unlikely a power plant of this magnitude could be contemplated using anything other than nuclear power, unless highly efficient transmission lines could be built to import electricty. Figure about 1-2 billion dollars per gigawatt for a nuclear reactor, meaning the powerplant for the pumps could cost up to 5 billion dollars. The cost for the new canals and the costs to overhaul the canals already built brings the total price tag to 25-50 billion.

A Renaissance in Central Asia?

But even if we don’t want to save the Aral Sea, or save the Gulf Stream, or stop the rising banks of the Caspian Sea? So what? After all, what’s the output of the restored Aral Basin worth, when its sea employs 100,000 fishermen, and new agricultural lands and rich deltas beckon the farmer and the tourist? What wealth might we reap?

For more information including references go to Refill the Aral Sea.

Mt. Kilimanjaro’s glaciers are melting away

Approaching the Kilimanjaro summits

“Hot tea and biscuits,”

came the muted voice from outside my tent. The time was a little past midnight, but yet it didn’t wake me, as I hadn’t slept a wink since first settling in to my sleeping bag five hours prior to this moment. My excitement and anxiousness prevented me from dropping off into unconciousness.

But any notion of sleeping anyway was negated by the fact that my tent was pitched on a surface of broken rocks at the debilitating altitude of 16,000 feet. In addition, feet-numbing cold embraced the air, as well as the incessant washing sound of the wind as it blew up from the warmer elevations of southern Tanzania, which lay in an inky darkness below.

It was time to rouse myself from the relative warmth of my bag and get dressed. It was time to climb! Summit day on Kilimanjaro comes early, as it often does on the high peaks of the world.

I had come here to east Africa to climb Kilimanjaro - a lifelong dream of mine - with a sense of urgency. Its famed glaciers are melting, and if the scientists are to be believed, these stunning features on an equally stunning and fantastic mountain will be gone in 15-20 years. I wanted to see them glistening in the sun while they are still with us, both from the wildlife-rich plains below and from above on the roof top of Africa.

Mama Cheetah and her five cubs look on

Since Kilimanjaro is a seven-summits peak, in the middle of an exotic utopia of wild animals and strange people with strange customs, the mountain is a focus for many people - suburbanite trekkers just happy to be there, armchair mountaineers with little actual experience, weekend warriors for whom Kilimanjaro will be their biggest life prize, and a small number of “hardcores” who are gunning for every big peak in the world.

If you go to Kilimanjaro and Tanzania expecting to find a nice wilderness experience on a giant exotic mountain in an Eden of savages and wild things, then think again. This isn’t the Kilimanjaro of Hemingway and Livingstone. But it’s definitely a grand life adventure in a world becoming increasing bereft of it.

As I exited the tent, I was greeted by the night-time firmament dotted and pierced by innumerable pinpricks of light. The starry constellations formed an ethereal panorama and served as a welcome foreboding of good things to come. My small climbing team, comprised of a 33 year old computer programmer named Sean from Calgary and Katherine, a 31 year old marketing executive from London, led by our stout guide John Minja, began our final 3,000 foot push to the summit via the Western Breach, Kili’s hardest non-technical route. The Breach is a large pile of scree and stone, punctuated by bands of cliffs, and being guided by headlamps, we picked our way through the rubble and made progress towards the crater rim at 18,000 feet. This was our 6th day on the mountain, and we were honed in on putting one step in front of the other in the slow manner of pole pole.

“Pole pole” is the most ubiquitous phrase on the mountain, and you hear it mentioned from the moment you step foot at the trailhead to within the last 100 feet of the top. It means “go slowly” in Swahili, and while one grows indifferent to hearing it spring from the lips of your guides every hour or so as you speed up the trail, it really does make a difference on summit day. Not that the altitude gives you much of a choice. It limits you to taking a few small steps at a time and then stopping for a mandatory gulp of air that is harder to come by the higher up you go. Half way up the rocky amphitheatre, our water bottles froze, leaving us thirsting in the deprived early morning air. Bright shooting stars flamed across the sky, some leaving long contrails marking their passage. Six hours of “pole pole later, we crested the crater rim almost to the minute that the sun crested the eastern horizon,

African Acacia Trees

Kilimanjaro is a voluptuous upheaval of rock and forest, accentuated by its gleaming white equatorial ice. Found snaking up and around its imposing dome are eight major trekking routes, but only three that lead to the summit, with most routes requiring 6-7 days to complete the climb. I chose arguably the most scenic - the Machame Route on Kili’s southern slopes. Kilimanjaro is unique in that due to its proximity to the equator, only 200 miles south of its bulging line, one travels thru all of the world’s climatic zones - it’s akin to experiencing all four seasons on a single climb.

The first white man to lay eyes on the mountain in 1849 - a Christian missionary by the name of Johann Rebmann couldn’t believe that he was seeing snow so close to the equator, and when he reported the spectacle back home in England, he was ostracized as crazy and delusional. The trail starts at roughly 7,000 feet in thick and lush rainforest and progresses up thru scant heather, sparse moorland, dry alpine desert and finally reaching arctic, icy conditions at the summit. We were doing the Western Breach variation of the Machame Route, which splits from the regular route near Lava Tower Camp two-thirds of the way up the mountain.

Kili’s glaciers flow from its summit like an elegant bridal veil, but they are quickly disintegrating under the African sun. Snowfall during the rainy season isn’t keeping pace with the melting that occurs during the dry season, and this lack of replenishment is taking its toll. Many scientists attribute this phenomenon to global warming. There is not a single place on earth, be it the rugged grandeur of the Alps, the vast Amazon Basin, the glacial fjords of Alaska or here in east Africa that is immune. With the recent devastation and increased ferocity of hurricanes in the Atlantic Ocean being attributed to global warming, climate change has the potential to drastically alter the way we live.

On Kilimanjaro, global warming affects not only the aesthetic beauty of the mountain, but also the livelihood of its local people who have lived and farmed on its lower slopes for hundreds of years. According to John Minja, a long-time guide and porter on the mountain, the shrinking glaciers means less snowmelt, which affects irrigation that is needed to water coffee plantations and gardens that provide cash crops, income, and food for local consumption. Even some of the major rivers tumbling down from the summit, such as the Umbwe, which used to run year-round, are now sometimes dry during certain times of the season.

Young faces of Tanzania

One native Chagga tribe member, Mr. John Minja, who was born and grew up in the shadow of Kilimanjaro, and who has been guiding on the mountain for seven years, indicates that within the past five years, he began noticing the glaciers visibly disappearing at an alarming rate. He has heard that in the past 50 years, the mountain has lost a third of its glacial ice.

Mr. Minja doesn’t know how losing the glaciers will affect the local tourism industry on Kilimanjaro, but he thinks tourism in general in Tanzania is good, as it creates jobs, contributes to the preservation of wildlife, increases education to the locals who live and work in the major tourism centers, and demands better management efficiency from park service managers and planners. Whether or not global warming is caused by human practices or just a part of the natural cycle of the planet is highly debatable, but regardless, the “eternal snows of Kilimanjaro” that Hemingway spoke so eloquently of are now just a few years away from disappearing altogether.

The sun rising up behind Kili’s eastern shoulder cast a spell on us. Sunrise from 18,000 feet is a wonderous spectacle, and we witnessed Kilimanjaro’s pyramidal shadow spread across the skirted clouds below. The three-story-high sheer face of the Furtwangler Glacier appeared instantly as we crested the volcanic rim. It’s an odd feature - a giant piece of ice sitting squarely on dirt. At one time not long ago, its translucent fingers spilled down the Western Breach, grabbing at solidified lava, but now it is just an oddly shaped chunk of shrinking ice sitting on the periphery of the crater. Two years ago a large section of this frozen mass caved in, accelerating its pending demise. This was the catalyst that spurred me to action.

The author stands next to the Furtwangler glacier

I had to go to Kilimanjaro soon to behold this ice cube before the last of its ice melted and flowed downstream, ending up as irrigation water for cultivated coffee plantations in Moshi township. And here I was now, touching it, feeling its surface, knowing that Kilimanjaro’s glaciers, for the time being, are holding on to existence.

The trudge up the remaining 800 feet of scree was a challenge, done with legs that felt like lead pipes and a brain clouded in drunken stupor. At the summit, the famous sign was limping and covered with bumper stickers. All of us were dazed and filled with a quiet sense of achievement. At that altitude, all I was thinking about was getting down to lower altitudes to relieve a pounding headache. The sun was shining, but at that moment, at the apex of the biggest adventure of my life, I was dreaming not of melting glaciers and over-crowding, but instead was lost in a daydream of the tropical white sands and coconut palms of Zanzibar.

How long the glaciers of Kilimanjaro continue to paint the summit with heavenly white is a question that should concern us all. Not because the mountain’s terrific height has been written about in descriptive narratives and dreamed about by countless adventurers, but because it’s a harbinger of greater environmental devastation looming on the horizon in a changing world of gas-guzzling automobiles and a society dominated by industrial progress. But at what price? The loss of Africa’s ethereal glaciers for one.

Dan Hall is a photo-journalist living in Sacramento, California

REFERENCES

- World Data Center for Paleoclimatology

- Kilimanjaro Data from University of Massachusetts Geosciences

- United Nations Environmental Program - Kilimanjaro Data

SERIES HYBRID CAR BASIC CONVERSION (top view)

Elec. motor to existing drive train generator on side of truck bed batteries on undercarriage (elec=R, batt=G, diesel=O)

Hybrid cars, which combine the power of an electric motor with a gasoline engine, are often presented as a transitional technology that will eventually be supplanted by fuel cell cars. This argument rests on an assumption which may or may not be valid - that on-board hydrogen, used to create electricity using fuel cells - is a better electricity storage medium than batteries. Examining this assumption reveals some strong challenges to the idea that batteries are going to go away, or that hydrogen fuel cells are the ultimate vehicle technology.

The first thing to understand is that hydrogen - at least green and renewable hydrogen - generally requires electricity to exist. While hydrogen can be extracted from some crops, it is impossible to grow enough crops to supply the world with clean hydrogen energy. To extract hydrogen from fossil fuel may result in cleaner energy production than simply burning the fossil fuel, but fossil fuel isn’t renewable. The only way hydrogen, theoretically, can be supplied in the quantities necessary for it to become the primary fuel used in the world is to manufacture hydrogen via electrolysis. This is the process whereby electricity and water are combined to separate the hydrogen from the water.

In all its forms, therefore, hydrogen is a fuel that’s manufactured from other fuels, either biomass, fossil fuel, or electricity. In this sense hydrogen is similar to electricity, since electricity also requires some other fuel to create it.

When one considers hydrogen-powered cars, one must ask where all the electricity is going to come from to produce all the hydrogen. One must also ask whether or not hydrogen is a better carrier to store electricity than the common battery. The problem with batteries isn’t their expense - fuel cells cost orders of magnitude more than batteries do. Moreover, the problem with batteries isn’t their efficiency storing electricity - a battery will discharge to an electric motor 90% of the electricity used to charge it. If that same electricity were used to electrolyse hydrogen, at least 30% of the energy would be lost, and if that hydrogen were then ran through an on-board fuel cell to power an electric motor, another 40% of the energy would be lost. That is, if you put 100 kilowatt-hours into a battery, you’ll get 90 kilowatt-hours back to power your motor. If on the other hand, you put 100 kilowatt-hours into electrolysing hydrogen, then in-turn convert that hydrogen back into electricity to power your motor, you will only have 42 kilowatt-hours available from your original 100. For storing electricity, a battery is more than twice as efficient as a fuel cell.

SERIES HYBRID CAR ADVANCED PROTOTYPE (top view)

Four powerful in-wheel motors independent 360 degree steering (elec=R, batt=G, diesel=O)

So why don’t we use all this technology to manufacture cars powered exclusively by batteries? The answer is batteries weigh too much, but this is changing. Typical lead-acid batteries get about 60 watt-hours to the kilogram. The newer nickel metal hydride batteries used to power hybrid cars get up to 120 watt-hours to the kilogram. Still further advanced lithium-ion batteries are approaching 200 watt-hours to the kilogram. This means that whatever range an electric car may have had using lead-acid batteries can now be doubled, or even tripled.

Advances in battery technology spurred by hybrid vehicle development may lead to the hybrid car not giving way to a fuel cell car, but, at least for many applications, to a 100% electric car. It isn’t like this hasn’t been tried before. General Motor’s EV-1 is a legendary example of an electric car that was ahead of its time. This vehicle had a range of 100 miles on a charge, and it had a top speed on 180 MPH! The car was equipped with a governor to keep the drivers from going that fast. When GM made the heartbreaking decision to discontinue the EV-1, it looked like electric cars would go the way of the steam locomotive. But with advances in battery technology, electric cars are making a comeback.

Today there are hybrid car owners who are making their hybrid cars capable of being plugged in. Other tinkerers are adding additional batteries to their hybrid cars. But why not go 100% electric? Just think - no twin drive train for the gas engine and the electric motor, no transmission, and a far less complex power-management system. Why wouldn’t someone want to just come home and plug their car in? No more gas stations. No more expensive gas.

HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO DRIVE A 100% ELECTRIC CAR?

At $.06 US per KWh, a battery-powered car costs $.02 per mile on grid electricity

As the table shows, not only are batteries very efficient ways to store electricity, but electric motors are very efficient ways to convert electricity to traction. Unlike internal combustion engines, which at best might convert 35% of the energy in gasoline into horsepower, an electric motor will convert 90% of the electrical input into horsepower. Since a kilowatt of output is equivalent to 1.341 horsepower of output, it is possible to calculate how a given amount of grid electricity - expressed in kilowatt-hours - will be available in the form of “horsepower-hours” to power a vehicle.

In the example above, the average car requires 20 horsepower to drive at a speed of 50 miles-per-hour on a level surface. On this basis, the average car requires 370 watt-hours of power to go one mile. At $10 per kilowatt-hour, it only costs you 3.7 cents to travel one mile. Compare this to an economy sedan that gets 30 miles per gallon. At $3.00 per gallon gasoline, it will cost nearly three times as much, $.10 per mile, to drive this car using gasoline. And at night when electric cars are being charged, electricity rates are often much lower than $.10 per kilowatt-hour. It is possible to drive an electric car for as little as $.02 per mile! This arbitrage between the cost per mile of gasoline power vs. the cost per mile of electrical power is an awesome opportunity, but only one that can be exploited by battery-powered cars, which can convert 90% of grid electricity into power going into the motor, compared to the electrolyser / fuel cell combination, which only can deliver 42% of grid electricity into power going into the motor.

ELECTRIC CAR RANGE WITH A 1,000 POUND BATTERY PACK

At only 100 watt-hours per KG, 1,000 lbs. of batteries gets 123 miles

Advances in battery technology are inevitable, as hybrid cars enter the mainstream of automotive technology. Toyota is planning on manufacturing, per year, over one million hybrid cars by 2010. Other manufacturers are following suit. At the least, vehicle batteries are going to get cheaper, more temperature tolerant, longer lasting, and cleaner to recycle and reprocess. At best, vehicle batteries, such as the lithium ion batteries, will enter mass production, allowing 200+ watt-hour per kilogram batteries to power electric cars. Weight as a core problem for electric cars will begin to disappear entirely if lithium ion batteries ever enter mass production.

In the meantime, it’s safe to say nickel metal hydride batteries are here to stay, and they are becoming increasingly available, durable, and cheap. The EV-1 had a battery pack that weighed 1,600 pounds. This is quite a payload. Using nickel metal hydride batteries, the battery payload can be reduced to 1,000 pounds, concentrated along the center spine of the car. Assuming 100 watt-hours per kilogram, which is easily attainable using today’s nickel metal hydride batteries, such a car fully charged would have 45 kilowatt-hours available to power the motor. Assuming 2.7 miles per kilowatt-hour, a car with a 1,000 pound battery payload at 100 watt-hours per kilogram of batteries will have a range of 123 miles. Is this great? No. Is this enough to get to work and back? At two cents per mile, you bet it is, and all you do is plug the car in at night. No more gas stations.

SERIES HYBRID CAR ADVANCED PROTOTYPE (side view)

photovoltaic skin optimally aerodynamic (elec=R, batt=G, diesel=O)

The biggest problem with electric cars, unlike gasoline powered cars - or hydrogen-powered cars, for that matter - is the time it takes to recharge the batteries. This is why gasoline-electric hybrids are getting an early foothold in the battle for the car of the future. When a gas/electric hybrid’s batteries run out of juice, the car can still limp along, powered solely by the gasoline engine. This is also why hybrid mileage is somewhat misleading. The more battery power is used, the better the mileage. For stop and go, low speed driving, the gasoline engine can divert energy to recharging the batteries faster than they’re being depleted. On extended runs at high speeds, or up hills, however, the gasoline engine must use all its energy to power the car, assisted by the battery-powered electric motor. This drains the batteries and turns the hybrid, basically, into an underpowered gas-powered car that has to carry a lot of dead weight. In these scenarios, mileage plummets. In a nutshell, the hybrid car has a lot of the same weaknesses as a battery-powered car, except it won’t leave you stranded when the batteries run low, just hobbled.

The idea that a 100% battery-powered car isn’t a viable vehicle solution because of its limited range, however, is to ignore the duty cycle that the vast majority of vehicle trips entails - a short range errand or commute. Most American families have two cars. Why wouldn’t it make sense - particularly at two-cents per mile - for one of those two cars be a 100% electric car?

If an electric car is defined as a vehicle that derives 100% of its horsepower from an electric motor, there are many ways to supplement the cars range. For example, a hybrid car typically depends on two engines to power the vehicle, an electric motor combined with a gasoline engine usually between 40-60 horsepower. But what if a gasoline engine, perhaps a highly efficient biodiesel engine, were used to power an onboard generator and was completely disconnected from the drive train?

RANGE ADDED WITH AN ONBOARD DIESEL GENERATOR

An on-board 20 horsepower generator doubles the range of batteries

This is the case for the serial hybrid. An ultra-efficient, steady-RPM clean diesel motor – turning an electric generator - running whenever the car was operating, could recharge on-board batteries at a rate at or near the amount they’re depleted. If only a ten horsepower generator were used, assuming a generator efficiency of 90%, then for every hour on the road, 18 miles of range would be added. Using the example above, a car with a 1,000 lb. battery pack has a range of 123 miles per charge; at 60 mph the car has extended its range another 47 miles (or so), which means that now the car can go 170 miles on a charge - with a few gallons of biodiesel. Remember, this engine is less than one fourth the size of the already tiny gas engines in hybrid cars.

If in your serial-hybrid car – where a diesel powered generator powers a battery-pack that powers an electric motor - you use a 20 horsepower diesel powered on-board generator, the range becomes very practical. Running a 20 horsepower generator, still a very small engine, will allow you to add 36 miles of range for every hour your battery-powered car is driven. Now you can drive your car 250 miles on a charge. Such a trip would require four gallons of gas and 45 kilowatt-hours of grid electricity. At $3.00 per gallon & .10 per kilowatt-hour, your combined-fuel cost per mile would be about five cents.

The advanced electric car can be built using advanced technology and materials - a lightweight ultra-strong frame, aerodynamic exoskeleton, in-wheel motors with independent 360 degree wheel rotation in all four wheels, driver control by wire, autopilot, lithium ion batteries, photovoltaic sides and windows, the works.

SERIES HYBRID CAR BASIC CONVERSION (side view)

Generic photovoltaic flat-panels placed on cover to truck bed. (elec=R, batt=G, diesel=O)

But a practical electric car can also be built by converting a small gasoline pickup truck, removing the gas engine and replacing it with an electric one. The transmission could be replaced by a single-speed reduction box that would last forever. In the bed of the pickup a 10-20 horsepower diesel generator could be bolted on, to power a battery-pack which would fill much of the rest of the bed of the pickup. Additional batteries could be installed on racks riding on the car’s undercarriage starting where the gas tank is removed. The top of the bed of the pickup would have a flat hood covered completely with photovoltaic panels, enough to add scores of miles per day of range to the battery pack. You would have a commuting truck you could refuel with either a plug into the wall, a pump at the gas station, or parking in the sun.

Entrepreneurs, investors, electrical engineers, auto-mechanics: All you need are used gasoline cars, electric motors and batteries. Who will make the electric car that refuels in the sun?

REFERENCES

- Electric Motor Efficiency

- Internal Combustion Engine Efficiency

- Diesel Engine Efficiency

- Average Horsepower Utilization

- How to Build an Electric Car

- Electric Cars: Battery, Hybrid & Fuel-Cell Cars (Amazon Affiliate)

The Ancient Middle Kingdom Awakens

Editor’s Note: China and India both have over a billion citizens. Each of these colossal countries by itself holds nearly a fifth of all humanity within its borders.
But although India and China are nearly equal in their massive populations, China’s economy is more than twice that of India’s. China’s economic clout in the world is being felt as never before, and right behind China is India - together nearly 2.5 billion people!

The rising energy consumption of China and India is raising the ante for energy producers to the tune of ten quadrillion BTUs every few years. These rapidly industrializing, massive nations are turning the global energy economy on its ears.

To bestride the other half of the world are the western superpowers of America and Europe. Just considering the USA and the European Community, you have barely a quarter as many people enjoying nearly ten times the overall wealth of India and China combined. Per person these westerners consume twice as much water and over six times as much energy.

THE BILLIONS AND THE BUCKS

Key Variables about the Most Populous & the Wealthiest Nations

-

But in terms of efficiently creating wealth from resource use, the USA and EU have actually increased their lead over India and China. How much energy it takes to produce a dollar of GNP - “Energy/GNP,” or “BTUs per dollar of GNP,” to be precise - is a key measure of how quickly a country is adopting clean technology, since only efficient energy use can cause a country to experience more prosperity without using proportionally more energy. Clean technology consumes fewer resources and creates less pollution per unit of wealth created.

In the USA and the European community the number of BTUs per dollar of GNP have lowered 18% in the last ten years, from 9,300 in the mid-1990’s down to 7,600 BTUs per dollar of GNP today. China and India have only improved 9% in the the same period, from 41,000 to 38,000 BTUs per dollar of GNP. Both east and west are converting energy into wealth more efficiently, but the lead held by the west is increasing. Clearly the technology-rich western nations have much still to offer the east. Today the USA and EU convert energy into wealth nearly five times as efficiently as India and China.

The wealth and technology of the fully-industrialized western nations can help countries like China and India to leapfrog the west. Clean technology is energy efficient and economical as well, especially using modern technology. The economic development potential of clean, modern energy and water technology is a bright and cooperative path for China, India, the USA and European Community to lead the world in sponsoring. - Ed “Redwood” Ring

For 2.5 billion Chinese & Indians to equal the per-capita wealth of the USA and European Community, without more efficiently converting energy into wealth, energy production in the world would have to triple.

For the last twenty-five years, China has charted a bold course of economic reforms.

In doing so China has achieved mixed, but often remarkable results given the development challenges it faces. Reported average annual GDP growth of over nine percent has improved living standards for hundreds of millions of Chinese people to a level unmatched in any point of Chinese history. China now plays a key role in the supply and demand of many global commodity markets including steel, cement, and oil. If sustained, China’s development will likely create the world’s largest economy, as measured in purchasing power parity, in about two or three decades. Per capita wealth, however, will remain far below OECD levels. Enormous opportunities and challenges await commercial, governmental and social interests across the globe as China develops.

Chinese energy demand has surged since the arrival of the new millennium, when a new round of investment-driven economic growth began. Preliminary Chinese data indicate that the energy elasticity of demand (the growth rate of energy consumption divided by that of GDP) surpassed 1.5 in 2004. In other words, for every one percent increase in GDP, energy demand grew by over 1.5 percent. The shift reverses China’s recent historical trend of maintaining energy elasticity below 1.0. For most developing countries, including India, Brazil, and Indonesia, energy elasticities greater than 1.0 are normal, but for China it is a groundbreaking change.

Many analysts rightly question the validity of Chinese economic and energy statistics; GDP is likely underreported right now, although from the late 1970s until the end of the 1990s, it was probably overstated. Likewise, Chinese energy consumption, coal in particular, is tracked poorly. Coal use from 1996-1999 is now regarded as massively underestimated by analysts both inside and outside of China due to untracked output from small coal mines. One of the contributing factors behind China’s current energy crunch is indeed these poorly tracked energy statistics: good energy policy and energy planning require accurate data.

Despite the problems with data quality, the general trend raises concern. Is this new energy-economy relationship in China temporary or does it indicate a deeper structural change within the economy? The difference could have a profound impact on future global energy markets, energy security, and environmental quality. Almost no authoritative research has been published to explain the surging elasticity. A clearer understanding of what is happening in Chinese energy markets may never be uncovered, but more research into the new energy-economic relationship would benefit the international community and China.

China surpassed Japan in late 2003 to become the world’s second largest petroleum consumer. In 2004, Chinese demand grew 15 percent annually to 6.37 million barrels per day (b/d), about one-third the level in the United States. Domestic crude output in China has grown only very slowly over the past five years. At the same time, oil demand has surged, fueled by rapid industrialization. Imports of crude oil grew alarmingly in 2003 and 2004 to meet demand, increasing nearly 75 percent from 1.38 million barrels per day (b/d) in 2002 to 2.42 million b/d in 2004. Imports now account for 40 percent of Chinese oil demand.

International Energy Agency

As described in the International Energy Agency’s “December 2004 Oil Market Report”, a significant driver of recent oil demand growth in China — perhaps on the order of 250-300 thousand barrels per day — has been the need for oilfired back-up power generation in the face of serious electricity shortages. Other contributing factors are the rise in personal car ownership and growing industrial petrochemical needs, which are likely to continue growing fairly steadily. However, the amount of fuel oil and diesel used for back-up power generation will likely decline, as China closes the generation shortage by installing new coal, natural gas, hydro, and nuclear power plants. It has also promised to institute tougher new demand-side efficiency measures.

Chinese policymakers and state-owned oil companies have embarked on a multi-pronged approach to improve oil security by diversifying suppliers, building strategic oil reserves, purchasing equity oil stakes abroad, and enacting new policies to lower demand.

Over the past decade, Chinese crude imports have come from a much wider and more diverse set of suppliers.

In 1993, almost all of China’s crude imports came from Indonesia, Oman, and Yeman. By 2004, Saudi Arabia was China’s largest supplier accounting for 14 percent of imports, with Oman, Angola, Iran, Russia, Vietnam, and Yemen together supplying another 60 percent, and the remainder which came from a long list of other suppliers.

China’s 10th Five-Year Plan (2001-2005) called for the construction and use of strategic petroleum reserves by 2005. Construction has begun at one of four sites slated to store government-owned supplies. Chinese officials plan to gradually fill up to 100 million barrels of storage by 2008 (equivalent to 35 days of imports then). Original plans called for boosting stocks to 50 days imports in 2010, but this may be slightly delayed. On the other hand, the recent surge in imports has led Chinese policymakers to consider an even more aggressive long-term plan for 90 days of stocks, perhaps by 2020. Western governments have shared experiences with China on stockpiling practices since 2001. Chinese officials have stated their intent to slowly fill their new stocks depending on global conditions. They have demonstrated less concern, however, in coordinating release of their future stocks as part of a larger global system. In other words, China may be more inclined to use strategic stocks to influence prices even without the threat of severe supply disruptions.

Chinese state-owned oil companies have accelerated their hunt for overseas oil assets as part of the country’s larger “going out” strategy. Growing foreign exchange holdings fuel the general outward drive of Chinese companies. While a significant number of oil-related announcements have been made in the press since 2001, much of this activity is still waiting to be finalized. The lack of transparency over investment amounts, production sharing contract details, and proven petroleum reserves may create a more successful image of Chinese companies than is actually the case.

Until recently, Chinese companies seemed most comfortable operating in locations not dominated by the oil majors. This meant countries like Sudan, Angola, and Iran. For example, over half of Chinese overseas oil production currently comes from Sudan. Activity has picked up in other areas recently, however, including Russia, Kazakhstan, Ecuador, Australia, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia to name just a few. Chinese companies appear to be improving their ability to purchase assets without overpaying, as earlier reports suggested, but this conclusion is only supported with anecdotal information.

China National Petroleum & Gas Company

In 2003, Chinese state-owned oil companies pumped 0.22 million b/d of equity oil. The figure is projected to rise by 8 percent annually thru 2020 when it hits 1.4 million b/d. Leading the drive among Chinese state-owned companies, China National Petroleum and Gas Company (CNPC) claims to have petroleum assets in 30 countries. It plans to spend $18 billion in overseas oil and gas development between now and 2020. Most of CNPC’s overseas production currently comes from Sudan, Kazakhstan, and Indonesia. Many speculated that CNPC would take a share in the restructured assets of Yukos; rumors in late January 2005 foresaw a $6 billion “loan” to Rosneft for long-term oil purchases, but no equity investment.

A disappointment for China during 2004 included the Russian decision to build an oil pipeline to Nakhodka with Japanese contributions, rather than to Daqing in northeast China with CNPC’s participation. Discussions are still ongoing regarding a potential spur line that would feed China’s northeast. In contrast, China and Kazakhstan made rapid progress in negotiating and starting construction on a cross-border pipeline that will initially deliver 0.2 million b/d of crude and products to Xinjiang province, and possibly later doubling to 0.4 million b/d. China appears to have made a geopolitical decision to secure its oil supplies with this line as costs would probably not pass a commercial test.

The China Petroleum Company (SINOPEC) is newer to the international game than CNPC and hopes to start pumping smaller quantities of equity oil in 2005 from activities in Yemen, Iran, and Azerbaijan. Perhaps the largest story in 2004 was SINOPEC’s agreement in Iran to spend $70 billion over 25 years to purchase LNG cargoes and participate in upstream oil activities there. Many uncertainties remain, however, before the investment is sealed.

China National Overseas Oil Company

The China National Overseas Oil Company (CNOOC), the most progressive and outwardly-oriented of the Chinese state-owned oil companies, has been very active in Australia and Indonesia. In 2004, it succeeded in securing significant natural gas stakes in both countries. CNOOC surprised the global community in early 2005 when it was rumored to want to purchase Unocal for roughly $13 billion. Little additional information has appeared in the press since then. These types of announcements tend to create an image of Chinese companies wearing bigger shoes than they actually do.

In summary, Chinese companies are increasingly active abroad and appear to be improving their business skills. They have not yet demonstrated that they can improve long-term oil security in a cost effective manner, however, as other Asian state-owned oil companies have learned.

Per capita oil consumption in China is only one-fourteenth the level in the US, indicating that strong growth could continue for many years. The transport sector in China will likely experience the strongest demand for oil over the mid to long-term. Currently, there are roughly 24 million vehicles in China, with projections anticipating 90-140 million by 2020. This would push transport demand from 33 percent of total Chinese petroleum demand to about 57 percent (from 1.6 million b/d in 2004 to roughly 5.0 million b/d in 2020).

To partially address this problem, China enacted new automobile efficiency standards in late 2004. In Phase I, running from mid-2005 until January 2008, no increase in fleet fuel consumption will be allowed without penalties. Phase II would then begin and require a 10 percent reduction in fleet fuel consumption.

Another measure that has gained renewed attention is the imposition of a vehicle fuel tax. This policy would ban all road use fees instituted at the local level and replace them with a nationwide tax ranging from 30-100 percent of the current price of vehicle fuel. Gasoline prices in most Chinese cities, for example, are currently the equivalent of about $1.60 per gallon. The fuel tax, if enacted, would raise gasoline prices to $2-$3 per gallon. The initiative has been discussed for years but lacked uniform support from policymakers. It has gained new steam over the past year with the surge in imported crude volumes.

WORLD ENERGY OUTLOOK

Without measures to limit demand or create alternative fuels, Chinese oil consumption appears set to grow rapidly for the foreseeable future. “The World Energy Outlook 2004″, an authoritative volume, forecasts Chinese petroleum demand in 2030 at just under 14 million bpd, about one-third less than current demand in the United States. China’s import dependency will continue to grow, however, reaching 75 percent. In 2030, China would be importing as much oil as the United States did in 2004. China itself forecasts a lower figure in the future, but analsysts will wait until the necessary policies are in place and in effect before anyone will adjust the number down. Analysts increasingly believe there are enough worldwide petroleum reserves to meet global demand through 2030 and beyond. More important uncertainty relates to marshalling the necessary upstream investments, maintaining stable petroleum output in major producer countries, mid and downstream infrastructure among consumers, and dealing with environmental issues like climate change.

Like a giant dragonfly hovering above the waters, another drilling rig looms in the Pacific sunshine

China has taken major steps since 1997 to boost natural gas use, mainly as a way to improve urban air quality.

But gas was largely ignored for most of China’s modern history and new market-oriented measures are needed to fully encourage natural gas use.

Domestic gas production currently stands at 40 billion cubic meters (BCM) and accounts for roughly 3 percent of the country’s total energy demand. Chinese policymakers envision gas use rising substantially through 2020, when demand would reach 200 BCM and account for 10 percent of total energy demand. Baseline estimates are currently less optimistic of future gas markets in China, but the potential for dramatic change in China cannot be discounted. With the right policy framework, gas use could be significantly higher than even Chinese government forecasts.

Chinese policymakers increasingly view natural gas as the fuel of choice for its environmental, security, and industrial advantages. But the gas industry is in its infancy and many barriers must be overcome before this relatively clean energy source can make a significant impact.

Why is China promoting the development of the gas sector, what are the challenges it faces, and how will these barriers be addressed?

China is taking new measures to promote the use of natural gas for three reasons. First, natural gas used in place of coal can help China address environmental problems that have become urgent economic and social issues. Replacing coal with natural gas basically eliminates emissions of sulphur oxides and particulates, the two most serious local and regional pollutants. Gas also offers steep reductions in nitrogen oxide and greenhouse gas emissions.

Second, natural gas can help China diversify its energy resources and address growing concerns over energy security. Imported crude oil now accounts for 40 percent of annual demand and will likely continue to grow rapidly. Additionally, coal demand has soared since 2002, resulting in localized transportation bottlenecks. China could help alleviate these energy security concerns by increasing reliance on natural gas.

Finally, natural gas has the potential to accelerate modernization of the country’s industrial facilities. Most of China’s industry is based on coal-burning technology, which is inherently less efficient than gasfired equipment. Modern natural gas boilers, for example, convert about 92 percent of the energy contained in natural gas to useable heat. Coal boilers on the other hand, waste 20 percent or more of the input energy in the process. Similarly, advanced combined-cycle gas turbines used to generate electricity are nearly 60 percent efficient, while coal-fired steam turbines convert only about 40 percent of the energy in coal into useful electricity.

Important gas projects have been launched to support China’s ambitious development targets for natural gas. An important 3,900 kilometre, $24 billion ‘West-East Pipeline’ started commercial operation in late 2004. Throughput will slowly ramp up to 12 BCM in 2007 as downstream projects and distribution networks are completed. The fact that CNPC completed the pipeline one year ahead of schedule, and without participation from its planned investment partners (Shell, Exxon-Mobil, and Gazprom), is testament to the drive and ability of Chinese energy companies. Although many outside observers question the economics of the pipeline, similar doubts were raised when China built its first gas pipeline to Beijing. The economics were shaky at the time, but that line is now oversubscribed and a second line will begin delivering gas to the capital in 2006.

DEVELOPING THE YANGTZEE RIVER BASIN

Barges and cruise ships venturing well beyond the locks at the Three Georges will reach points far further inland; several gigawatts will stream from the dam; cubic kilometer volumes of river water will flow to China’s arid north in new canals. Photos: Michel Dalle

Two LNG terminals are also under construction in southeastern China, with perhaps a dozen more under discussion and consideration. LNG imports in China became an extremely hot topic in 2004 as coal prices rose substantially, along with incomes and air pollution. If even half of the LNG terminals currently under discussion are built, China could be importing 30-35 BCM of natural gas by 2015. Talks continue on international natural gas pipelines with Russia and Kazakhstan as well, but progress has been slow. A joint feasibility study funded by Russia, China, and South Korea that would deliver 20 BCM of Russian gas to China and 10 BCM to South Korea is currently under evaluation. This pipeline may also have been ahead of its time, but Russia’s Gazprom blocked any further discussion of the deal.

Important hurdles exist for natural gas market development, including: -Natural gas is expensive compared to coal if environmental costs are not included; -China is not believed to be endowed with abundant and cheap gas reserves; -Known supplies are often located far from the main centers of demand;

Gas supply infrastructure is fragmented and huge investment is needed to finance its expansion; China lacks a legal and policy framework to encourage investment in the gas sector, and: There is a lack of knowledge over how to best develop natural gas technology and markets. Perhaps the weakest link in China’s current natural gas chain is the perception of high costs that results in weak demand for gas. Without stronger market pull for gas, the entire natural gas chain will remain weak, no matter how much the government tries to development the market by administrative dictate.

Jiang Zemin President of the People’s Republic of China

Steps that can be taken to improve the energy outlook in China include:

1. Publishing a “White Paper” on natural gas policy as part of a coherent national energy policy framework;

–To realize the ambitious target for gas market development in China, there is a need for the government to go beyond the “project-by-project” approach by publishing a comprehensive national natural gas policy. Such a policy could address issues of gas exploration, development, distribution, pricing, marketing as well as imports. It should be part of a coherent national energy policy, as China’s gas industry is intertwined with the coal and the electrical power industry, and with environmental policy. Through the elaboration of the “White Paper”, the government can make a clear and formal statement of its policy objectives and long-term strategy for natural gas in China. The process of elaboration and consultation is critically important: the government should consult as many actors as possible within and outside the central administration.

2. Establishing a legal basis for natural gas;

–Preparation of a national natural gas law is an urgent priority. Such a framework would provide a clear legal expression of the government’s policy and strategy for gas industry development and the ground rules for operation of the gas industry. Almost every country where a natural gas industry has been established, whether based on indigenous resources or imports, has adopted a gas law in the early stages of market development. Adopting such a law would help create a more stable environment for investment and operation, reduce uncertainty and investment risk, and consequently lower the cost of capital. It should codify the roles, rights and responsibilities of different players as well as regulatory principles in the industry to reduce conflicts of interest and to ensure a level playing field for all. It should provide the legal basis for short-term gas market development activities, such as gas contract negotiations and enforcement. It should also be flexible enough to cope with market evolution over the medium and longterm.

3. Making environmental protection a component of energy pricing;

–Theoretically, environmental protection, in particular the reduction of local atmospheric pollution, is the key driving force for increased gas use in China. However, important challenges remain in turning this theoretical driver into a real market mover. China has put in place a whole set of environmental laws and regulations on air pollution, but a lack of adequate means for enforcing implementation makes most of them ineffective. In power generation and industrial boilers, in addition to strengthening the enforcement of existing regulations, the use of economic instruments must be extended. To start with, the price penalty per ton of emissions (SO2, NOx, particulates) should fully reflect the market value of emission permits and take into consideration the health damage to the public. Many OECD countries include the price of environmental externalities in power generation, at least in planning exercises to determine the best choices for future power plant additions.

4. Creating a central administration for energy;

–China has, until very very recently, lacked a central body to address the country’s overall energy strategy. Since the abolition of the Ministry of Energy in 1992, China did not have a single central-government entity in charge of energy policy and regulatory matters. Energy sector responsibilities were spread across several ministries. As the government is strongly committed to removing the policy-making and regulatory functions from state-owned companies, it needs to strengthen its own resources for governing them. This recommendation was recently implemented by the Chinese, although the newly formed Energy Bureau within the National Development and Reform Commission does not have enough staff or resources to perform all the necessary functions. There are roughly 30 employees at the Energy Bureau in China, while most OECD countries would have hundreds, if not thousands, of employees to create the policy framework and oversight needed to steer a modern energy industry. Given the current shortages of electricity and coal, Chinese planners are again considering restructuring of the central energy planning body.

Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development

China’s rapid economic growth is creating dislocations both at home and, increasingly, around the globe. These changes create both challenges and opportunities. China’s rapid growth over the past few years should also be kept in perspective: China’s 1.3 billion people currently consume only one-half the energy as the 290 million citizens in the US, and Chinese oil demand is only one-third as large. While Chinese policymakers have done a laudable job of steering economic reform, a huge number of challenges — from population imbalances and environmental pollution to corruption and AIDS — await solutions before the country can raise individual standards of living to anywhere near current OECD levels. The international community must engage China in order to minimize the challenges and maximize the opportunities that lie ahead.

About the Author:
Jeffery Logan is the Senior Energy Analyst and China Program Manager for the International Energy Agency. The text of this article is from his February 3rd, 2005 testimony on the EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook for 2005, delivered before the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

In the beginning there was a dairy farm

In recent years demand for tropical hardwoods has increased exponentially.

This is due to rising populations as well as increasing standards of living. But tropical hardwoods have always been in strong demand. As building materials they are resilient, renewable, and aesthetically pleasing. India, a nation with a population of 1.1 billion, prizes tropical hardwoods such as teak but must import the wood, since they have lost over 90% of their forests. China, another rapidly industrializing nation with a population of 1.3 billion, also must import most of their tropical hardwoods. Throughout Asia there is a voracious demand for tropical hardwoods that is almost entirely dependent on imports. Elsewhere, in Europe and the USA, wealthy consumers pay a premium for products made from tropical hardwoods.

To meet this burgeoning demand, forests have been clear-cut throughout the equatorial regions of the world. From Indonesia to Africa to the Americas, deforestation has robbed the world of nearly half of the original tropical forests. Often this deforestation has been fueled by multinational timber companies who came in, cut everything in sight, and moved on. In their footsteps came farmers, then ranchers, and all too often, deserts, as the unprotected topsoil washed away.

To counter deforestation and to help fill demand for tropical hardwoods, enterprising companies have begun to reforest denuded tropical landscapes with tree plantations. These monocultural tree farms have flourished, but their efficacy is limited. Only 2% of total hardwoods sold come from plantations, even as advances in equipment have facilitated greater harvests of tropical timber than ever from the rainforests. And while these tree farms do help stabilize topsoil and sequester carbon, as monocultures they cannot support the diversity of wildlife that the original forests could support, and as monocultures they will eventually rob the soil of nutrients and will become dependent on massive inputs of fertilizer. Monocultural tree farming is not sustainable.

Fred Morgan riding among newly planted teak

Permanent, profitable reforestation can only occur if monocultural tree farms are established as transitional crops with mixed tropical hardwoods replacing them.

A mixed forest of mature tropical hardwoods, cut scientifically on a rotation where “corridors of light” are created as trees are selectively removed, mimics the natural ecosystem of the original forest. Properly managed, understorage of smaller trees and plants is not only permitted along with the timber trees, but helps the overall ecosystem health. This type of forestry is sustainable and profitable. Selecting a specific pioneer species of tree to serve as the monocultural tree crop as the terrain is transitioned from cleared land to forest is a necessary intermediate step. This transitional tree can immediately stabilize the soil and retain moisture, improving the quality of the land so diverse native trees can be reestablished. It can also provide income to finance the reforestation of the native trees.

In 2002, after extensive study and preparation, Finca Leola was established in the northern interior of Costa Rica with the intent of practicing this model for permanent, profitable reforestation. This enterprise, run by Fred Morgan, Amy Morgan, and Hector Ramirez, so far has acquired two plantations, both located in the inland areas northeast of Lake Arenal. How they have gone about establishing their tree plantations is a case study in what conscientious investors and consumers should look for when considering tropical hardwoods.

“Sometimes people think they can just stick a few trees in the ground and come back in 25 years to harvest them,” said Fred Morgan, describing an approach diametrically opposed to his own, “but nothing could be further from the truth.” In reality there is a huge amount of knowledge required to successfully farm trees, and ongoing maintenance is required as long as a tree plantation is intended to be productive.

The verdant countryside of Costa Rica

Central America is one of the best places on earth for growing tropical hardwoods.

Unlike most of Asia and Africa, the land of Central America is geologically young. The depth of the topsoil in Central America is measured in feet or even yards instead of inches. Areas that have been deforested in Central America are much easier to redeem, since it can take centuries for the topsoil to erode after the tree canopy is lost. In parts of the Amazon or Congo, by contrast, the soil is only inches thick and utterly dependent on an intact tree canopy to remain viable. Restoring forest in these areas is far more challenging.

For an optimally productive tropical tree farm, however, just locating in Central America isn’t enough. The transitional monocropped trees, such as teak, prefer very specific climates, altitudes, humidity, and soil type. The soils surrounding the volcanos of Costa Rica are generally more favorable for tree farming compared to the low-lying coastal areas, where the soils more resemble those of the Amazon.

Hopefully someday all the logs that make their way to the mill will be sustainably harvested

“First of all you must select suitable ground for the trees, which requires soil tests. Then you must select suitable trees for the land based on fertility, altitude, and slope.”

So says Antonio Rodriquez, a forestry engineer who has worked throughout Costa Rica and who has routinely consulted for Finca Leola, explaining some of the necessities of good forestry management. Rodriquez’s involvement with Finca Leola didn’t end with site selection, however. As one of the preeminent forestry engineers in Costa Rica, Rodriquez advises Finca Leola as to the ongoing care of the trees - determining when to prune and thin, watching for disease, and suggesting remedies - and helps interact with various government programs.

The first site Finca Leola selected, located near La Garita de Monterey, was a 67-hectare former dairy farm, located at an altitude of about 150 meters. The soil was deemed ideal for growing teak, which would then be transitioned to mixed forest. It quickly became clear the extra time spent selecting a site and testing the soil was worth it, as the trees grew much faster than all data indicated they should. Within two years most of the teak trees were over eight meters high, and Rodriguez currently predicts the first thinning will probably need to occur after only six years, instead of the standard eight years. At that point, the trees will be roughly nine inches in diameter, producing up to 7-inch-wide boards up to 20 feet long. Their plan calls for the teak to be thinned four times prior to final harvest, which they estimate to take place between 20 and 25 years after the original planting. Each time the teak is thinned, the wood is sold for lumber.

One year old teak pruned to guarantee straight trunks and quality wood

To monocrop tropical hardwoods correctly is expensive. Regular pruning up to the first 10 meters of the trunk is required to ensure quality wood.

This will help the tree grow straight and also will eliminate the knots that form deep into the tree when well-developed branches are present, distorting the grain of the wood. Until the trees are over about 10 meters in height, it is also necessary to regularly clear the undergrowth. After the trees get larger, this isn’t as important because the trees are well enough established to compete against the undergrowth, but it is always necessary to prevent creeping vines from climbing the trees.

The conditions in many of the teak groves all over Costa Rica are examples of poor plantation management. In addition to failure to prune and leaving the undergrowth to compete with the teak, the owners either didn’t thin at the appropriate time or thinned the best trees, leaving poor quality, twisted trees standing to grow larger.

The model Finca Leola is pioneering may not be unprecedented, but it is unfortunately quite rare. Those familiar with planting practices in Costa Rica are surprised to see the towering, native mother trees preserved among the teak fields of Finca Leola. The norm is to remove them to clear the way for straight rows of monocrop species. On the Finca Leola plantations, they are kept not only as food trees for wildlife but to produce some of the seedlings for the future forest.

Teak trees barely two years old, benefitting from excellent soil and excellent forest management

Finca Leola differs from traditional tree growers in their conviction that it’s not really reforestation if the end result is not a forest.

Normally, a failed tree among the rows of teak would be replanted with another teak tree. But Finca Leola plants various slower growing native species in these spots. These are selected for their diversity, their adaptability to the site, their ability to support wildlife, and their value as tropical hardwoods. They include almendro (which the endangered Great Green Macaw depends on), as well as ron ron, cristobal, corteza, ojoche, tempisque, and mahogany, among others. Because these trees grow slower than the teak, they don’t compete with it. These are the foundation trees of a future perpetual forest.

Finca Leola’s second plantation is located in Monte Cristo de Guatuso inside a government-designated biological corridor. Some 30 hectares located at an altitude of 350 meters, it is a former cattle ranch and contains considerable primary forest fringed by pioneer trees that have sprung up in the pastures. There are also some massive native trees of great value. Monte Cristo will be managed partially by filling in the pastures with native pioneer species such as laurel, roble coral, and pilon that then will be transitioned to mixed forest, and partially as an already established mixed forest. This section of mixed, mature trees will immediately begin having corridors of light created by sustainably cutting large native trees, then these cut zones will regenerate, sometimes with the help of selected plantings to increase diversity. As such, this plantation is and will remain a rich, intact ecosystem and a haven for wildlife.

The potential for reforestation using a transitional - and very profitable - tree farm to finance the establishment of a restored mixed forest ecosystem which itself can be managed profitably, is enhanced when others are allowed to participate by buying blocks of trees. Finca Leola has been able to expand their reforested areas more rapidly at the same time as they provide an opportunity for tree owners to not only realize an excellent return on investment, but also to participate in a forestry business that is systematically restoring ecosystems, instead of destroying them. For every block of 100 trees purchased, a tree owner converts 350 square meters of deforested land into perpetually protected rainforest.

Finca Leola

Projections provided by Finca Leola for their tree owners rely on conventional assumptions: a rate of timber growth of 26 cubic meters per hectare per year, a market price for teak of $350 per cubic meter, and a natural loss of 10%. Based on these assumptions, a $3,500 investment will return over 25 years a payback of $33,000, yielding a very healthy inflation-adjusted internal rate of return of 13.4%. In reality, the returns from an investment in tropical hardwoods may be far higher. Historically, the price of tropical hardwood has increased on average 6% per year over and above general inflation, due to the factors already mentioned, increasing demand and diminishing supply. If this trend holds over the next few decades, then a $3,500 investment in tropical hardwoods today will return over 25 years a payback of $116,500, yielding an astonishing internal rate of return of 21%.

Finca Leola is unusual in their commitment to use a monoculture like teak only as a transitional crop. But by the time the teak trees are completely harvested, where they were, a mixed forest of tropical hardwood trees will already be producing food and habitat for wildlife. Rodriguez points out that “often by removing only the best trees, we are practicing genetic erosion that destroys the forest just like soil erosion destroys the land.” In contrast, by removing only trees that are damaged, diseased, genetically defective, or at the end of their life cycle, the health of the forest is constantly improved. Many of these trees are so rare that even the poorer quality ones are quite valuable. By such sustainabe harvesting, a rich ecosystem is maintained, and funds are generated to pay for its maintenance and protection. Finca Leola’s forestry business model truly is one that allows profitable, permanent reforestation, something that if emulated, could bring back the forests of the world.

COSTA RICA’S PARKS & PROPOSED BIOCORRIDORS

Finca Leola’s tree farms (red dots) are located in the rich, deep soils of Costa Rica’s interior. The dark green on the map denotes existing parks; light green the proposed bio-corridor. (Scale: one pixel = one kilometer)

A Jatropha Nursery in Zambia

Jatropha curcus is unusual among tree crops.

Perhaps its most unusual feature is its modular construction. The dry fruits and seeds will remain on the tree for some time, before falling to the ground, especially under dry conditions. Benefits include but are not limited to:

Oil as raw material: Oil has a very high Saponification value and is being extensively used for making soap in some countries. Also, the oil is used as an illuminant as it burns without emitting smoke.

Medicinal plant: The latex of Jatropha curcas (VanaErand or RatanJyot) contains an alkaloid known as “jatrophine” which is believed to have anti-cancerous properties.

Raw material for dye: The bark of Jatropha curcas (VanaErand or RatanJyot) yields a dark blue dye which is used for colouring cloth, fishing nets and lines.

Soil enrichment: Jatropha curcas (VanaErand or RatanJyot) oil cake is rich in nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium and can be used as organic manure.

Feed: Jatropha leaves are used as food for the tusser silkworm.

In addition to these benefits, scientists at Perdue University in the U.S. and elsewhere are working in the extraction of usable pharmaceutical derivatives from Jatropha Curcas while others are attempting to grow non-toxic plants (Mexico).

Preliminary research indicates Jatropha may display certain Anti-Tumor properties, Anti Malarial properties and research is advancing related to HIV/AID’s and immune system response enhancement. There are other levels of use that can be exploited. Direct fermentation of seed cake and pulp delivers an organic fertilizer that has a high potential for export to developed countries.

It is in the field of Bio Diesel fuel, however, that Jatropha’s properties are the most exciting. At same power output, Jatropha curcas oil specific consumption and efficiencies are higher than those of diesel fuel. Tests conducted show that out of these various vegetable oils including copra, palm, groundnut, cottonseed, rapeseed, soya and sunflower - the lowest exhaust gas emissions were obtained with copra and Jatropha Curcas crude oil.

Over 50% of Africa’s land has the right climate for growing Jatropha

HOW MUCH LAND IN AFRICA IS SUITABLE FOR GROWING JATROPHA?

In a survey conducted by Dr. Guy Midgley, Chief Specialist Scientist of the Kirstenbosch Research Center of of the South African National Biodiversity Institute (Cape Town) over 1,080 million hectares land Africa could be termed prime growing regions for Jatropha Curcas on the African continent. A further 580 million hectares could be used making a total of 1,660 million hectares suitable for the growing of Jatropha Curcas.

On the map of Africa the dark areas represent prime Jatropha growing regions in Africa. These areas, comprising over 1,080 million hectares, or 10.8 million square kilometers, are ideal because the average annual rainfall exceeds 800 mm, and the minimum temperature of the coldest month is greater than 2 degrees centigrade.

The light green areas of the map are areas with average annual rainfall in excess of 300 mm, with the minimum temperature of the coldest month greater than 2 degrees centigrade. These areas, comprising over 580 million hectares, or 5.8 million square kilometers, are also viable regions for growing Jatropha.

HOW MUCH REVENUE PER HECTARE CAN JATROPHA GENERATE PER YEAR?

Jatropha Facts

Referring to the table, the yield per hectare per year is up to 8.0 tons of Jatropha seed, which contain over 30% oil. At $320 (US$) per ton, this will translate into sales of Jatropha crude oil of $768 per hectare per year. Of potentially equal or greater value is the yield from Jatropha seeds of glycerin. Up to 7% of Jatropha seeds are made up of glycerin, which sells for up to $2,000 per ton. This translates into glycerin sales of up to $1,120 per year per hectare, or total sales of up to $1,888 per year per hectare.

Editor’s note: In subsequent investigations we have not been able to corroborate the author’s claim of 8 tons per acre. Jatropha yields vary widely, but in no other example has such a high yield been reported.

Imagine, if only 3% of the land in Africa that is considered viable land to grow Jatropha was actually planted with Jatropha, with a yield of 8 tons per hectare per year and an oil content of 30% some 119 Million tons of Jatropha crude oil would be produced per year. The glycerin content at 7% of the 119 M tons would produce an additional 8.366 M tons. Glycerin is indeed a valuable by product.

In terms of annual revenues, if only 3% of the potential Jatropha growing regions in Africa were planted with Jatropha, based on a Jatropha crude oil price of $320 per ton and with glycerin selling at $2000 per ton a total sales value of $55 billion per year would be generated. Processing the crude oil into Bio Diesel would on average in Africa add a further 15% to the sales value. This sales value excludes other byproducts of Jatropha. Most African countries are oil dependent and foreign exchange expenditure would be reduced.

Jatropha farming could be an incredible contribution to economic development in Africa. Feasibility however is problematic due to the difficulty sourcing suitable financing. The two main reasons for failures to source funding are:

1) Land in many countries in Africa is not owned but leased. This effectively eliminates land being used as collateral by funders.

2) Start up agriculture projects are generally among the most difficult projects for which to obtain funding.

Moreover, financial models show that an assured supply of feed stock is required from a central area to ensure a viable project. Only when this is assured can out growers be considered to supplement the main supply chain. Projects where only marginal land is to be used will be very border line and unlikely to financially succeed. Good yields on marginal land are highly unlikely to be obtained.

Jatropha seedlings grown by Stancom Tobacco in Malawi

WHAT ARE CHALLENGES TO JATROPHA’S COMMERCIAL VIABILITY?

There are still some inherent problems with Jatropha and research work is still required. We are learning more and more about the properties of Jatropha. These potential problems include:

1) Jatropha oil is hydroscopic - absorbs water and needs nitrogen blanketing on steel tanks. One issue that is quite clear is because Jatropha is high in acid, it has the tendency to degrade quickly, particularly if not handled properly through the supply chain.

2) Right from the time of expelling, the oil needs to be kept in storage conditions that prevent undue degradation. Exposure to air and moisture must be minimized - hence the need for nitrogen blanketing on the tanks.

3) The range of fatty acids present in the various seeds will differ but the oil and biodiesel that is produced must be acceptable. However, this assumes that that oil is fully degummed. The degumming may well be more of a problem than making biodiesel!

4) The phospholipid, protein and phorbol ester contents in edible Jatropha seem to be quite different compared to these contents in non-edible Jatropha. It needs to determined if this affects the degumming method. The degumming removes lecithin and other related compounds, so if these are high than a modified degumming method may be needed. If the oil is properly dried after degumming and kept under nitrogen blanketing this may suffice. Biodiesel companies are investigating storage requirements and the oxidative stability of Jatropha.

5) Seeds degrade as soon as they are picked and so careful storage and handling is required. In the warm humid atmosphere in countries such as Ghana the degradation of seeds can be rapid. Even in the U.K. seed storage is a problem. Recently a U.K. importer had samples of rapeseed that had been harvested and stored in wet weather. The analysis showed that they had 28% of free fatty acid! The free fatty acid must not increase above 2%.

6) There has never been a highly commercial group handling Jatropha Curcas harvest and derivatives.

The BD-1 Group, located in Durban, South Africa, with a 12,000 hectare farm in Ghana, is an African pioneer in Jatropha cultivation

Rubber Nitrile tanks are perfect for container shipping as there is no exposure to the atmosphere or the air, this is because they are collapsible and always work in a vacuum. They can be fitted in a 20ft - 30 ton container. Each container would hold about 22.4 tons Jatropha Curcas crude oil. Their use would prevent the problem of water absorption.

World Wide manufactures of Bio Diesel processors are beginning to recognize the need for their units to be able to accept more than one variety of vegetable oil. The pre-processors, (de-gumming units) must be designed to be “multi disciplinary”. Commercial Bio Diesel processors are expensive and it is financially essential for feed stock to be available on a continuous basis. Harvesting is seasonal and storage time has to be minimal due to the free fatty acids having to be no more than 2%.

South African National Biodiversity Institute

Feasibility studies ideally need to be done but this is far too time consuming. The bio-diesel entrepreneur would need to take some statistical chances. By growing at the same time alternative crops to Jatropha curcus the problems may be somewhat reduced.

It makes sense that a bio-diesel entrepreneur should focus on the promotion of partnerships and in-house activities that support multiple crop development and improvement activities as well as seeking the add on values that are available.

Climate change will grossly increase African’s poverty levels. A Bio Diesel 1 Group initiative introduced Stancom Tobacco to the benefits of growing Jatropha curcas for conversion into Bio Diesel. The photos in this article show the Stancom Tobacco’s nurseries in Zambia. The harvested seed will be collected by BD1 Malawi and processed into crude oil.

EMAILS TO THE EDITOR

—–Original Message—–

From: ATTMA [mailto:@touchtelindia.net]

Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 7:32 AM

To: ed@ecoworld.com

Subject: Jatropha vs Pongamia

Sir,

Your article is excellent. Certainly we should go in for Bio-Diesel. My point is which is most suited for Indian Conditions. Jatropha or Pongamia. Pongamia is native to India whereas Jatropha is an Imported one. Why not we encourage Pongamia cultivation. Is there any other problem or issues involved in it? Please do reply.

Thanks,

Karuppan Gnanasambandan

EDITOR’S REPLY

Karuppan,

I have forwarded your inquiry to some people involved in jatropha production and indeed Pongamia is already well known as a plant to cultivate for bio-fuel. We will investigate this further and hopefully have some reports for you on the differences between these plants. In the meantime, you may want to start a thread on
www.ecoworld.net/forum/jatropha/.

Thank you for your email,

Ed Ring

Ranchers & environmentalists work together to restore rangeland & save a way of life

Quivira is a Spanish word that is not easy to translate:,

“an elusive golden dream… fabulous realm just beyond the horizon… unknown territory beyond the frontier.”

The Quivira Coalition, based in Santa Fe, New Mexico, began as an alliance between two environmentalists and a rancher; in the last eight years, it has snowballed into an environmental force to be reckoned with, and is as difficult to squeeze into easy definitions and categories as its name.

The basic philosophy of the group is that the best thing for environmentalists, ranchers, and the environment itself is to stop fighting long enough to see the ranching issue in a new way. Hard-core environmentalists want to stop ranching altogether; hard-core ranchers want to keep on ranching the way their forefathers have done it for a century. This we know destroys the ecosystem, and eventually their own profits; but putting ranchers out of business often results in the land being resold to developers and turned into condominiums, parking lots or shopping malls, which is the last thing either side wants.

The Quivira Coalition

Quivira’s task is to try to get both parties to see what they have in common, and work together. Observation and an ever-deepening understanding of grazeland ecosystems can and has led to new ranching methods that are less and less harmful, and that even help heal the environment from the ranching wounds of the past. In their own words, “It is a nonprofit organization dedicated to bringing ranchers, environmentalists, public land managers, and other members of the public together and demonstrating to them that ecologically healthy rangeland and economically robust ranches can be compatible.”

Our mission is to define the core issues of the grazing conflict and to articulate a new position based on common interests and common sense. We call this position the New Ranch.

Jim Winder, who owns the Beck Land and Cattle Company, is one of the co-founders. He points out the radical reality that we humans have doubled since 1950 and will reach the mark again near 2050. The question is how to keep our lands healthy enough to provide that food to enormous number of fellow humans we will have by this time.

Enlightened mystic Osho said, “if you are violent and your food is vegetarian, then your violence will have to find some other way of expression. It is natural, because eating non-vegetarian food gives release to your violence.” Humanity has now plenty of violence seeking release– as well as the habit and fondness for the taste of meat.

The land needed to produce a one-year food supply for a person who has to support a meat-eating habit is 3.25 acres. For a pure vegetarian, 1/6 acre. Not to mention the fact that producing one pound of meat requires about 2,500 gallons of water, which is 12 times more than the requirements of a pure vegetarian.

Lester Brown of the Overseas Development Council has estimated that if Americans would reduce their consumption of meat by only 10%, the amount of grain wasted on animal feed that could be diverted for direct human consumption would be sufficient to adequately feed every one of the 60 million people who die from hunger each year.

To consume more primary foods and less secondary foods, i.e., more vegetation than animals, is healthier for our bodies as well as our planet; but this is another issue, and as long as there are customers for meat, ranching will be of concern to the environment.

Courtney White - CoFounder & Exec. Director of The Quivira Coalition

Courtney White is the executive director and one of the co-founders of the Quivira Coalition. A realization at age 16 changed his life, and in turn, his influence and that of the Coalition has changed many lives now. In his words, after taking a backpacking tour of Yellowstone and other National Parks with his math teacher and some chums, “it was not just environment that turned my head, but the whole idea of the American West — its beauty, space, people, and diversity. I more or less decided right then and there to devote my life to exploring the region, understanding it, and assisting it in some way.”

When the Quivira Coalition was formed in 1997, the environment in New Mexico was in desperate need of assistance. 400 years of ranching with the techniques acquired from more temperate regions had led this semi-arid region to a state of disappearing grasslands with excessive trees and shrubs. Recurrent drought and the rancher’s suppression of natural fires further disturbed the ecosystem. As soon as cattle crowded into the remaining meadows, savannas and riparian areas, the problem rose to its peak.

The quick and impulsive response to the situation by Federal land managers was to cut down the number of cattle, at a time when beef prices were low enough to lead many ranches out of business.

Further, the pressure of environmental groups and the public pushed ranchers to find new and improved ways to preserve the wildlife habitats and clean water. Environmentalists flooded the courts with lawsuits against ranchers.

In 1997, the Quivira Coalition was formed and began spreading the New Ranch idea.

In the last 8 years they have developed into a powerful organization which is bridging the gaps and bringing awareness among ranchers, environmentalists and others.

Nowadays, funded by private foundations, government grants and individual donations, they spread it through newsletters, workshops, outdoor classrooms, management demonstration projects, videos, publications, site tours, community meetings and other educational forums.

So what exactly is in the curriculum? How does one go about ranching in an ecologically sound way? What is the Quivira vision of ranching and the environment?

Overgrazing leaves the land stripped of vegetation and topsoil vulnerable to erosion

First of all, the group asserts that grazing is not an unnatural process, but “one of several types of natural disturbance to which many range plants are adapted.” Bison and other roving ungulates have always been a natural part of the ecosystem.

There should be a high degree of biodiversity as well- as humans have learned again and again, the web of nature is complex and species that seem to have no “economic value” are almost always related to the rest of the ecosystem in ways we may not be aware of. Biodiversity increases the rangeland’s ability to recover from any single source of disturbance, i.e., grazing.

The Coalition also explains that, if managed properly, grazing can actually strengthen the plants. As Quivira states:

“The application of small stresses and disturbances such as grazing and hoof action exercises the recovery mechanisms making the ecosystem more resilient to large disturbances like drought, fire and flood.”

What it all depends on is how the grazing is done– the three magic words are intensity, timing, and density of grazing. Properly grazed plants are more likely to survive catastrophes than those that have been either overgrazed or have had extended periods of
rest.

Intensity is the measurement of how much biomass livestock remove from a plant. It is a function of three variables: the number of animals in a pasture, the size of the pasture, and how long the animals graze there. Traditional ways of measuring intensity have generally left out one or another of these three components; the New Ranch uses Animal-Days per Acre, or ADA’s. After adjusting for the class of livestock being grazed, ADA’s seem to be the best way to accurately measure and manage intensity of grazing.

On the new ranch, the livestock are managed in a way that actually stimulates vegetation

The principle of timing is that plants should be neither overgrazed nor overrested. A plant that is grazed once or twice and then allowed to rest for the remainder of the growing season, according to the Coalition, is very likely to recover completely. The basic principles of timing are that:

1. Recovery will take longer depending on how much leafy area of the plant has been grazed off;

2. Plants that are overgrazed weaken over time, because the lose the ability to store energy and can’t recover as easily from any catastrophe.

3. In any given pasture, grazing should not happen at the same time of year every year. If it does, this will cause the impact to be worse on the palatable species that are young and green at that time. That species will eventually decline in comparison to those

around it.

Finally, timing is difficult to manage because certain variables are difficult to predict, like when and how much it will rain. This affects all other decisions about the ability of plants to recover from grazing.

Density, the third and last aspect of New Ranch grazing, means how many animals graze in a certain area at once, or in other words, how many animals should be in a herd. This is the most controversial issue in ranching. It’s easier to control a single herd, and saves the overhead cost of labor. Some ranchers and conservationists have tried and preferred to allow animals to move as individuals over large pastures.

Ways of control over grazing have included fencing, mineral blocks, and turning water on and off, and the most ancient technique– herding. Herding is currently considered back as it’s cost-efficient. The Quivira Coalition favors a single or in some cases double herds, as it’s easier to monitor the livestock and they are less vulnerable to predators than if they were alone and spread out.

On the New Ranch, the rancher must be pro-active, in planning, monitoring and adjusting his or her approach in response to the land. He or she must keep records carefully of what works and what doesn’t. The New Ranch should be flexible and able to grow.

The Radical Center

People should share these qualities as well, and if they don’t, they don’t qualify for the New Ranch. In an interview with Grist magazine last year, Courtney White described the “radical center”:

“We work in what is being called ‘the radical center’ with the idea that the extremes are too entrenched in their positions to move.”

“I don’t want to waste a minute of my time prying open closed minds, so I don’t. They don’t come to us either, which is fine.”

“We’re too busy mobilizing the middle to worry about the extremes. We don’t facilitate, mediate, or try to achieve “consensus” on thorny issues. Instead, we grab progressive ideas and plow ahead in trying to implement them and spread the news.”

Environmentally, The Quivira Coalition has had many successes and some failures too. The most valuable thing about the group is the idea that in order to progress, people must find common ground.

The radical thing about the “radical center” is that this is the first ever mass-consciousness approach to ranching. When a group of people drop their old ideas and open themselves to the new, growth becomes possible.

For more information about the Quivira Coalition contact Courtney White, Executive Director, at 505-820-2544 or send a letter to: The Quivira Coalition, 551 Cordova Rd., Suite #423, Santa Fe, NM 87501. E-mail: wldwst@rt66.com. FAX: 505-466-4035. Or check online: www.quiviracoalition.org