Burn leaves and bring back global cooling by Those who remember
7comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
 Dominick Zito Jun 16, 2014 01:07  | Proposal contributor
As an original member of SAVE (Students Against Violence to the Environment) I am appalled by the failure of the scientific community to review its past actions and their effects. Back in 1970 SAVE advocated a ban on leaf burning based on the prevailing theory on global cooling and its causes. Legally, our efforts, along with those of countless other activists, led to an almost complete ban in the US. This current proposal to reverse the ban is based on the assumption the ban was effective at preventing global cooling. Therefore, the first and easiest step towards restarting global cooling would be to burn leaves, correct?
|
 Gunes Hellweger Jun 17, 2014 09:56 |
Hi:
It's a good idea to propose a reverse action however as you have mentioned, the fire protection, health costs due to breathing disorders
and any other disadvantages should be considered. I do not think the fire department would easily
agree with this proposal and the fire codes are very strict.
Maybe a test area/volunteers could be engaged as a trial effort and this would help to promote the proposal
in larger groups later on.
Also, one other thing to consider could be the seasonal effect of this action. The leaves fall in fall, how would that be carried
to summer to help with the albedo?
Overall good luck,
Gunesh
|
 Manohar Lal Baharani Jun 18, 2014 06:27  |
The reversal of practice is welcome move once it makes good sense, but it should harness the best practices / technology options that could address breathing disorders and possibly utilize the burning heat. Things have advanced over four decades on technologies as well like efficient cook stoves in developing countries that nicely address breathing disorders in rural communities.
|
Vishal Bhavsar Jun 20, 2014 11:50 |
There are several source of particulate matter into atmosphere since the first earth day. Going back to old method may not be right approach. It can be one of small step but cannot be an action which we should resort to take action against arresting climate change.
|
Dominick Zito Jun 23, 2014 12:47 | Proposal contributor
Thank you all for your input! Excellent comments.
These are leaves that are now destined for landfills. The particulate matter is large and relatively "natural" so it degrades easily. The smoke is not highly processed material such as the black tar that billows from burning tires. The chemistry is not plastic based and not as obnoxious (to most people). The leaves are a poor source of heat, which is a good thing! The goal is to cool the earth, so why would we want an efficient mechanism? Granted, the heat could be repurposed but that involves industrial collections and other resource intensive activities. This proposal is one that every family can implement on its own, immediately. The seasonal component just adds to the allure. It's more fun when you do it once or twice a year. More than that it becomes a chore. Most important, it's simply a reversal of an actively implemented policy. Before there was a law against it there wasn't a law permitting or mandating it. The laws against leaf burning have outlived their purpose.
|
 James Boulter Jul 23, 2014 07:37 |
I think that there is much we can relearn from looking back to the time when the first Earth Day began to wake up the nation and so I appreciate this suggestion. But I'm sorry that I can't agree with this proposal. While leaf burning will lead to production of atmospheric particulate matter, it also generates substantial amounts of CO2 and NOx. Inefficient combustion from burning in piles will lead to gaseous products incomplete combustion, which in combination with the NOx would lead to urban ozone production. Both the CO2 and the ozone are GHGs, and the combination of NOx, ozone, and particulate matter would lead to serious respiratory concerns, particularly for the elderly, the very young, and any people predisposed to respiratory illness.
On the other hand, aerobic composting of leaves DOES produce some CO2 (and other gases) but locks a great deal of the carbon into new soil, which has multiple co-benefits.
Alternatively, biomass digestion (on a larger community- or industry-scale leads to CO2 production, but also generates substantial amounts of (renewable) electricity, offsetting fossil fuel consumption.
|
James Boulter Jul 23, 2014 07:49 |
Oops - I hit "submit" too soon. The other "GHG" that is produced by leaf burning isn't a gas at all, but significantly contributes to the global radiation balance. That's black carbon. While it is short-lived, it's irritant to note that not all the particulate matter emitted from leaf burning is albedo enhancing. This component absorbs solar energy and leads to atmospheric heating.
|
