Skip to main content

Archived Comments for: Carbon sequestration via wood burial

Back to article

  1. Has CBM been taken in?

    William Befort, Minn. DNR, Forestry Division

    9 January 2008

    I've read only the abstract, but I suspect a hoax of the reductio ad absurdum variety. Surely the traditional and comparatively profitable idea of making trees into durable wood products must be nearly as effective in terms of carbon sequestration?

    Competing interests

    Work for a state natural resources department, which for all I know may be in thrall to timber barons.

  2. Has CBM been taken in? No, CBM rather takes in ...

    Georgii Alexandrov, Editorial Team

    9 January 2008

    Re: Befort W: Has CBM been taken in?

    It is not unusual that results of a scientific research, written in plain language, looks like a hoax of the reductio ad absurdum variety. That is why scientists are prone to a scientific jargon that only their peers can understand. However, an interdisciplinary journal cannot follow with flow for it is intended to convey research results across disciplinary boundaries. This research is quite understandable when considered in the context of geo-engineering approaches to CO2 capture and storage (see also: IPCC special report on this issue and the commentary published in CBM []). The results of this research can be also considered in the context of wildfire management, which is essential for protecting carbon stocks in managed forests (see also: comments to the article on CO2 from fires in the United States []).

    Competing interests

    Handling Editor for this article