This Is How We End Climate Change

Soil Carbon Tests. Big Cheap & Easy

         using Loss On Ignition (LOI)
*Big 2,000 grams sample size
*Dries sample in 30 minutes to 100°C
*LOI Temperatures - 350°C to 550°C
*Complete LOI in 60 to 90 minutes
*Integral weighing in-situ at 100°C
*Accuracy  1/1000
*No laboratory needed. Farm shed OK
With accurate infield sampling kit. Powered 4 inch auger. Powered mixer, Sampling sieves. 


Optics Determine Biosphere Temperatures

The sun determines the average surface temperatures of the solar system's inner planets provided only that they revolve creating day and nights. The Earth's internal heat has almost zero effect on our biosphere's temperature. This applies to any stable revolving planet with Earth like distances from its home star.   


Quotable Facts and Numbers

If we continue to use agrochemicals and fossil fuels, we cannot prevent catastrophic climate change. And those industries know it. Their marketing policy then must be to create doubt, to generate confusion and to totally split opposition to using and relying on their incredibly dangerous products . Below is what they really don't want you to understand


Aus’ Government Dumps Yeomans Methodology

Stopping all the world's carbon emissions today can't stop future centuries of continuous warming. So it's imperative that we start by removing our existing carbon dioxide overload. Sadly, the Department of the Environment and Energy here in Australia is quite clearly not prepared to take the concept of removal seriously.


Instilling Complacency and Money

When the voting public wakes up and begin to understand what is actually happening now with climate change now - and what it means to them - and they begin to appreciate the horror of what is in store for them in the months and years ahead - they will vote for action now. This site says what action that must be. And nobody has a sane "plan B". And there's no time to invent one.


Home Site & Navigating Around This Site

First; You put the Cursor on one of the 13 numbered buttons.
Second: The button turns yellow and the big square on the left side lights up with a summary of what you will find when you open the page.
Third: Leave the Cursor arrow there and Left Click and you have opened the whole page. The lower part of the screen then comes up with all the information.
Forth:Then scroll up or down to find what you want.
Fifth: Click the WHITE HOUSE if you want to go back up to the top of the page.


Written Library & Video Library

We are assembling a collection of meaningful and factual references and videos. They will go here. It will be similar to the Video Library at our  Yeomans Keyline Plow site at---   This new library is going to take me some time to get it up and running. There probably won't be much before Late January 2017-- Allan Yeomans.


Stop Press On Today’s Fictions

The Owners of the Tobacco Industry intended to survive and prosper despite the inconvenience of their products killing millions of their customers. To maintain sales, advertising their own individual brands became far less important than allaying fears in the millions of customers still alive. Their most significant weapon became the well structured manufacture of doubt in the public mind. Was smoking really that dangerous?


Who Is Allan Yeomans

For general introduction Google -- Allan Yeomans Wikipedia -- This gives a good summary. Allan is the originator of the concept of soil carbon sequestration. His concept was first described in his 1989 paper "The Agricultural Solution To The Greenhouse Effect". This paper was his  presentation to the Esalen Congress on Sustainable Agriculture. Big Sur, California January 1990.


Soil Carbon How It Happens

Tell me in a nut shell.

How does soil carbon sequestration work?

How do you take the carbon dioxide out of the air and put it into the soil?

Allan Yeomans answers:  
"Happily it’s a completely natural process. The world’s grasslands illustrate it best and they're the best soils in the world.


Link to Yeomans Plows and equipment

In the early 1950s, on our family farms in New South Whales we developed a system of farm management we called "Keyline". My father was the genius behind the whole concept. He was a geologist and mining engineer originally and turned this expertise onto the problems of water storage and handling for on-farm water storage and low cost irrigation. He understood insightfully the role for the enhancement of soil fertility in all forms of farm management. My role was in equipment design, and i did think up the name  "Keyline" to describe it all.   


How we produce enough abundant, cheap, energy continuously for 7.5 billion people. Without adding carbon to the biosphere.

In round figures we have dumped near a liter of dry ice on every square metre of the Earth's surface. It behaves like a sheet of glass the same thickness and adds to the greenhouse effect. We humans came into existence on this planet when it was covered with two sheets of glass. Now it's got three and we are getting runaway heating. It's crazy to destabilize the  Earth's entire biosphere just to keep the fossil fuel organizations in business


Getting the $10 Trillion to remove the excess carbon dioxide from the air comes from stopping our tax money funding fossil fuels and chemical based agricultural.

Our Global Warming problems are caused by the excess carbon dioxide in the air now. Not the particular rate we are currently adding to that excess. (For how to stop the adding, go to Button 12.)   So our immediate and urgent requirement is to realign the proportions of carbon within the biosphere. We turn atmospheric carbon (as CO2) into soil carbon (as soil humus and organic matter). Each country must accept its historic individual responsibility and pay to make that realignment happen. Countries must insist that neighbors and friends follow suit.

3. Quotable Facts and Numbers 4. Aus’ Government Dumps Yeomans Methodology 5. Instilling Complacency and Money 6. Home Site & Navigating Around This Site 7. Written Library & Video Library 8. Stop Press On Today’s Fictions 9. Who Is Allan Yeomans
2. Optics Determine Biosphere Temperatures 1. Soil Carbon Tests. Big Cheap & Easy 13. Getting the $10 Trillion to remove the excess carbon dioxide from the air comes from stopping our tax money funding fossil fuels and chemical based agricultural.

"The urgent problem is getting rid of the excess carbon dioxide that's already there. Soil can do that.

Emissions reductions must become zero, but that can be phased in over the next two to three decades."
Allan Yeomans. January 1998

Yeomans LOI Soil "Carbon Still"© test takes two hours. Accepts huge 2,000 gram test sample. 550°C

Plus - Yeomans Soil Test Protocol
(for info click Button 1)

10. Soil Carbon How It Happens 11. Link to Yeomans Plows and equipment 12. How we produce enough abundant, cheap, energy continuously for 7.5 billion people. Without adding carbon to the biosphere.

Salvation is three things – – SOIL and NUCLEAR and BIOFUEL 

                        View the Yeomans Methodology Here     (at 30 June 2017)

   The Department of the Environment and Energy here in Australia is clearly not prepared to take the concept of removing carbon dioxide from the air seriously.

But it is absolutely imperative that we start removing the huge CO2 overload right now.

     Soil carbon sequestration is now touted to be official Australian policy.

But they sit on it.

The policy is spelt out in Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011. It says that if a farmer improves the fertility of his soil, in some suitable manner, and measures the resulting increase in soil carbon he will be awarded Australian Carbon Credits. The Act says the farmer must follow an agreed protocol for both measuring soil carbon changes and for managing the soil. A protocol is called a “Determination Methodology”.(usually revered to simply as “Methodologies”)
But it’s not happening.
Unfortunately Department of Environment employees structured the requirement for managing the farm and the measurement procedures to be compiled with in a manner that systematically prevents Soil Carbon Sequestration ever happening in Australia. Additionally, it is now been decreed that only Departmental personnel can devise and create Methodologies.  The Minister for the Environment then approves the proposed methodology. That’s the procedure. (Technically the Minister himself can propose a methodology.)

For soil carbon, Departmental officers have created two methodologies. Both have proved to be absolute failures as not one single one of our 135,000 Australian farmers have considered them sane and workable and taken up their offers to sequester carbon out of the air. Read the incredible Departmental requirements in these methodologies and you’ll see why not one Australian farmer has taken them seriously.
Here are the links to the complete methodologies.

The first one is called —     Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) (Sequestering Carbon in Soils in Grazing Systems) Methodology Determination 2014

To see what a farmer has to totally understand and then do, have a look at the methodology. Hold control and click on, or just click   —

As there was no takers for this methodology next year they came out with a another.

It’s called —  Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative—Facilities) Methodology Determination 2015

Again no takers. To see what a farmer has to do on this new “simplified” methodology —  control and click on    — (Currently you will have to type in this address to get there  The “click” thing doesn’t work yet Oct 21 2017)

They now have composed a third “soil methodology” (two more years). It was opened for comment in the period between 4 September 2017 to 2 October 2017. Sadly, having looked at it myself I expect it too will be totally rejected by the Australian farming community. I maintain, justifiable so and on the grounds that it too will be seen as “impractical and unworkable”.

It’s called –     Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative- Measurement of Soil Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Systems) Methodology Determination 2017

to see it, control and click on –

Measurement of soil carbon sequestration in agricultural systems draft Determination (PDF – 411.37 KB)

It’s impossible to follow. Same as the other ones. For an example – Go to the link then scroll down to pages – 36 and 37. They’re typical of the mathematics a farmer is expected to be able to follow and use.
Because these Departmental methodologies are so unworkable and because of the now dangerous state of our atmosphere and the resultant destabilization of world weather systems I created one myself. My methodology is designed to significantly encourage farmers to increase the basic fertility of their own soils (which is what we want), while complying with the dictates of the Carbon Farming Initiative Act sufficiently to qualify for Australian Carbon Credits.

The fundamentals of the nature of soil; in a nut shell.

All broken down rock material – that is sub soil – becomes humus rich top soil quickly, just with thoughtful management and a moderate and regular supply of water. To illustrate the nature of soil: The rich black soils of the Darling Downs becomes a mixture of reddish brown sand and bull dust, when its humus is all cooked off at 5000 C. Good management techniques – some we have yet to discover – can rapidly reverse the process and turn brown desert dirt, into rich and fertile, carbon charged, top soil.

Our Australian Department of the Environment people seem to know nothing about the rapid creation of soil fertility. Nor apparently are they interested. Yet they author the “Methodologies” on how it should all be done.

I originated the whole concept of soil carbon sequestration to combat global warming back in the late 1980s. I wrote and lectured on my concept both in the US and later back here in Australia. From there the concept took off. Yet they’ve never asked me a thing. Farmers have told me they could use and work within my methodology and make soil carbon sequestration happen on their farm; but absolutely no way with the methodologies dreamed up by the people in our Australian Department of the Environment.

Unfortunately, along with all our hopes, dreams and efforts to effectively combat climate change by soil fertility enhancement, we must never forget the elephant in the room is the rich and powerful agrochemical industry. Are strings being pulled?

I submitted my methodology to the Department both directly and indirectly through the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee. It was emailed to them on 7 July 2017. I was received an email back from the Department mail on 5 September. I was informed that my submission and the principals behind it are to be ignored by the Department. They list the reasons and conclude by saying — “Accordingly, the Department does not intend to further develop your proposal at this stage”.

Below is a copy of my methodology which they propose to ignored. And below that is a complete copy of that final Departmental rejection email to me and wherein which they state their reasoning behind their total rejection of my whole methodology of encouraging the developing large scale soil carbon sequestration to beat climate change.

For comparison, make sure you have a look at the methodologies the Department dreamed up which have been totally rejected by every single farmer in Australia then :

    View the Yeomans Methodology Here 

And this is the email where they rejected our methodology —
rejection_1 Rejection

The raising temperature in the Earth’s biosphere is too serious a phenomena to allow such an official and significant Department of Environment letter such as this one, to go uncorrected and uncriticised .

So let’s go through it.

On the first page it reported on apparent advice from the Soil Technical Working Group relating to a protocol I suggested prior to the construction of the current “Yeomans Methodology“.  That surly appears somewhat incompetent. It also asks for “further data” but doesn’t say on what!

They then suggest that the one gram sample size used in LECO in their Loss on Ignition test machine is “practical” when testing large areas of agricultural land, and a sample 2,000 times bigger might be impractical . This has to be nonsense.

Additionally it says our sample sizes are 4,000 grams, a size not mentioned anywhere in any of our literature. Actually 4,000 grams is also beyond the capacity of our loss on ignition test equipment.

“The likelihood of instrument error” suggested might occur is much more likely in a one gram test sample than in a 2 kilogram. The logic escapes me.

If our test equipment was used it would of course require Australian Soil and Plant Analyse Council calibration approval. Which we will do when our methodology is accepted.

Finally, if they had read the Yeomans Methodology they would see that the standard LECO manufactured test machine is acceptable for soil sampling.

They note seven more objections to the Yeomans Methodology in their letter. One would suspect from these objections that the Department dismissed the methodology deliberately without any diligent consideration. In some ways it  actually seems that it was not even read.

“Permanence obligation” is in fact covered in the Methodology.

“Defining what activities are eligible” before farmers have worked out the best way to improve the fertility of their soil is extremely counter productive. The requirement effectively hamstrings and knobbles the development of techniques of rapid soil fertility enhancement on any farm in the nation.

Their email (which came with a note saying a hard copy would be posted which after two weeks has not been received) has  to says there is insufficient defining of the methodology’s “greenhouse gas assessment boundary”. Departmental literature says “a greenhouse gas assessment boundary is all greenhouse gas emissions and reductions directly affected by the activity”. The scope for obfuscation is thus unlimited. Part 5 of our proposed methodology suggests an approach that is workable and usable in practice. At  least, so farmers say.

The other “objections” are already covered clearly in the Methodology. So their email / letter is confusing.

The email clearly is used to remind us that the Emission Reduction Fund “does not support research and development”. What does that really mean? I would take “support” to mean actual financial support. Surely “does not support” should not be interpreted by the relevant Departmental personal to mean the Department should actively discourag research and development by others. If that is case then the Departmental people should cease interpreting it that way.

It’s now political.  Nothing will happen unless you start chasing your local Federal Member or Senator to get the Minister for the Environment and Energy, that’s the Hon. Josh Frydenberg MP  to get his Department people to get our Methodology approved. His contact numbers at his web site are 03 9882 3677. The fax number is 03 9882 3773 and the number in Canberra is 02 6277 7920.

It’s not up to me now, nor those in the Department, it’s up to you.

The late Margret Meed, highly respected  American biologist, statistician and philosopher once said –

“If You Ever Think You’re Too Small To Be Effective,
You’ve Never Been In Bed With A Mosquito”

The  Dalai Lama agreed. His words were – “If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito.”