Eric Toensmeier wrote: We are also very close to the commercial release of perennial rice, which will represent a carbon–sequestering practice.
SRI is a methodology. Products, cultivars and species can be used with it to boost the benefits even more. There is no reason special strains of bacteria can't be used with SRI. In fact, part of the reason SRI works so well is wild strains of bacteria are doing that very function. Helping them out with special strains is like growing "indian" corn or one of the new modern hybrids. Methods equal, the hybrid yields more. So I am in full support of your advocasy of products to boost SRI even more!
Brett Pritchard wrote:Scott - While SRI can reduce methane emissions by 30%, mainly through reducing the amount of time the fields are flooded, the method I outlined would stop 100% of the methane emissions. There is no reason it couldn't be incorporated into existing SRI techniques to further improve both the fertility and reduce the greenhouse gas emissions. The carbon sequestering bacteria also improves the soil carbon faster than SRI techniques, and as the probiotic fertiliser is made from fermented food waste it also closes the food-waste-food cycle saving further emissions. While SRI is an improvement in rice growing it is still incapable of sequestering more emissions than it creates. When the warming potential of methane is considered over a 20 year period it has over 100 times the warming potential of CO2 and to avoid a climate spike we need to reduce methane emissions from rice fields to zero, and SRI on its own is incapable of achieving that. In contrast the method I detailed is carbon negative as zero methane emissions are created and carbon is locked up in the soil, and as an extra bonus the use of food waste to produce the fertiliser diverts that waste food from landfill where it would rot and create methane.