What if we could do this with all the extra carbon dioxide in our atmosphere?

如果我們可以用大氣中所有額外的二氧化碳來做這件事，會怎麼樣？

Just shove it underground.

把它推到地下就可以了。

Well, some people are actually already trying this, and we've poured millions of dollars research and time into this strategy known as soil sequestration.

好吧，有些人實際上已經在嘗試這樣做了，我們已經在這個被稱為土壤封存的戰略中投入了數百萬美元的研究和時間。

The thinking goes that soil can lock carbon underground and help with the climate crisis, but much like how messes don't disappear when shoved into your closet soil.

這種想法認為，土壤可以把碳鎖在地下，有助於解決氣候危機，但就像把垃圾塞進衣櫃裡的土壤後，垃圾並不會消失。

Carbon may not stick around in the ways we had previously thought.

碳可能不會像我們之前想象的那樣堅持下去。

In fact, our entire understanding of how carbon dioxide stays in the soil may need some major reworking.

事實上，我們對二氧化碳如何在土壤中停留的整個理解可能需要進行一些重大的重修。

To be clear, we do know that carbon can stick around in the soil for centuries or even millennia.

要明確的是，我們確實知道碳可以在土壤中堅持幾個世紀甚至幾千年之久。

If we want to store carbon in the soil, we first need to understand what that thin layer of material covering Earth is actually made of.

如果我們想在土壤中儲存碳，我們首先需要了解覆蓋地球的那層薄薄的物質究竟是由什麼構成的。

At its most basic, soil is made up of minerals, air, water and organic matter like leaves.

最基本的是，土壤是由礦物質、空氣、水和葉子等有機物組成的。

Organisms feast on this organic matter, breaking it down and releasing carbon dioxide or CO two into the air, with one major exception.

生物體以這些有機物為食，將其分解並向空氣中釋放二氧化碳或CO 2，但有一個主要例外。

Humans first described in 1786.

人類首次描述於1786年。

This group of complex organic molecules has long been considered stable enough to resist decomposition from microbes, which instead of the other shorter molecules present in the soil, this meant that all the carbon stored inside of these humans particles sort of just stayed put.

長期以來，這組複雜的有機分子被認為足夠穩定，可以抵禦微生物的分解，而不是土壤中存在的其他較短的分子，這意味著所有儲存在這些人類顆粒內的碳有點只是停留在原地。

Because of this, some scientists have been trying to harness the potential of humans as a carbon sink.

正因為如此，一些科學家一直試圖利用人類作為碳匯的潛力。

The Salk Institute's Harnessing Plants Initiative has received millions of dollars in funding to research methods of creating more humans.

索爾克研究所的 "駕馭植物計劃 "已獲得數百萬美元的資金，用於研究創造更多人類的方法。

But we still don't know how carbon cycles and soil, and there's very little that we actually understand about humans Like doesn't even exist.

但是我們仍然不知道碳循環和土壤的情況，而且我們實際上對人類的瞭解非常少，比如甚至不存在。

In a groundbreaking study from 2015, the researchers argue that the available data collected on the soil doesn't actually provide any evidence for the formation of humus and soils, mostly because traditional soil extraction methods don't analyze the material as precisely as they should.

在2015年的一項突破性研究中，研究人員認為，對土壤收集的現有數據實際上並沒有為腐殖質和土壤的形成提供任何證據，主要是因為傳統的土壤提取方法並沒有對材料進行應有的精確分析。

Traditionally, scientists study soil organic matter by adding a harsh alkaline treatment to the soil sample.

傳統上，科學家們通過向土壤樣本添加苛刻的鹼性處理來研究土壤有機物。

This treatment causes different components of the soil organic matter to react differently.

這種處理方式使土壤有機物的不同成分發生不同的反應。

Some of it becomes more soluble in water where some of it isn't affected by the treatment at all.

其中一些變得更易溶於水，而一些則完全不受處理的影響。

To account for these differences, scientists concluded that there were different types of human substances in the soil.

為了解釋這些差異，科學家們得出結論，土壤中存在著不同類型的人類物質。

Instead of trying to figure out how soil organic matter functions as a whole.

而不是試圖弄清楚土壤有機物的整體功能。

Basically, it created a lot of confusion.

基本上，它造成了很多混亂。

But now scientists have a much more sophisticated way to study soil organic matter.

但現在科學家們有了一種更復雜的方法來研究土壤有機物。

Put a little bit of soil in a magnetic field, beam it with timed radio frequency pulses and directly examine it.

將一點土壤放在磁場中，用定時的無線電頻率脈衝射出，並直接檢查。

Recent studies have found that humorous mostly contains components from plants and microbes, meaning that humans may be a snack from microorganisms to.

最近的研究發現，幽默大多含有來自植物和微生物的成分，這意味著人類可能是一個來自微生物的零食來。

And if they're able to digest us, that means the carbon that we once thought was locked away is actually being released right back into the atmosphere.

如果它們能夠消化我們，這意味著我們曾經認為被鎖住的碳實際上正被釋放到大氣中。

So you can imagine how this changes our plans for having humans captured.

所以你可以想象這如何改變了我們讓人類被俘的計劃。

CO two underground.

地下有兩個CO。

But remember, carbon can stick around in the soil for a very long time.

但請記住，碳可以在土壤中停留很長時間。

So if humans isn't sequestering carbon, what is well, one idea is that minerals and clumps of soil particles or aggregates could be responsible.

是以，如果人類沒有封存碳，那麼什麼是好的，一個想法是，礦物和土壤顆粒或聚集物的團塊可能是負責的。

They could present a challenge to microbes looking for a snack, essentially locking away carbon in the soil and preventing them from digesting it.

它們可能會給尋找零食的微生物帶來挑戰，基本上鎖定了土壤中的碳，使它們無法消化。

But we don't have enough studies about this interaction or how it's vulnerable to natural and human processes like freezing, thawing or cultivation.

但我們對這種相互作用沒有足夠的研究，也沒有研究它如何易受自然和人類過程的影響，如冷凍、解凍或培養。

Meanwhile, we've got to apply our new understanding of humans to climate crisis solutions, starting with our climate models.

同時，我們必須將我們對人類的新理解應用於氣候危機的解決方案，從我們的氣候模型開始。

Back when scientists started making models of the global climate, they simplified them by putting soil carbon into short term and long term pools.

早在科學家們開始製作全球氣候模型時，他們就將土壤碳放入短期和長期的碳庫中進行簡化。

Those classifications continued to be used for the next few decades.

這些分類法在接下來的幾十年裡一直被使用。

So now a bunch of models like the one used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change overestimate how much carbon is sequestered underground and underestimate how much carbon comes out, which becomes a bigger problem when you factor in that warm soil releases way more Co two.

是以，現在像政府間氣候變化專門委員會所使用的一堆模型高估了地下封存的碳的數量，而低估了有多少碳出來，當你考慮到溫暖的土壤釋放出更多的Co 2時，這就成為一個更大的問題。

The reality is that we just don't have precise enough ways to figure out how soil carbon cycles, so it's really hard to write a perfect model.

現實情況是，我們只是沒有足夠精確的方法來弄清楚土壤碳循環的方式，所以真的很難寫出一個完美的模型。

But researchers could add certain elements to our models, like the fraction of carbon associated with minerals.

但是研究人員可以在我們的模型中加入某些元素，比如與礦物相關的碳的部分。

And since soil microbes are such huge drivers of carbon flow, maybe adding microbial, biomass or the microbial growth rate into the mix could be the move, even though it's a blow to learn that long term carbon storage and humans doesn't actually happen.

由於土壤微生物是碳流的巨大驅動力，也許將微生物、生物量或微生物的生長速度加入到組合中可能是此舉，儘管得知長期的碳儲存和人類實際上並沒有發生，這是一個打擊。

It is great to have this knowledge to better inform our decisions.

掌握這些知識，為我們的決策提供更好的參考，這是非常好的。

Science isn't perfect, but it's ever improving our understanding of the world.

科學並不完美，但它在不斷提高我們對世界的認識。

Any other ground breaking news you'd like us to cover?

有什麼其他突破性的新聞希望我們報道嗎？

Pun definitely intended.

雙關語肯定是有意的。

Let us know down in the comments and make sure to subscribe to seeker for all your soil.

請在評論中告訴我們，並確保訂閱seeker以獲得所有的土壤。

Science news.

科學新聞。

Thanks for watching.

謝謝你的觀看。

And I'll see you next time.

還有，下次見。

Mm.

嗯。