The second item of your list sounds to good to be truth. A closer look at chapter 11 - ENERGY SYSTEMS WE USE NOW AND WHAT WE MUST USE TOMORROW  shows the neglect of the thermodynamic laws and economic principles. Also not one word is mentioned on EROI issues or growth figures to implement those future renewable energy systems.

"Ethanol can replace petrol in motor vehicles
and that would end the production of greenhouse
gasses from all the cars in the world. We must
make it happen now. Ethanol is actually a cheaper
fuel when oil prices go over $45.00 a barrel.
Virtually all motor vehicles other than those
in Brazil, today run on either petrol, diesel or
LPG (liquefied petroleum gas). And they are all
fossil fuels. To stop Global Warming these fuels
have to be replaced. What is amazing is just how
incredible easy and practical it is to do so.
"

"Now in Brazil, and in any other efficient sugar
producing country, from a hectare of sugar cane
they can produce 5,500 litres of ethanol per year,
that's 35 barrels of motor fuel. On a per acre basis,
that's 14 barrels or 600 US gallons.
The total world's oil consumption is four billion
tons per year. That's two thirds of a ton of oil per
head of population. It is the equivalent of one car
for every four and a half people on the planet.
There is actually only about half that number of
transport vehicles in the world. The rest of the oil
is used for heating, petrochemical production etc.
What does this all mean? As an exercise, let's
say we drive 16,000 miles per year and get 20
miles to the US gallons, (26,000 kilometres at 12
litres per 100 k). That's about three tons of fuel
per year. Then to grow the ethanol or biodiesel
we would need to allocate two thirds of a hectare,
that's under one and a half acres per motor vehicle
That's 0.13 ha or 0.33 acres per person. That
would require an area of sugar cane farms 2,750
kilometres square or 1,700 miles square. That's
about the size of the Amazon basin and we will
have cancelled our need for petroleum derived
transport fuel."

I'm a bit more interesed in the claim

Allan calculates that a 1.6% increase of organic matter levels on the world's arable lands (8.5% of the land area) would stabilise atmospheric carbon levels.