RE: [Biochar] Special Issue - Bioenergy and Biochar: Repurposing Waste to Sustainable Energy and Materials
Anderson, Paul
Dimitrios, (And others on the Biochar discussion group can give opinions also.).
Would it be appropriate for your special issue to have a re-cast, re-focused version of what is in my document (found at www.woodgas.com/resources ) about:
“Recognition of Biochar & Energy (BC&E) as a Separate Negative Emission Technology (NET)”.
It would not focus on the IAM aspects. It would include a tracing back to see where the incorrect joining of biochar (BC) and soil carbon sequestration (SCS) was made (and then endorsed in high power publications). This has been (and continues to be) to the great detriment of biochar as a negative emission technology.
If my document is incorrect, then this topic can be ignored and biochar will be lumped with SCS and BECCS can claim all the renewable energy value of biomass.
Proposal: The rewrite would be a combined effort of numerous experts. I would take a backseat. At 76 years of age, I am not seeking a peer reviewed article for my career advancement. Maybe the article could be one of those short important position-type articles with 8 to 15 co-authors, such as appear occasionally in Science or Nature. Include the authors like Furhman et al., Minx, and those others who have unfortunately perpetuated the error of SCS and BC&E being together and the unfortunate elevation of BECCS and DACCS (for which the CCS is barely off the drawing board.)
Basically, the question is this: Does the biochar community believe strongly enough in the role of BC&E for the future of our planet that it would present its claims with some vigor?
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website: www.drtlud.com
Email: psan...@ilstu.edu Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP Go to: www.JuntosNFP.org
Inventor of RoCC kilns for biochar and energy: See www.woodgas.com
Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at www.capitalism21.org)
with pages 88 – 94 about solving the world crisis for clean cookstoves.
From: ma...@Biochar.groups.io <ma...@Biochar.groups.io>
On Behalf Of Dimitrios Kalderis via groups.io
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 4:04 AM
To: Biochar Group <ma...@biochar.groups.io>
Subject: [Biochar] Special Issue - Bioenergy and Biochar: Repurposing Waste to Sustainable Energy and Materials
[This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to ab...@ilstu.edu]
Dear list,
a kind reminder that our Special Issue is open for submissions and 3 open-access papers have been published so far.
Deadline is the 30th of June 2020.
_._,_._,_
Groups.io Links:
You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#27181) |
Reply To Group |
Reply To Sender |
Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription |
Contact Group Owner |
Unsubscribe [psan...@ilstu.edu]
_._,_._,_
Thomas Goreau
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
Chief Scientist, Blue Regeneration SL
President, Biorock Technology Inc.
Technical Advisor, Blue Guardians Programme, SIDS DOCK
37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139
gor...@globalcoral.org
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226 leave message
Books:
Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392
Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734
No one can change the past, everybody can change the future
Energies
Energies, an international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal.
_._,_._,_You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#27181) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [psan...@ilstu.edu]_._,_._,_
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to CarbonDioxideRem...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CY4PR03MB253537BDAB80B5D7741BAC5EDBD90%40CY4PR03MB2535.namprd03.prod.outlook.com.
Andrew Lockley
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/D6A03390-DB93-4E45-BFAF-34D3A2F116B3%40globalcoral.org.
Thomas Goreau
biochar will be lumped with SCS and BECCS can claim all the renewable energy value of biomass.
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
Chief Scientist, Blue Regeneration SL
President, Biorock Technology Inc.
Technical Advisor, Blue Guardians Programme, SIDS DOCK
37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139
gor...@globalcoral.org
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226 leave message
Books:
Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392
Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734
No one can change the past, everybody can change the future
Andrew Lockley
Thomas Goreau
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
Chief Scientist, Blue Regeneration SL
President, Biorock Technology Inc.
Technical Advisor, Blue Guardians Programme, SIDS DOCK
37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139
gor...@globalcoral.org
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226 leave message
Books:
Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392
Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734
No one can change the past, everybody can change the future
Greg Rau
Anderson, Paul
Dear Thomas,
I am glad that you asked so clearly:
How do you explain the difference between biochar and SCS (and BECCS) concisely? To me Biochar is a form of SCS, among other benefits?
The proper classification of NETs should be focused on how carbon dioxide removal (CDR) occurs. The mutually exclusive types of carbon sequestration, their typical duration and the associated NETs are listed in Table 1:
Table 1: Types of carbon sequestration, processes, duration, associated NETs, status and comments
|
Type |
Processes |
Duration |
Associated NETs |
Status |
Additional notes |
|
Inorganic chemistry: mineralization and pH change |
Create solid minerals on land or sea or change pH |
Potentially long-term stability |
Enhanced Weathering (EW) with ocean alkalinization and Ocean fertilization (OF). |
Chemically possible but major application is mostly theoretical and conjecture |
If applicable someday, would be expensive. An “affluent world” approach. |
|
CO2 capture and storage: CCS |
Capture CO2 from air or chimneys, render transportable, put into storage |
Potentially long-term stability; caution with leakage issues |
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) for chimneys (BECCS) and Direct air (DACCS); always with storage. |
Experimental and expensive demos; some for injection to assist fracking for fossil fuel increase |
If CCS works and if at scale, would be extremely expensive. Requires energy. Moral hazard. An “affluent world” approach. |
|
Organic carbon: Living and dead biomass |
Photosynthesis creates biomass from CO2, H2O and sunlight. Decomposition makes this carbon neutral. |
In soil for a few years or in forests for several decades; value is in potential volume |
Soil carbon sequestration (SCS) and Afforestation and reforestation (AR). Optional to support BC&E; misleading to support BECCS. |
Already part of nature and would be good agro-forestry practice if financial returns went to where the work is done. |
If without guidance and support, this is agro-forestry as usual, which does not solve the problem. There are limits to plant growth. Worldwide participation. |
|
Elemental carbon: Charcoal Biochar |
Use pyrolysis of biomass to create solid carbon as charcoal / biochar with release of energy. |
Multi-century or millennial. Protection from burning is required and is natural in soil. |
Biochar (BC), proposed to be called Biochar and Energy (BC&E) because it increases energy supply while creating stable carbon removal. |
Ready for scale-up with new methods; need increased R&D for improvements. Additional benefits being evaluated. |
Intercepts organic carbon before it decomposes. Can be by both rich and poor. Liberates energy. Decentralized. Safe. Worldwide participation. |
Soil Carbon Sequestration (SCS) and biochar are fundamentally different in each of the six columns in the above table. If for no other reason, the duration of biochar for centennial or millennial sequestration is what is needed, but SCS is for yearly or decadal duration. Just because the main destination of biochar is into soil does not make stable graphene elemental carbon the same as organic carbohydrates that decompose. Whales live in the oceans but that does not make them the same as fish or plankton. The classification needs to be correct. And that is also true as to why CCS is not the same as biochar (BC).
The above table is at the start of my document which is at www.woodgas.com/resources :
Recognition of Biochar & Energy (BC&E) as a
Separate Negative Emission Technology (NET) for
Improving Integrated Assessment Modeling (IAM)
In regard to BECCS, my document goes on to point out that the energy in biomass can be liberated via complete burning to CO2 (as in BECCS) or via pyrolysis that yields biochar (as in BC&E – Yes, I emphasize the energy (E) with biochar (BC that ready for operational sequestration) in the same way that BECCS emphasizes the bioenergy (BE) with carbon capture and storage (CCS that not yet ready for operational sequestration). Again, that is a fundamental difference that should be highlighted as crucial for efforts for CDR.
Because my document is a response to the Fuhrman et al. (2019) publication, I also give attention to how biochar & energy (BC&E) has complementary benefits (not tradeoffs) with many of the sustainable development goals (SDG). This is in stark contrast with the other NETs (excluding AR and somewhat SCS) that have so little relationship with the SDGs and the 80% of the world that is not affluent.
In particular, I point out how pyrolytic cookstoves (commonly called TLUD = “tee-lud” stoves) are true BC&E devices that give the energy for cooking with pyrolytic gases while providing biochar that could be sequestered. If made available to the poorest bottom three-fifths of households, each one-fifth could contribute over 2 gigatons of CO2 sequestration PER YEAR while the people are cooking their food with LESS of the same wood and crop-residue fuels that they currently burn. I do hope that many will read the full explanation that cites the on-going project in India from which the quantitative data are taken. [Note: This happens to be my specialty for the past 18 years.]
The document goes on to present about biomass supply, pyrolytic technology, the latest Drawdown Review 2020 solutions, and scaling up to over 10 gigatons CO2 for CDR per year, within this decade and continuing past 2100. And do not forget the energy that will be available to partially replace fossil fuels and to save electricity that should not be expended on low- value heating purposes.
I sincerely hope that some of you will read that document and reply. Tear it to pieces, or embrace it, or pick and choose what to like or discard. But in the end, we who have good intentions for CDR must decide if this “bird in the hand” is something to consider for the now and near future.
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website: www.drtlud.com
Email: psan...@ilstu.edu Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP Go to: www.JuntosNFP.org
Inventor of RoCC kilns for biochar and energy: See www.woodgas.com
Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at www.capitalism21.org)
with pages 88 – 94 about solving the world crisis for clean cookstoves.
Anderson, Paul
Brian,
Your comments are appreciated. I do NOT have the needed knowledge to adequately represent what is in the first row of the table. You do, and I am glad that you have expressed it for all to read. In my defense, my document (and table) are focused on the biochar and soil carbon and BECCS issues. So, I am glad for your reply about EW.
About you house, let’s talk. I will recommend a refinement of the RoCC kiln instead of a TLUD device. That discussion can be off-list. Intro info (not about home heating) is in the RoCC Kiln Manual at the www.woodgas.com/resources page. My personal email address is in my signature block below.
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website: www.drtlud.com
Email: psan...@ilstu.edu Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP Go to: www.JuntosNFP.org
Inventor of RoCC kilns for biochar and energy: See www.woodgas.com
Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at www.capitalism21.org)
with pages 88 – 94 about solving the world crisis for clean cookstoves.
From: brianc...@yahoo.com <brianc...@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 10:47 PM
To: Thomas Goreau <gor...@globalcoral.org>; Andrew Lockley <andrew....@gmail.com>; Anderson, Paul <psan...@ilstu.edu>
Cc: Carbon Dioxide Removal <carbondiox...@googlegroups.com>; Bio...@groups.io
Subject: Re: [CDR] RE: [Biochar] Special Issue - Bioenergy and Biochar: Repurposing Waste to Sustainable Energy and Materials
Hi Paul,
I've come to respect your work so much that I plan a TLUD mini-furnace trial to test whether to use a fullscale TLUD system as winter heat source in a planned new home.
But I take issue with the first row of your table. I understand that merely 4% of the carbon captured (by enhancing weathering (EW)) is used up in the 'enhancing', or olivine rock grinding and distribution. Further, although now at a small scale as with biochar, integration of EW into other ongoing processes delivers multiple benefits cost-effectively.
For example, to buffer rain and soil acidity, limestone is ground and distributed across USA soils. Substituting olivine grinding and distribution, as is now done in the Netherlands (https://www.greensand.nl/en), since this olivine is not yet carbonated, involves transport of less rock mass for the same amount of buffering capacity, and, instead of releasing CO2 from ground limestone use, use of ground olivine absorbs CO2. Thus, with olivine, or basalt to a lesser degree, less energy is used, less fuel burnt while meeting the same soil buffering need . Granted, there are potential nickel toxicity issues with use of certain olivines. Basalt use has been proposed to lessen this, but requires three times more rock to be ground.
And this is just one success. There are many other existing (https://www.greensand.nl/en/about-greensand/applications) and potential ones. (See: http://smartstones.nl/six-examples-of-profitable-projects/
In particular, use of ground alkaline rock, like olivine, might integrate with biochar in soil improvement efforts. In biochar production, ground alkaline rock could capture some released carbon dioxide from the burning fuel, further increasing the carbon entering our earth's lithosphere, as has been pointed out already: http://smartstones.nl/application/
Indeed, were it not for olivine buffering of the volcanic CO2 released over earth's history, our atmosphere might be like that of Venus.
Brian Cady
-
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
To view this discussion on the web visit
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to CarbonDioxideRem...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/D6A03390-DB93-4E45-BFAF-34D3A2F116B3%40globalcoral.org.
_._,_._,_
Groups.io Links:
You receive all messages sent to this group.
Thomas Goreau
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
Chief Scientist, Blue Regeneration SL
President, Biorock Technology Inc.
Technical Advisor, Blue Guardians Programme, SIDS DOCK
37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139
gor...@globalcoral.org
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226 leave message
Books:
Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392
Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration
http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734
No one can change the past, everybody can change the future
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CY4PR03MB2535B7B59476743A3E3577A9DBD60%40CY4PR03MB2535.namprd03.prod.outlook.com.
Benoit Lambert
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/441DBBD6-6B84-4FF5-8F3E-7DF64AE9B930%40globalcoral.org.
Anderson, Paul
Thomas,
Please allow me to disagree. I will use YOUR words:
The ambiguity for me is that biochar is just one group of soil carbon compounds among so many
Really? Is an almost unending sequence of carbon atoms (with a touch of ash minerals) really a compound? C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C- is rather different than C6H12O6 (generic carbohydrates).
Biochar is carbon. 80%+ pure carbon. With tremendous long term stability (unless it is burned.) Carbohydrates are destined to decay in relatively short time periods.
I think of Biochar as … THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND LONG LASTING form of SCS, rather than as a separate category.
But isn’t the characteristic of being longer lasting (by two to four orders of magnitude of time) precisely what should make biochar extremely more important to people like us who seek CDR that stays as CDR rather than be equated with the short-life organic matter in the soil?
The same gradient in quality BETWEEN biochar and ordinary soil carbon also exists WITHIN the biochar category, depending on the starting materials and conditions of formation.
The SAME gradient??? That seems far fetched. But you do add on the “depends on…” phrase that allows you to maybe find some extreme case. Sorry, I do not buy into your statement.
The distinction seems to be operational, how it is made, rather than how it acts in the soil itself.
“… how it is made…” Yes. That is important. Biomass is by photosynthesis and highly diverse plant growth. And biochar is by thermochemical pyrolysis with highly uniform alignment of carbon atoms. To me, that distinction really separates biochar from soil carbon in operational terms of how they is made.
But you focus on how they act in the soil. That distinction is even greater. If that is not evident, I leave it to the experts on soil organic carbon to compare notes with the experts on soil inorganic (pyrolytic) carbon.
“… wherever forests were cleared … roughly half of soil carbon is made up of the various forms of biochar, from charcoal to black elemental carbon.”
I had not heard that before. And I doubt it. (others can clarify, please.) But even if true, what we are discussing (which is the CDR value of biochar), the issue is to put carbon back into soils. And according to your statement, that would mean putting roughly half back as organic carbon (SCS) and to somehow also putting roughly half back as biochar / elemental carbon. And the latter would require making and sequestering biochar.
From another message that you sent soon after the one below, you wrote:
Unfortunately it [the types of CDR and the various forms of carbon] need to be put in very simple and short terms for most people to listen.
I can agree about people needing simple and short terms, but I certainly disagree about organic carbon and biochar being … variants from the same population … [referring to carbon in soil]. People know the difference between a piece of charcoal and a decaying root or leaf litter. To combine them is what causes confusion. To talk about long-term sequestration REQUIRES the distinction of organic SCS from biochar.
To use (or abuse) your desire to combine two major CDR types / technologies, one could argue that both BECCS and DACCS are really together, just separated by the level of concentration of CO2 in chimneys versus ambient air. Minor difference? Or enhanced weathering (EW) with associated ocean alkalinization in the oceans might be combined with ocean fertilization (OF). They are all in the oceans. Are they not just a slight matter of chemistry? And timing? And budgets? When dealing with the common person, we must not underestimate their abilities to understand somethings. We need to teach them and to point out what are the real differences. Then they can understand and can become supportive.
In summary, I maintain that Biochar and Energy (BC&E) is and should be recognized as one of the major negative emission technologies (NETs) to accomplish CDR. If we cannot among ourselves have better recognition of the NETs, and especially about BC&E which is the most currently ready way to get moving for gigaton CDR, then our goal for climate stability is so much further away.
We (the world) need(s) all the tools we can muster to accomplish CDR. Just like hammers, saws, wrenches, drills, etc. each have specific functions for building a house, biochar (BC) is a tool separate from SCS, EW, DACCS, etc. They each have separate functions for saving a planet from climatic devastation.
In my document about “Recognition of BC&E…” I have suggested that there be a unified correction to the improper lumping of biochar with SCS. That could be a “statement” or a peer reviewed (short) document with many many co-authors, including those of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (2019), European Academies Science Advisory Council (2018) and Fuhrman et al. (2019) that have propagated the error. Let’s try to get this right.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website: www.drtlud.com
Email: psan...@ilstu.edu Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP Go to: www.JuntosNFP.org
Inventor of RoCC kilns for biochar and energy: See www.woodgas.com
Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at www.capitalism21.org)
with pages 88 – 94 about solving the world crisis for clean cookstoves.
From: Thomas Goreau <gor...@globalcoral.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2020 5:38 AM
To: Anderson, Paul <psan...@ilstu.edu>
Cc: Andrew Lockley <andrew....@gmail.com>; Carbon Dioxide Removal <CarbonDiox...@googlegroups.com>; Bio...@groups.io
Subject: Re: [CDR] RE: [Biochar] Special Issue - Bioenergy and Biochar: Repurposing Waste to Sustainable Energy and Materials
[This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to ab...@ilstu.edu]
Mike Biddle
This CDR group seems to have been taken over by biochar back and forths and its flooding my email. Is there a way to opt out of ‘biochar’ or do I need to remove myself from the CDR group?
Best regards,
Dr. Mike Biddle
Managing Director | Evok Innovations
San Francisco Bay Area Office
c: 925-393-9129
Sign up here to get the latest news from Evok Innovations!
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CY4PR03MB253581CC30233D4CB886BDD3DBD60%40CY4PR03MB2535.namprd03.prod.outlook.com.