Please find attached our paper on low tech pyrolysis emissions. The CH4-emissions of TLUD and Kon-Tikis are in the same order. Optimization of gas combustion and especially the use of dry feedstock can greatly reduce CH4-emissions of both.
CH4-emissions of forest wild fires are in the some order as optimized Kon-Tiki (see the other attached paper). In field burning of harvest residues produce more methane especially when the residues are humid as is often the case.
The quantity of emitted methane may not look high but as the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of methane is about 100 times that of CO2 in the first 20 years, the climate effect of rather low CH4-quantities is already considerable.
The problem with methane in all low-tech pyrolysis systems is that methane molecules get wrapped by arising water vapor which prevent its combustion.
From: Schmidt, Hans-Peter <schmidt@...>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 6:01 PM
To: Anderson, Paul <psanders@...>
Subject: Re: Webinar comments by Hans-Peter
... considering that 40 t DM of biomass per ha is what can be expected in tropical carbon farming systems, the 1500 t of biomass necessary for one standard size E-pyrolysis would need about 40 ha. And even when they do
not achieve those numbers in productivity in the first years, with 100 – 200 ha there would be enough biomass per village. In the tropics, this is more or less year around, and the machines can work in continuous processes.
[PSA>>] The above is a valuable statement. DM is “dry matter”, right? Just knowing about 40 t/ha/year would require 40 ha, and then to have extra, allow up to 100 or 200 ha. 100 ha is NOT a very big area;
it is only 1 sq km.
So a safe easy statement is that there can be sufficient biomass to produce 1 t of char per day for a year from a area the size of about 1 sq km.
??? Did I say that correctly? We do not want to be saying things that we later need to retract.
???? Maybe others who are in the tropical settings (Thailand, Uganda, etc.) could comment about this.
The US$ 50.000 estimate are based on our experimental E-Pyrolysis data, the Pyreg 1 t BC per day systems and experiences with other rotary kiln systems.
[PSA>>] I looked up the Pyreg rotary kiln. Nice video of a small model at
???Where is there some info of a larger unit that does 1 t BC per day? Or was that a calculated estimate of scale-up? Either way, that is a good starting point.
It is only an estimate but I do not see any that may increase the material and construction cost beyond 50.000 when it enters serial mass production. And I also think that 50.000 would be a kind of limit for investors
to start upscaling.
[PSA>>] I agree. The $50,000 is not a trivial amount and could be the limit for investors. And that is ONLY based on when serial mass production is possible.
??? Statement: What the world needs is a 1 t of BC per day system that costs only $25,000. Is that a good goal or “dream”??? Would that price make the production of biochar become a major factor quickly???
I would like several people to comment about this. Not just Hans-Peter has answers. Comments from all are appreciated.
The methane emissions shown in the graph are based on our Kon-Tiki paper (attached). The data are even much worse when the feedstock is not completely dry. We are going to publish a paper about it within the next months.
[PSA>>] As said before, please send the graph. I really did not associate methane with burning of biomass. I need some instruction. Does an open fire (bonfire or campfire or 3-stone fire) put out considerable
methane emissions? The testing of cookstoves does NOT have a methane concern!!!! So is it something about the flame-cap of the Kon-Tiki and other open cone kilns that “causes” the methane to be created and to escape?? Please help with this question.
I am still not understanding about methane for such fires.
Just wondering, why do you think that the 1 t/day of char production would be a size that would be appropriate for villages? We are discussing developing countries. Would this be expected year round, or maybe only
seasonally for 2 to 5 months (and then idle)?
And where did the $50,000 price per pyrolyzer installation come from? I am content if you say it was just a convenient number, but maybe you have some basis for it.
I was surprised by your comment about the (relatively) high emissions of methane from the Kon Tiki (and other) flame-cap charmakers. Any links to reports about this? Why methane? I would have more easily believe
high PM or CO.
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP
psanders@... Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile: 309-531-4434