Re: A climate change solution slowly gains ground: Washington Post
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
This is a depressingly familiar story. Everyone loves cool, futuristic, high-tech solutions. Nobody ever considers the obvious point that absent a Manhattan Project, new technologies do not scale fast. No less important, any technology that captures fossil fuel emissions can at best be carbon neutral. That is, if the technology captured 100% of the emissions, all it would do is to 0 out the addition of new carbon to the atmosphere. Capture CO2 from a coal-fired power plant? Pump it into an old oil well? Cool. How much of the plant's emissions are you not capturing? What about the emissions of that mile long train that hauled the coal to the plant. What about....
The challenge here is to address the bias in both reporting and thinking. It is these that direct us down these practical dead ends and divert our attention from the task at hand: removing carbon from the atmosphere.
Here Kathleen Draper is absolutely right. Biochar is the only viable means available for sequestering large quantities of carbon. And as David Yarrow points out, once we do this properly, we will set off a cascade of additional carbon sequestering processes in the soil.
Time to get out there and pyrolize! Municipalities can save millions by charring everything heading for landfills, sewage sludge, and autumn leaf collections. Timber and lumber companies can save - even profit - by charring. Farmers can char corn stalk/soy hay and plow the char in before planting cover crops. Given cost savings realized, all of these ought to be profitable even at today's ridiculously low valuation of carbon removal.
Where is the leadership on this? Where is the Mike Bloomberg of the oceans Initiative?
Time to stop explaining all of biochar's limits and to start selling. Otherwise, high-tech cool and its big media shills are going to waste a lot more of the little time we have left.