Re: [usbiochar] New Research Article on Forest C Sequestration vs. Bioenergy #bioenergy #sequestration
Paul S Anderson
To Tom and all,
Extremely interesting. I will leave the chemistry to the chemists. I will comment on the lower amount of CO2 emissions, which reveal that there was less thermal energy released (assuming quite complete combustion of a lesser amount of pyrolytic gases).
If standard pyrolysis has a 20% weight yield of charcoal, and if the “50%-ash-added” pyrolysis had a 78% increase in biochar carbon, then 0.78 x 20% is 15.6%, giving a total of 35.6% weight yield of charcoal.
In conditions where the components (biomass and ash) are in supply, and where there is no useful value for the released thermal energy, this could make the difference between making a profit or not from the biochar.
This experience (and others similarly structured) should be replicated, and if successful, should be considered for commercial applications.
But what do the chemists say about the process? And does the 450 deg C biochar have the desired characteristics for adsorption, water retention, pH, etc? Making more of what might not as good is not progress. Much still needs to be known.
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website: www.drtlud.com
Email: psanders@... Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP
Go to: www.JuntosNFP.org to support woodgas (TLUD) projects
incl. purchase of Woodgas Emission Reduction (WER) carbon credits
and please tell you friends about these distinctive service efforts.
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: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> On Behalf Of Thomas Casten via Groups.Io
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Biochar] [usbiochar] New Research Article on Forest C Sequestration vs. Bioenergy
[This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to abuse@...]
I discovered a fascinating 2018 paper today, attached, titled " Unexplored potential of novel biochar-ash composites for use as organo-mineral fertilizers" Wolfram Buss et al that bears on this thread.
The research looked at making biochar with finely ground spruce and pine pellets and with the same feedstock plus between 5% and 50% ash from biomass boilers with the same feedstock.
Hold on to your hat! The 50% ash addition resulted in a 78% increase in the biochar carbon from a given amount of feedstock. This was an increase in the biochar carbon, although the ash analysis showed no carbon. The ash seemed to act as a catalyst, enabling the biochar carbon to convert to recalcitrant carbon at a lower temperature. In addition, the biochar pellets were loaded with plant nutrients, so they should create interesting yield increases in crops or trees in the initial year.
In my economist view, this is a game-changer. The percentage of biomass carbon that becomes recalcitrant biochar carbon goes from perhaps 45% to near 80%, and the CO2 emissions from the pyrolysis is slashed. Lower cost biochar, more effective biochar, and significantly more carbon sequestration, with less CO2 emissions.
Am I missing something?
Thomas R Casten
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 6:38 PM Kelpie Wilson <kelpiew@...> wrote: