toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
in response do the questions below I have created a new thread.
I mentioned my ideas which relate to biochar and human remains composting in at least two articles I wrote for medium.com. Because of my ALS, I cannot attach documents to an email by myself. My assistant Jake will be with me starting at 11 today and at that time I can provide some links.
The first of the 3 patent applications dealt with the idea of hydrolyzing the body under milder conditions than what it is used today. That would imply a longer time for hydrolysis unless there is more effective agitation, which is actually part of my thoughts. I don't mean to be gross about it but I went into full detail. Since the final hydrolysate has a pH of about 10, one really doesn't need to use potassium or sodium hydroxide, and can rather use tripotassium phosphate.
I would like to see my bones preserved. The conventional method of hydrolysis is so aggressive that the bones crumble due to the hydrolysis of the protein between the calcium apatite crystals of the bone.
The next patent refines the method by instead of going straight to composting having the hydrolysate absorbed into biochar. I'm pretty sure I have a medium.com article about both of these ideas.
The third major idea covered in by in my provisional patents is the concept of creating a fertilizer pellet which is mainly comprised of biochar particles with a desirable cation profile, which are then bound together by a mixture of potassium humate and the ammonium salt of ulmic acid.
I visualize a pellet of fertilizer that can go through conventional fertilizer spreaders. of course this can be done with the the biochar containing hydrolyzed human remains. In fact, that's what I want done with the proteinaceous portion of my body.
The funeral industry is ready for major changes. Alkaline hydrolysis is already legal in more than 50% of states in America. It uses less energy than any other approved method. And what appeals to me is that it prevents putrification, and it preserves the body's Amino and nucleic acids up to the point that they go into the soil or into a compost pile for composting. That appeals to me.
Because of my ALS I've been thinking a lot about what to do with my body when I die. I would very much like to be the very first example of my method being used.
On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 9:38 AM, Paul S Anderson
Please provide a link or sources about all three of your ideas. Is any about carbonization (pyrolysis) of the body?
Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website:
Email: psanders@... Skype: paultlud
Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434
Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP Go to:
Inventor of RoCC kilns for biochar and energy: See
Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at
with pages 88 – 94 about solving the world crisis for clean cookstoves.
From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io>
On Behalf Of Roger Faulkner via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2020 7:27 AM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io; Ron Larson <rongretlarson@...>; email@example.com; claudia.kammann@...
Subject: Re: [Biochar] Negative Emissions, Biochar material use and PyCCS
[This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to
I really enjoyed reading this. I have a contribution here, the use of biochar in human remains dispersal. I have actually filed three patent applications covering ways of dealing with a human body after death. The most favorable method
uses alkaline hydrolysis with a combination of potassium hydroxide and tripotassium phosphate as the hydrolyzing agent. This liquid can be absorbed onto biochar. The particulate biochar containing the hydrolyzed human remains can either go from there into
a compost pile or can be dried. It can also be pelletized by using a mixture potassium and ammonium salts of humic and ulmic acid.
I think it is often the case that getting a new industry started it is desirable to start at the highest value application you can think of. Tesla motors went after the top of the line sports car right from the beginning. They're probably
a lot of other examples as well.
Biochar used to help grieving people honor their loved ones by incorporating their remains into plantings which they select is a huge opening for getting biochar into the minds of the public. Biochar for this application could also fetch
a realistic price that would enable production to begin on a commercial basis.
I have filed those patent applications to enable me to speak freely about this. The clock is running; now that I have fully revealed my ideas they can only be patented by me because I have pending patent applications.
Before you think me a commercial sell out or something like that you should know that I have ALS and then I have devoted my life to causing change in the world. As I age it has become clear that the fastest way to do that is to make money.
Also mentioned in this train below are various ideas about how to name biochar. I think the definition biochar as opposed to other types of pyrolytic carbon which all are useful in carbon sequestration has to do with the cation exchange
capacity. I think it will have to come down to some specific criteria. It will probably be expressed in moles per kilogram or something like that.
I have commented a few times but allow me to introduce myself. I am Roger Faulkner, primarily I'm an inventor but I'm also a chemical engineer and polymer scientist. I have also been a political activist including
having run for the US Senate in Wisconsin in 1992 calling myself a green Republican. I got 20% of the vote in the statewide Republican primary election, more than 50,000 votes.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 7:44 PM, Ron Larson
Professor Kammann and biochar list:
Glad to see this new shorter thread on a limited topic. I’ve dropped much of your older material, which was on Project Drawdown not this issue - mostly " PYCCS." I earlier responded separately to Michael Shafer, who was the major part
of today’s thread comments.
This response is on terminology. Thanks for the three attachments. I’d not seen the one by Galinposki.
Re the “Biochar material use” discussion:
We carved the term PyCCS for Pyrogenic Carbon Capture and Storage via the two attached papers which does not contain the word “Biochar”, as you can see.
[RWL1. I like the word “carved”. I’ve previously read and greatly admired the two on PYCCS - where you are a co-author.. The titles don’t use the word “biochar”, but the papers do.
However, Frank mentions cascading uses and that is where building materials meet biochar: if you use a clay loam plaster on your walls – breaking the house down will ultimately
result in something that weathers again to be, in the end, soil. Also, if you use it as a feed additive, it finally ends up in the soil, but has a different purpose first (animal health).
[RWL2: Frank (see also his comment below) was responding to this paragraph in Michael’s message of also today (emphasis added); "Well, if we make the crude assumption that the smallest farms are the most marginal
and on the worst land, then we are talking about dividing our 1 billion tonnes of
real biochar (biochar buried in the ground) to the land that these farms are on. The result is not the golden 1 kg/m2 required to up the performance of the pampered soils of New York and the Rhone Valley, but in Asia and Africa, as little 125
or 250 g/ m2 ought to boost the yields of most crops by 30% or so.
I think I agree with you (Claudia) that the word “biochar” can be broader than initial placement in soil. I am happy with the idea that a biochar is any charcoal that is not combusted - whichI believe is what you say next.
For me, biochar was and is largely a term that depicts a beneficial material use,
not the use that involves burning it and returning it as CO2 to the atmosphere (as in “charcoal”), be it in soil, in animal feed, or materials such as paper (that may be composted in the end) or building materials.
No one would just use biochar as a sand replacement without testing the strength and resistance of the resulting material. At least in Europe, there are strict regulations
and norms that would never, ever allow its use without sufficient R&D first. Maybe this is different, a kind of Wild-wild-West, in the US?
[RWL3: I believe it true that the US still doesn’t have the “legal” definitions that are the arrangement in at least parts of Europe. But California seems to be getting close. It is worse than being “wild”.
Hans-Peter Schmidt has done some work on this, together with engineers. Biochar in tunnel concrete worked well as a replacement of the fibres that they have to put in
it as fire protection (fibres that melt when there’s a fire, so that water vapour can escape and the carrying structure remains intact & is not blasted appart. Biochar replaced the fibres very well.) Plus, biochar is alkaline, not acidic.... Clearly, more
R&D is needed here.
[RWL4: Very interesting; that “fire” protection information is new to me.
If we truly want to go for the 2° goal of Paris, there is no way around negative emissions, with biochar /PyCCS as one of the many needed options. And as for the next
ice age? Screw that, not going to happen, anyway, we humans made sure of that already. (See attached paper “Ganopolsik et al. 2016”)
[RWL5. We should also note the way you use “biochar/PYCCS” as being separate - I believe not two terms for the same product(s). Your team has done a nice job of sequestering pyrolysis products, NOT sequestering CO2.
But I may be misinterpreting as you add "as one of”. Should that be “as two of”?
I can’t find that the past thread has talked about “next ice age” - but I agree with you on having put that off for probably millennia. I see that the “ice age" term is the subject of the Ganopolski paper, they seem to have done a
I don’t think this is the right list to get into arguing the truth of this paper.
Claudia: Good to have you commenting here. I understand the term “PYCCS” as being different from “biochar”, but I am afraid that the (commendably) large sequestration values in your two papers are being lost by CDR writers, because
they aren’t labeled “biochar”. I don’t know how to solve that problem - except to hope you can find a way to somehow include the word “biochar” in future papers' titles
The “Caludia” problem should have been fixed.; hope it wasn’t the list fault.
PS: Can someone probably correct my first name in the data base....?
RE: “real biochar (biochar buried in the ground)
What is the definition of “real Biochar” ?
As I see it, Biochar is pyrogenic, stable black carbon that is useful in fostering / in supporting LIFE.
Biology = Life-Science
Bio = Life (Greek)
Consequently: Biochar supports, fosters, enables Life above and below ground and in/ under water.
Pyrogenic Carbon / Biochar has supported, fostered and enabled life well before humans walked the Earth and / or well before humans learned how to manage fire. …
The cascading values and uses of Biochar is where things get very interesting.
First capturing nutrients and then becoming useful in the soil and sediment …
Frankly thinking loud
Your capacity for detail is just remarkable. It took me more than a few times through this to make all the pieces fall into place and i am normally a pretty good close reader.
<snip - the rest on a different topic - responded to already>