Re: A question about biochar as a decontaminate #contaminate

Nando Breiter

I am sure that there are preferred feedstocks, pyrolysis temps, etc. for each contaminate type, but my question is more general. It is really, "Is there any point? Anything to gain?" or would such an exercise be a total waste of money and frivolous?

In practice, I don't think there is a general answer.  For projects like this, a large scale producer or promoter will need to find funding. Funds for such projects do not come easily. Those providing them almost certainly must believe there is a point, there is something to gain. In my experience, most people with control over substantial amounts of money in the private sector have a pretty good head on their shoulders and a very good nose for BS, prevarication, or a thinly researched case. So if the project promoters think it may be frivolous, it is very unlikely they will be able to convince financial backers that it is not. 

That said, the real world is complex and not easy to understand, but I do not think putting our best effort into understanding it and sharing the slivers of knowledge we gain is frivolous, even when the results are certain to be impartial truths.

So even if the char sorbs only some of a toxin, and does not retain it forever, and "only" one case of cancer in a young child is prevented as a result, and we learn something useful along the way to improve our approach, would that be a total waste of money? 

Nando Breiter
CarbonZero Sagl
Astano, Switzerland

Join to automatically receive all group messages.