Re: White paper "Climate Intervention with Biochar" and related webinar on 10 Dec


d.michael.shafer@gmail.com
 

Dear Geoff,

This is an interesting take on the whole methane thing. To be honest, it never occurred to me that my troughs and trenches were emitting lots of methane until pushed about this by Hans Pieter with the weight of the IPCC behind him. I had always assumed that all that nice flame was methane burning as it is in the stack of my TLUDs. And as for time and EFs, I am entirely with you on avoiding getting laughed at. I take cover behind the EPA's published Global Warming Potential (GWP) figures that are all 100 year numbers. I have been attached for being too conservative for using their methane GWP of just 25, but better that than going too far. I think that one thing that all this raises is the question of one's own timeframe. As Paul Anderson pointed out to me recently, 20 years may seem like a long time when you are selling carbon emission reduction credits in the here and now, but in anything less immediate, what's 20 years? Seriously, trees take 20 years to grow what...? if you are thinking about carbon emission reductions or carbon capture via biochar over the next century, what's 20 years?

M




photo
Dr. D. Michael Shafer
Founder and Director, Warm Heart

+1 732-745-9295 | +66 (0)85 199-2958 | d.michael.shafer@...

www.warmheartworldwide.org | Skype: live:d.michael.shafer53

61 M.8 T.Maepang A.Phrao 50190 Chiang Mai Thailand
Social icon Social icon Social icon

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 10:41 AM Geoff Thomas <wind@...> wrote:
Hi Michael, Naturally there is a lot of debate on the methane issue, - it tends to be over emphasized by conservationists and under emphasized by the Gas miners..

The amount of how much stronger has gone up from single digit to (the highest i have seen) 90 times stronger a greenhouse gas than CO2, nontheless, it does seem to be more on the higher side than lower from article to article whereas the time it remains at significant levels in the atmoshere seems to be averaging about 12 years, lately.
Tricky things to measure of course and vary from place to place, so I tend to use lower figures when writing letters on it, as one can not be ridiculed as easily, imho, if using lower figures, yet on the other hand one doesn’t want to pretend it is not a problem.

With methane from flame cap kilns, if the kiln is working correctly, - ie no smoke and flame all over, it is hard to see how much methane at all would not be combusted, - it has heat and oxygen and relatively low combustion temperature.
Perhaps when one must use a wind shield, the input air could go through a slot caused by cutting around 3 sides and bending the ‘tongue’, Inwards, always in the same direction all around the circle, so the air goes clockwise or anti clockwise and forms a spiral, thus achieving more mixing and more dwell time of the gas forming the shield.
Presumably the direction of the spin should be opposite in the northern hemisphere than the southern hemisphere, depending on the direction of the spiral formed when you empty a bathtub and a spiral forms around the plug hole, although just how important that is I have no idea, - it seems to be important to Cyclones, - what Americans call Hurricanes, but could also be called Anticyclones, in the northern hemisphere.

Cheers,
Geoff. 

I  
On 8 Dec 2020, at 4:09 pm, d.michael.shafer@... wrote:

Paul,

I have been corresponding with Hans Pieter Schmidt and others of the biochar "biggies" about a new project involving the counting of small producer biochar in the climate change budget.

I have learned a number of interesting things. According to Schmidt, it is essential to separate our (as he calls it) "Kon-tiki" pyrolysis from other stuff because of the methane emitted. The methane, he argues, offsets carbon sequestration values for 20 years, that is, until the methane had entirely broken down. As far as I know, TLUDs do not emit methane.

He also contends that the "NOx bundle" is not considered "climate forcing" only N2) is, that he asserts it is not included in the bundle. S. Akagi does not give a separate EF for N2O. He would therefore contend that the 3.11 kg/tonne for NOx that is included in CO2e is not valid unless an EF for N2) can be found to replace it.

He also contends that while NH3 (ammonia) is a smog precursor, it is not a climate forcer and therefore cannot be counted in CO2e.

Finally, he says that the best way to go about our work is to focus exclusively on emissions reductions from open field burning of biomass and not try to deal with sequestration where the carbon math gets very complicated.

As for biomass totals, I have been doing a lot of reading. According to "scientific" sources,crop waste biomass is best measured as "dry matter," something that i have never encountered in the field and something that is NOT cited in the FAO stats. Koppmann, 2012, a big player in this realm, constantly refers to a late 1990s figure of 8.7 gigatonnes of waste biomass as dry matter. Corn cob from the field comes in at 15% moisture content or more such that this is equal to at least 10 gigatonnes + of not dry biomass. 

For whatever reason, FAOSTAT will not load just now, but when it does, I will re-run my numbers for say 1999 to see how they compare. Because feed and food crop production have increased so rapidly and so much in the past 20 years, I suspect that I will find that my figures and the DM figures are reasonably close.

I will let you know as soon as I can get to the website.

M




photo
Dr. D. Michael Shafer
Founder and Director, Warm Heart
www.warmheartworldwide.org  | Skype: live:d.michael.shafer53
61 M.8 T.Maepang A.Phrao 50190 Chiang Mai Thailand
Social iconSocial iconSocial icon
App Banner Image
App Social Buttons Image   App Social Buttons Image   

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 3:30 AM Paul S Anderson <psanders@...> wrote:

This white paper will be summarized and discussed at a free webinar that is announce in the attachment:  9 AM EST Thursday 10 December 2020.

Please forward this announcement to others who have interest in either our climate crisis or biochar or both.

Climate Intervention

with Biochar

A White Paper about Biochar and Energy (BC&E) for

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and Emission Reduction (ER)

First Edition dated 2020-12-07

Distributed from the website  www.woodgas.energy 

 

The white paper’s direct URL is    https://woodgas.energy/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Climate-Intervention-With-Biochar.pdf

 

Executive Summary of Biochar White Paper

Elevator Speech: 

            Major impacts to fight the climate crisis are possible now with the economical use of biochar and energy (BC&E) as a negative emissions technology (NET) for millennial sequestration of gigatons of atmospheric CO2e as a soil enhancement while also being an emission reduction (ER) source for valuable needed heat.  Opportunities for practical, prompt actions are in Part Two of the white paper.

* * *  Part One:  Biochar among the NETs  * * * 

            A.  Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) involves two separate actions:  remove CO2 from the atmosphere and sequester it for at least hundreds of years.  Of the recognized Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs), only one good combination is functional now for gigatons of CDR. 

            B.   Natural photosynthesis by plants in forests, fields, wild lands, and oceans (as associated with AR, SCS, and OF) can do at low-cost massive amounts of CO2 removal by creating biomass that is abundant and can even be increased.  

            C.  Pyrolysis of that biomass can produce highly stable carbon for sequestration while also providing vast amounts of valuable heat, being the NET called Biochar and Energy (BC&E).  

            D.  Other technical solutions (DACCS, BECCS, EW and OF) are still in development stages involving sorbents and inorganic chemistry for expensive carbon capture and storage (CCS). 

            E.  It is time to recognize pyrolytic biochar from biomass as a practical way get CDR started immediately.

 * * *  Part Two:  Gigatons of CO2 Removal and Reduction via Biochar  * * *

            F.  Nearly 0.2 Gt CO2/yr currently is being made worldwide into stable carbon:  But it is charcoal produced to be burned for cooking for 2 billion people, not for sequestration.  Section XI. 

            G.  Micro-gasifier BC&E TLUD biomass cookstoves produce biochar equal to approximately 1 t CO2 removal per stove per year.  With carbon offset support, sustainable and even profitable fexpansion could sequester 0.25 Gt CO2e/yr with many SDG benefits for the bottom quintile of socio-economic families with a decrease in the consumption of biomass fuel.  Section XII. 

            H.  Recent (2020 patent application) advances in lower-cost mid-range BC&E char making technology help make scalable CDR solutions possible.  Section XIII.

            I.  Cleaner air is a benefit while sequestering a Gt of CO2e/yr from pyrolysis of crop residues, with co-benefits for SDGs.  Section XV. 

            J.  Biomass disposal via BC&E for fire safety, forestry slash and urban waste.   Section XVI.

            K.  Biomass pyrolysis and electric power production.  Sections XVII. 

            L. Heat for housing and industrial process heat.   Sections XVIII and XIX.     

            M.  Co-benefits of Biochar and the financial value of CDR, by biochar    Sections XXI and XXII

            N.  A blockchain-secured carbon accounting and verifiable biochar sequestration recording and mapping system for ER and CDR is operational. Sections IX and XX.

* * *  Part Three:  Conclusions and Actions   * * *

            N.  Summary of CO2 removal via BC&E, reaching up to 9.2 Gt/yr CO2e. Section XXIV          

            O.  A call to action.  “If we cannot promptly implement these comparatively easy, benefit-rich Biochar and Energy (BC&E) initiatives, we will lose the battle to save our planet.”        Paul S. Anderson, PhD, Woodgas Pyrolytics, 7 December 2020 (psanders@... )

 

 

++++++++++++

 

 

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  

Inventor of RoCC kilns for biochar and energy:  See  www.woodgas.energy  

Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at www.capitalism21.org)

         with pages 88 – 94 about solving the world crisis for clean cookstoves.

 




Join main@Biochar.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.