Topics

Biochar's Role in Driving Carbon Dioxide Emissions to Zero #CDR #climate #drawdown


Valentine Nzengung
 

I though this will be of interest to the Biochar Community of Practice.









Valentine A. Nzengung, PhD
College Arts & Science
Professor Environmental Geochemistry, National Academy of Inventors ( NAI) Fellow

Geology Department
Athens, GA 30602-5026

p: 706-202-4296
e: vnzengun@...
w: https://geology.uga.edu/directory/people/valentine-nzengung

University of Georgia
Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Youtube Snapchat


Paul S Anderson
 

Valentine,

 

Thank you.  Quite interesting graphic (see it below in the original message).   And it prompts some comments about labels.   The graphic is about POTENTIAL by 2030 (as if society is going to actually take action, but that is a separate discussion.)   Units of measurement are PER YEAR but are only in MEGAtons.   And we need a 1000 Mega to become ONE GIGA.  

 

CCS:   Carbon Capture and Storage POTENTIAL

This is the massive SPACE to put the captured carbon IF such capture would be possible in quantities.   The fossil fuel industry has given to humanity so much empty space in the depleted oil and gas reservoirs.   They have created space for the solutions to the problems that such extraction caused in the first place.   Will society pay those companies for that space?

 

CCUS:   Carbon Capture and Use.    Is that the name?   Or is the final “S” to mean storage?     Carbon Capture Use and Storage   is what I think it means, but there could be many authoritative definitions.

 

The part of CCUS for FUEL is not storage and is not carbon dioxide removal (CDR).   And even if they are renewable fuels from biological sources, those fuels when burned are at best carbon neutral (except that there was energy expended to make the fuels.)    Does not seem to be appropriate for this graphic that is about POTENTIAL and being carbon negative.

 

PLASTICS AND CHEMICALS.    Assuming that these materials are stable AND were made from renewable sources (probably not the case), they can indeed be CCUS (meaning storage).   But for much of it, now the problems become how we can capture the plastic and store it so that it does not eventually reach the oceans.  Recycling is not removal, so the ultimate place for plastic is in landfills.

 

ENHANCED OIL RECOVERY:  This is usage of captured CO2, good.   But we really should not want to be encouraging the production of more oil and gas, especially if we (society as customers) are paying for the EOR efforts, which are not yet showing that the results are worth the costs.

 

CONSTRUCTION:   Good.   Finally one that makes sense.   Much work is still needed to make CDR via construction materials happen at the multi-gigaton scale, whether in concrete or in modern buildings with much wood.  I often think of trees over 200 years old being massive trusses in 800 year old cathedrals in Europe.   Millennial storage!!   Too bad that Notre Dame burned down a year ago and the debris is now in some landfill.  The graphic give the impact value of 3 gigatons CO2 removal per year (by 2030 if society would get serious about such construction).   Build and build and build.   When more space is needed, tear it down and perhaps fill some to the quarries from which limestone was extracted in the past for making cement.  

 

BIOCHAR:   [I acknowledge my focus on biochar.]  I do not like that biochar would be lumped into the CCUS basket with the others.   CCS and CCUS should be used with BECCS and DACCS (DAC) technologies, which are trying hard to become proven for scaled efforts to solve the world’s carbon crisis.   We need all efforts for CDR.   And also I disagree that the CDR per year of biochar should be as low as one gigaton.   I will write about that separately.

 

In  conclusion, I like to see such graphics, but I think that the public audience is sometimes misled into thinking that all that is presented is in a  proper context or might help solve the climate crisis.

 

I will possibly revise this and sent to the CDR Discussion Group.   Does Valentine or anyone else want to participate in that message to a different audience?    For now, this is just a Biochar discussion topic.

 

Paul

 

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.com

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 Valentine Nzengung via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2020 9:24 AM
To: biochar@groups.io; main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: [Biochar] Biochar's Role in Driving Carbon Dioxide Emissions to Zero

 

[This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to abuse@...]

I though this will be of interest to the Biochar Community of Practice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Valentine A. Nzengung, PhD
College Arts & Science
Professor Environmental Geochemistry, National Academy of Inventors ( NAI) Fellow

Geology Department
Athens, GA 30602-5026

p: 706-202-4296
e: vnzengun@...
w: https://geology.uga.edu/directory/people/valentine-nzengung

University of Georgia

FacebookTwitterInstagramLinkedInYoutubeSnapchat

 


Valentine Nzengung
 

Hi Paul,

McKinsey is open to inputs into its analysis. I am sure your analysis will be accepted for review. See a related paper at the url below.
Holding warming to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels could limit the most dangerous and irreversible effects of climate change.
www.mckinsey.com
Best regards,
Valentine


Valentine A. Nzengung, PhD
College Arts & Science
Professor Environmental Geochemistry, National Academy of Inventors ( NAI) Fellow

Geology Department
Athens, GA 30602-5026

p: 706-202-4296
e: vnzengun@...
w: https://geology.uga.edu/directory/people/valentine-nzengung

University of Georgia
Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Youtube Snapchat


From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> on behalf of Paul S Anderson via groups.io <psanders@...>
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2020 11:46 AM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io>; biochar@groups.io <biochar@groups.io>
Cc: Anderson, Paul <psanders@...>
Subject: Re: [Biochar] Biochar's Role in Driving Carbon Dioxide Emissions to Zero
 
[EXTERNAL SENDER - PROCEED CAUTIOUSLY]

Valentine,

 

Thank you.  Quite interesting graphic (see it below in the original message).   And it prompts some comments about labels.   The graphic is about POTENTIAL by 2030 (as if society is going to actually take action, but that is a separate discussion.)   Units of measurement are PER YEAR but are only in MEGAtons.   And we need a 1000 Mega to become ONE GIGA.  

 

CCS:   Carbon Capture and Storage POTENTIAL

This is the massive SPACE to put the captured carbon IF such capture would be possible in quantities.   The fossil fuel industry has given to humanity so much empty space in the depleted oil and gas reservoirs.   They have created space for the solutions to the problems that such extraction caused in the first place.   Will society pay those companies for that space?

 

CCUS:   Carbon Capture and Use.    Is that the name?   Or is the final “S” to mean storage?     Carbon Capture Use and Storage   is what I think it means, but there could be many authoritative definitions.

 

The part of CCUS for FUEL is not storage and is not carbon dioxide removal (CDR).   And even if they are renewable fuels from biological sources, those fuels when burned are at best carbon neutral (except that there was energy expended to make the fuels.)    Does not seem to be appropriate for this graphic that is about POTENTIAL and being carbon negative.

 

PLASTICS AND CHEMICALS.    Assuming that these materials are stable AND were made from renewable sources (probably not the case), they can indeed be CCUS (meaning storage).   But for much of it, now the problems become how we can capture the plastic and store it so that it does not eventually reach the oceans.  Recycling is not removal, so the ultimate place for plastic is in landfills.

 

ENHANCED OIL RECOVERY:  This is usage of captured CO2, good.   But we really should not want to be encouraging the production of more oil and gas, especially if we (society as customers) are paying for the EOR efforts, which are not yet showing that the results are worth the costs.

 

CONSTRUCTION:   Good.   Finally one that makes sense.   Much work is still needed to make CDR via construction materials happen at the multi-gigaton scale, whether in concrete or in modern buildings with much wood.  I often think of trees over 200 years old being massive trusses in 800 year old cathedrals in Europe.   Millennial storage!!   Too bad that Notre Dame burned down a year ago and the debris is now in some landfill.  The graphic give the impact value of 3 gigatons CO2 removal per year (by 2030 if society would get serious about such construction).   Build and build and build.   When more space is needed, tear it down and perhaps fill some to the quarries from which limestone was extracted in the past for making cement.  

 

BIOCHAR:   [I acknowledge my focus on biochar.]  I do not like that biochar would be lumped into the CCUS basket with the others.   CCS and CCUS should be used with BECCS and DACCS (DAC) technologies, which are trying hard to become proven for scaled efforts to solve the world’s carbon crisis.   We need all efforts for CDR.   And also I disagree that the CDR per year of biochar should be as low as one gigaton.   I will write about that separately.

 

In  conclusion, I like to see such graphics, but I think that the public audience is sometimes misled into thinking that all that is presented is in a  proper context or might help solve the climate crisis.

 

I will possibly revise this and sent to the CDR Discussion Group.   Does Valentine or anyone else want to participate in that message to a different audience?    For now, this is just a Biochar discussion topic.

 

Paul

 

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.com

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 Valentine Nzengung via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2020 9:24 AM
To: biochar@groups.io; main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: [Biochar] Biochar's Role in Driving Carbon Dioxide Emissions to Zero

 

[This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to abuse@...]

I though this will be of interest to the Biochar Community of Practice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Valentine A. Nzengung, PhD
College Arts & Science
Professor Environmental Geochemistry, National Academy of Inventors ( NAI) Fellow

Geology Department
Athens, GA 30602-5026

p: 706-202-4296
e: vnzengun@...
w: https://geology.uga.edu/directory/people/valentine-nzengung

University of Georgia

FacebookTwitterInstagramLinkedInYoutubeSnapchat

 


ROBERT W GILLETT
 

Valentine,

Thank-you for posting information about the article. Having read through and pondered it, the thing that stands out to me is the expectation that biochar will continue to be valued as a premium product 10 years from now, far exceeding other paths of CCUS (except plastic, which I hope means biodegradable plastic). 

Adding to my perspective of the CCS picture, another eye-opener for me in this article is the huge technical potential and anticipated demand for CO2 storage in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and aquifers. I doubt that biochar would be suitable for that path, unless as a means of disposal of contaminated char.

Best,
Robert Gillett


Harald Bier
 

Dear Robert, dear all, 

we just recently published a Whitepaper: Biochar-based carbon sinks to mitigate climate change. 

You can find it here: http://www.biochar-industry.com/why/ 

I will refer from posting personal opinions on CCS, but I think we should put the greatest effort into nature-based solutions as they are available and scalable NOW and they have co-benefits (that are actually primary benefits for many of us). Of course we will need every way of storing carbon, no doubt. 

Best, Harald


Am 16.10.2020 um 14:26 schrieb ROBERT W GILLETT <themarvalus.wabio@...>:

Valentine,

Thank-you for posting information about the article. Having read through and pondered it, the thing that stands out to me is the expectation that biochar will continue to be valued as a premium product 10 years from now, far exceeding other paths of CCUS (except plastic, which I hope means biodegradable plastic). 

Adding to my perspective of the CCS picture, another eye-opener for me in this article is the huge technical potential and anticipated demand for CO2 storage in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and aquifers. I doubt that biochar would be suitable for that path, unless as a means of disposal of contaminated char.

Best,
Robert Gillett


Tom Miles
 

Harald,

 

Thank you very much.

 

Tom

 

Tom Miles

Executive Director

U.S. Biochar Initiative

"Promoting the Sustainable Production and Use of Biochar"

www.biochar-us.org

@USbiochar

Facebook US Biochar Initiative

USBI Logo - Copy (420x176) 

 

 

 

From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> On Behalf Of Harald Bier
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 12:18 PM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Biochar] Biochar's Role in Driving Carbon Dioxide Emissions to Zero

 

Dear Robert, dear all, 

 

we just recently published a Whitepaper: Biochar-based carbon sinks to mitigate climate change. 

 

You can find it here: http://www.biochar-industry.com/why/ 

 

I will refer from posting personal opinions on CCS, but I think we should put the greatest effort into nature-based solutions as they are available and scalable NOW and they have co-benefits (that are actually primary benefits for many of us). Of course we will need every way of storing carbon, no doubt. 

 

Best, Harald

 



Am 16.10.2020 um 14:26 schrieb ROBERT W GILLETT <themarvalus.wabio@...>:

 

Valentine,

Thank-you for posting information about the article. Having read through and pondered it, the thing that stands out to me is the expectation that biochar will continue to be valued as a premium product 10 years from now, far exceeding other paths of CCUS (except plastic, which I hope means biodegradable plastic). 

Adding to my perspective of the CCS picture, another eye-opener for me in this article is the huge technical potential and anticipated demand for CO2 storage in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and aquifers. I doubt that biochar would be suitable for that path, unless as a means of disposal of contaminated char.

Best,
Robert Gillett

 


Benoit Lambert
 

Harald,

Your Whitepaper does a great job at putting biochar in perspective compare to other nature-based sinks. The time has come to insist biochar has co-benefits that BECCS and other carbon dioxide removal approaches do not have. Biochar is ready for implementation now, and, indeed, can be combined and used in cascade with other bio-sourced climate solutions such as build-up of soil organic matter or planned grazing. Remarkable piece of work, and you are right, 80% of information on biochar came in recent years. Things go fast. Good work !!

Dr. Benoit Lambert
Founder and President / Fondateur et président
Cbiochar Enr., https://cbiochar.com
BioGéoThérapiste, auteur/blog https://cologie.wordpress.com 
Membre: Stratégie énergétique, biosphère et société, Genève
Reviewer/réviseur IPCC/GIEC, Working Group I (WGI), Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), in particular Chap. 5 Carbon dioxide removal methods/biochar.
Tel: 450 775 7444








Le 16 oct. 2020 à 20:02, Tom Miles via groups.io <tmiles@...> a écrit :

Harald,
 
Thank you very much. 
 
Tom
 
Tom Miles
Executive Director
U.S. Biochar Initiative
"Promoting the Sustainable Production and Use of Biochar"
@USbiochar
 
 
 
From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> On Behalf Of Harald Bier
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 12:18 PM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Biochar] Biochar's Role in Driving Carbon Dioxide Emissions to Zero
 
Dear Robert, dear all, 
 
we just recently published a Whitepaper: Biochar-based carbon sinks to mitigate climate change. 
 
You can find it here: http://www.biochar-industry.com/why/ 
 
I will refer from posting personal opinions on CCS, but I think we should put the greatest effort into nature-based solutions as they are available and scalable NOW and they have co-benefits (that are actually primary benefits for many of us). Of course we will need every way of storing carbon, no doubt. 
 
Best, Harald
 


Am 16.10.2020 um 14:26 schrieb ROBERT W GILLETT <themarvalus.wabio@...>:
 
Valentine,

Thank-you for posting information about the article. Having read through and pondered it, the thing that stands out to me is the expectation that biochar will continue to be valued as a premium product 10 years from now, far exceeding other paths of CCUS (except plastic, which I hope means biodegradable plastic). 

Adding to my perspective of the CCS picture, another eye-opener for me in this article is the huge technical potential and anticipated demand for CO2 storage in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and aquifers. I doubt that biochar would be suitable for that path, unless as a means of disposal of contaminated char.

Best,
Robert Gillett