John, I could roll out tens of kilometers of properly-designed 10 meter wide floating Algae "seine" from a barge on the Red Sea and roll it back up to squeeze out the algae and saline water several months later, while you are taking a stroll across the ocean to reach the proverbial "promised land for ozzies" in the Mojave Desert. :-)
Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: John Berry To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 2/15/2007 5:31:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: The $25 Million Branson Climate Prize Ok, so what do you think the cost per tonne of carbon dioxide removed by your method would be? Obviously it's going to have to be better than $15USD per tonne to be worth while. Though I don't suspect you aren't far enough along for a cost analysis yet? On 2/16/07, Frederick Sparber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Michel Jullian wrote. > > Charring works I agree but it retains only 50 percent of the biomass carbon. > Right the pyrolysis creates CO + H2 + pyroligneous acids etc that reacts with the atmospheric O2 which I found with my early biomass work was enough to self-power a unit that augered biomass through a stainless steel tube heated to 1200-1400 F with the off gas and acids wet scrubbed. > >Half-charred idea: how about pressing the micro-algae for their oil and then charring the press-cake to make charcoal? > If pressing retains 60% of the carbon, the whole process could sequester 80% of the captured carbon! > Vacuum or inert gas (N2) pyrolysis can do that. > > BTW, are we set on high yield salt water micro-algae http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algaculture for the CO2 capture? > It's hard to grow seaweed in livestock watering tanks, and water evaporation (about 12,000-15,000 gallons/acre-day) makes large desert algae ponds rather impractical > > It seems less fuss than macro-algae (seaweeds), and can be grown anywhere on the ocean surface not just in shallow areas. > The use of floated "seine" ponds in fresh or sea water would make large scale harvesting more practical. No? > > As I said if it turned out to be more economical we could also harvest the open sea phytoplankton > (which we could re-seed to help natural reproduction), using floating multi-km2 fine-mesh nets >. > Wouldn't it be nice if a self-powered harvesting/processing supertanker departing empty from a middle east port could arrive full at a US port? :) > Lets get Nick Palmer across the "Chunnel" from you to ask Sir Richard Branson that question. Fred >. > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "vortex-l" < vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:46 AM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: The $25 Million Branson Climate Prize > > > >I see your point Nick, harvesting algae using a floating horizontal fine-mesh seine > > as an algae pond to sequester atmospheric CO2 followed by charring the algae is > > a seine idea. > > Since Michel is closer to the Seine.... and you are closer to Branson. :-) > > > > The millions of acres in the US that are in "set aside acreage" that are > > brush-hogged so the farmer can collect up to $30.00/acre (or are > > brush-hogged to keep the place looking good) that oxidize releasing > > CO2, could be covered with a fiberglass mat or such to generate "slash-and-char > > bio-char in situ. > > > > Fred > > > > http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/geowissenschaften/bericht-555 16.html > > > > "Slash-and-burn, which is commonly used in many parts of the world to prepare fields for crops, releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Slash-and-char, on the other hand, actually reduces greenhouse gases, Lehmann said, by sequestering huge amounts of carbon for thousands of years and substantially reducing methane and nitrous oxide emissions from soils. > > > > "The result is that about 50 percent of the biomass carbon is retained," Lehmann said. "By sequestering huge amounts of carbon, this technique constitutes a much longer and significant sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide than most other sequestration options, making it a powerful tool for long-term mitigation of climate change. In fact we have calculated that up to 12 percent of the carbon emissions produced by human activity could be offset annually if slash-and-burn were replaced by slash-and-char." > > > > In addition, many biofuel production methods, such as generating bioenergy from agricultural, fish and forestry waste, produce bio-char as a byproduct. "The global importance of a bio-char sequestration as a byproduct of the conversion of biomass to bio-fuels is difficult to predict but is potentially very large," he added. " > > > > Nick Palmer wrote: > >> > >> > >> Here's three more websites (particularly the first one) that extol the apparently huge benefits of bio-char charcoal in > soils. If the char was created from pyrolysed algae that was fattened on fossil fuel sourced > >> CO2, we could be on our way to a share of $25 million! > >> Can anyone do some numbers? > >> > >> http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/terra_preta/TerraPretahome.htm > >> > >> http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/geowissenschaften/bericht-555 16.html > >>> http://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU05/05947/EGU05-J-05947.pdf > >>
