Folks,

I think biochar suffers from the same fate as most biomass options.

Because of the low efficiency with which ecosystems convert sunlight to
reduced carbon and because only a fraction of this reduced carbon will be
converted to biochar, biochar options are unlikely to be able to offset more
than 1 W of fossil-fuel CO2 emissions per square meter of land area. My
post-doc has done some calculations indicating that this estimate might be a
factor of 5 too small (taking into account other inputs and inefficiencies).

We in the United States each use about 10 kW of energy, so this would be on
the order of a hectare per person at the higher efficiency, 5 hectares at
the lower efficiency.

For 7 billion people at 2 kW, this is 1.4 x 10^13 m2, or roughly 10% of land
area on Earth at the higher efficiency -- roughly the amount of land already
devoted to agriculture -- or half the land area on Earth if my post-doc is
right about the lower efficiency.

So, this is another one of those things that could be good to do where
appropriate, but is not likely to be a major player in the grand scheme of
things.

Best,

Ken

___________________________________________________
Ken Caldeira

Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA

[email protected]; [email protected]
http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab
+1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968



On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 6:24 PM, dsw_s <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> I don't get the impression that the anti-biochar pdf is very
> credible.  For example, it suggests that there's basically no degraded
> land in the world, that could be improved with biochar.  It's a big
> world.  There's a lot of not-so-degraded land, and a lot of degraded
> land.  It wouldn't surprise me if the loudest claims over the last
> couple decades were grossly exaggerated as to how much biological
> productivity was being lost as vast areas of the Amazon got clear-cut,
> eroded, and turned into quasi-desert.  But to dismiss biochar out of
> hand for lack of land to improve with it (even if it works, which they
> reject, and even if it's affordable, which they reject, and so on)
> just sounds as though they're looking for anything that would
> invalidate biochar and then reasoning backward to the putative facts.
> It may be that the improvable acreage is enough only for X gigatons of
> carbon to have any benefit, with X too small to be a big part of the
> overall picture.  It would still be able to generate legitimate carbon
> credits up to that point.
>
> On Apr 14, 9:58 am, Ray Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I thought we should rename this biochar for the sake of the archive.
> >
> > Does biochar hold water significantly better than the organic matter
> > it was made from? Especially if the latter was used as mulch?
> >
> > [See YouTube "Greening the Desert" - clip from permaculture
> > institute of Australia]
> >
> > Thank you all for bringing biochar to my attention. I like the
> > fact that (for Africa) it can be locally produced in low-tech kilns.
> >
> > I'd be interested to know if there is a site which replies to the
> > following limitations/drawbacks:
> >
> > http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/docs/biocharbriefing.pdf
> >
> > Raywww.globalcoolers.net
> >
> > On Apr 14, 3:20 am, David Schnare <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > My Center is doing a major report on putting carbon back into the soil
> as
> > > the means to developing two kinds of market mechanisms for farmers,
> > > nutrients and carbon.  I'll keep the group informed as we prepare our
> > > materials, but just to give you a heads up, this is no silver bullet
> (for
> > > carbon).  Biochar is better than crop detritus (no till farming), but
> both
> > > lose carbon due to microbial action (CO2 emissions).  However, both do
> a
> > > terrific job creating a substrate for water.  They take high clay soils
> and
> > > turn them into an organic sponge, holding nutrients in the ground,
> attached
> > > to the invested carbon.
> >
> > > David Schnare.
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:03 PM, dsw_s <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > Wow, that sounds very promising, although we'll have to see about the
> > > > economics.
> >
> > > > I hadn't heard (or hadn't absorbed) that the biochar was to come from
> > > > a pyrolysis process that makes oil and gas, so there's more
> > > > hydrocarbon and less just-plain-carbon than there would be in
> charcoal
> > > > from burning in open air.  I don't know how stable regular charcoal
> is
> > > > either, although it sounds as though it's much more stable than I had
> > > > thought.  I would certainly expect biochar or ordinary charcoal to
> > > > improve water retention (at least in most soils), and one of the
> > > > references in the Wikipedia biochar article says it does (without
> > > > saying for what kinds of soil, as far as I saw).
> >
> > > > I hope we study soil ecology before doing it on a very large scale,
> > > > though.
> >
> > > > On Apr 12, 5:18 am, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > Biochar is highly stable in soils, and lasts centuries-millennia as
> Terra
> > > > > Preta.
> > > >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocharhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terr...
> > > > > I understand it also bulks up the soil, trapping '3rd party'
> carbon.
> >
> > > > > I am unsure whether this either affects the hydrological properties
> of
> > > > the
> > > > > soil, or promotes forest regrowth.  If either were the case, it
> could
> > > > have
> > > > > the cloud-inducing effects discussed.  This effect could be highly
> > > > > significant and I hope someone expert can consider it.
> >
> > > > > A
> >
> > > > > 2009/4/12 dsw_s <[email protected]>
> >
> > > > > > But wouldn't the carbon in the biochar get returned to the
> atmosphere
> > > > > > fairly quickly if it were used that way?
> >
> > > > > > On Apr 11, 6:24 pm, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > It would be very interesting to see if biochar has a similar
> effect.
> > > >  If
> > > > > > > biochar could lock up carbon in soils, thicken soils, preserve
> and
> > > > spread
> > > > > > > forests and brighten clouds it would have benefits that could
> > > > reasonably
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > described as 'ginormous'.
> > > > > > > I'd be interested to know if anyone in this group could explore
> these
> > > > > > > effects and potentially look at doing a paper or a model run on
> them.
> >
> > > > > > > A
> >
> > > > > > > 2009/4/10 dsw_s <[email protected]>
> >
> > > > > > > > That sounds a lot like how I imagine geoengineering can work.
>  A
> > > > > > > > suggestion I've made is that materials like expanded
> vermiculite
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > perlite (basically rock popcorn) could be used to increase
> water
> > > > > > > > retention in soil for both agricultural and climatic benefit.
>  The
> > > > > > > > climate benefit includes CO2 removal by weathering, but the
> > > > > > > > distribution could also be chosen to optimize cloud patterns.
> >
> > > > > > > > On Apr 9, 11:50 am, Ray Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello all,
> >
> > > > > > > > > I've been in consultation with a range of land-atmosphere
> > > > > > > > > and cloud meteorologists, looking at scope for increasing
> > > > > > > > > stratus and cumulo-nimbus over land in regions identified
> > > > > > > > > in GLACE (nasa).
> >
> > > > > > > > > Literature review available atwww.globalcoolers.net
> >
> > > > > > > > > Focus is on West Africa and rainwater harvesting,
> > > > > > > > > pilot studies plus 4 continents alliance-building.
> >
> > > > > > > > > Anyone interested in collaborating?
> >
> > > > > > > > > Ray Taylor
> >
> > > > > > > > > ray [at] andy-taylor.org
> >
> > > --
> > > David W. Schnare
> > > Center for Environmental Stewardship
> >
> >
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to