Hi John I agree it would be plain stupid to throw vast quantities of charcoal residue into the air but if you look at the Dynamotive field trials that is exactly what happened. I now realise that Dynamotive have conveniently removed that study from their website but the subcontractor, Blue Leaf, has it still at theirs:
http://www.blue-leaf.ca/main-en/files/BlueLeaf_Biochar_Field_Trial_2008_fv.pdf if you look at the photo's on pages 23-25 you will see huge clouds of biochar going happily aloft. This is indeed a very fine particulate form of biochar (over 60% of particles were under half a millimetre according to the report) but it is also the exact form that Dynamotive, one of the leading biochar companies, actually sell commercially as “CQuest™ Fast Pyrolysis BioChar” so this is a 'real world' trial of biochar. if you look at the stated objectives of the study (on page 3) they were not, as Nando claims, done "on a very windy day with a particular type of spreader specifically as a test trying different spreading techniques to see how much would blow away under worst conditions", in fact none of the seven objectives sound anything like that. In contrast the report explicitly says that "Although wind velocity was low at the time of spreading, loss rates were visually estimated to be significant." I live in Quebec and even the Eastern Townships (which are slightly more open than much of the province) are not that windy. Repeat the test in the plains of Saskatchewan or Kansas and you may get really serious loss. I agree that the obvious remedy to this is to apply the biochar as sludge or in wet form but have the studes been done to check that assumption? I'd be interested to know what the losses of black carbon to the air from soils post-application are, especially in regions of high winds and what is the resultant forcing, especially in agricultural regions where monoculture industrial agriculture has continually destroyed soil structure - see for example http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15631883 . If you are talking about integrating biochar with biofuels production then you are referring to exactly this sort of production model on lands with poor residual soil structure. Jim On Dec 15, 2009, at 12:56 PM, John Nissen wrote: > > Dear Jim, > > You seem to think that the biochar process implies throwing vast > quantities of the charcoal residue into the air. That would be plain > stupid. The essential thing about the biochar process is that the > products of combustion are all captured - so to then pollute the air > with the carbon would be absurd. > > I am now convinced that biochar has tremendous potential benefits: > > 1. capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, helping to bring the > level below 350 ppm; > > 2. using the charcoal as a soil improver to increase crop production; > > 3. providing biofuel without sacrificing food production; > > 4. doing the above without putting black carbon or organic carbon into > the atmosphere. > > Anyway, I passed your message onto the biochar group, since you might > not have been able to post there. This was the first response, and > was > from MAx Turunen: > > --- > If charcoal powder is mixed with wet plant slurry, like that which > comes > out from local-materials technology biodigestors, as a Terra Preta - > type > mixture... it should not be getting airborne... and mixture that has > been seeped into sand surface layers should not be crawling out to > become airborne either... but... instead tilling the land, and pouring > on dry charcoal powder... and doing this on very arid conditions.. > > > This is not something to leave to the management of peoples focused on > making a quick buck... "ahh... we get better quarterly profits this > year, increasing our portofolio value and appeal at stockmarkets, if > we > leave out the compost... and we can count what we pour on fields as > carbon offset cash according to local officials... besides, now we > have > time to invest on fertilizer industry shares, as there will be more of > that needed as less charcoal stays in fields... and why should we > worry > about charcoal dust being blown to glaciers, law mandates that we > stick > to worrying only about our investors profits... besides, this way we > can > sell them farmers even more charcoal and count it as even more offset > cash..." > > matters a lot *how* things are done. Just any Charcoal to somewhere > in > bulk... or Terra Preta -type mixtures, with first thinking and > planning > with locals about conditions and places ? > > > MaxT > > --- > > Cheers from Chiswick, > > John > > --- > > jim thomas wrote: >> John >> >> I have trouble understanding why you think biochar would reduce the >> release of black carbon. Biochar IS black carbon and indeed the real >> world application of biochar appears to release a large quantity of >> black carbon particles into the air. >> >> A preliminary report from a recent study here in Quebec, Canada >> reported that about 30% of the biochar (applied in granulated form) >> blew away during application.. (see Preliminary Evaluation of >> Biochar >> in a Commercial Farming Operation in Canada, BlueLeaf Inc, 2009, >> www.dynamotive.com/wp-content/themes/dynamotive/pdf/BlueLeaf_Biochar_Field_Trial_2008.pdf >> >> ) >> - some amazing images there of airborne biochar! >> >> Soil erosion in the months and years after application is a further >> way in which biochar is likely to become airborne. >> >> As you know airborne black carbon has a highly positive radiative >> forcing because it absorbs solar radiation and reduces albedo. How >> strong this effect will be depends on the size of biochar particles >> which are blown away – the lower end of the particle size of >> charcoal >> extends into the same range as that of soot, the submicron range. A >> report by CSIRO states: The size of biochar particles is relatively >> rapidly decreased, concentrating in size fractions <5μm diameter.” >> (Biochar, climate change and soil: A review to guide future research, >> CSIRO, Saran Sohi et al, February 2009, >> www.csiro.au/files/files/poei.pdf ) >> >> Scaled up to a large enough application to be considered >> geo-engineering there is an argument to be made based on teh >> Dynamotive trias that applying biochar could actually worsen warming >> through release of airborne black carbon rather than reduce it.. >> >> best >> >> Jim Thomas >> ETC Group. >> >> On Dec 14, 2009, at 4:55 PM, John Nissen wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Saving the Tibetan glaciers must be high on the list of priorities >>> for action - but perhaps behind Amazon and the Arctic sea ice >>> because >>> these have a higher short-term risk. As with the Arctic sea ice, >>> black carbon and organic carbon (BC and OC) reduction should be part >>> of the solution. (Explorers have pointed out how grubby the >>> Greenland glaciers look.) In the quest to reduce global warming >>> and >>> ocean acidification by carbon dioxide removal, a major advantage of >>> the biochar process could be the avoidance of BC and OC. >>> >>> I've just received this from Jim Hansen: >>> >>> --- >>> Survival of Tibetan Glaciers: New PNAS paper on black soot & >>> Himalayan glaciers is available at >>> http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/12/07/0910444106.full.pdf >>> +html >>> >>> A discussion of it is on the GISS web site at >>> http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_14/ >>> --- >>> >>> The discussion is as follows: >>> >>> Survival of Tibetan Glaciers >>> By James Hansen — December 2009 >>> >>> Glaciers on the Tibetan Plateau, sometimes called Earth's "third >>> pole", hold the largest ice mass outside the polar regions. These >>> glaciers act as a water storage tower for South and East Asia, >>> releasing melt water in warm months to the Indus, Ganges, >>> Brahmaputra >>> and other river systems, providing fresh water to more than a >>> billion >>> people. In the dry season glacial melt provides half or more of the >>> water in many rivers. >>> >>> <figure1_s.gif> >>> Figure 1. Five ice cores were extracted from the indicated >>> locationson the Tibetan plateau. The white dashed line is the >>> northerly boundary of the Indian monsoon. (View larger image) >>> >>> Tibetan glaciers have been melting at an accelerating rate over the >>> past decade. Glacier changes depend on local weather, especially >>> snowfall, so glacier retreat or advance fluctuates with time and >>> place. Thus it is inevitable that some Tibetan glaciers advance over >>> short periods, as has been reported. But overall, Tibetan glaciers >>> are retreating at an alarming rate. >>> >>> Global warming must be the primary cause of glacier retreat, which >>> is >>> occurring on a global scale, but observed rapid melt rates suggest >>> that other factors may be involved. To investigate the possible role >>> of black soot in causing glacial melt, a team of scientists from >>> Chinese research institutes extracted ice cores from five locations >>> on the Tibetan Plateau (Figure 1). >>> >>> Black soot, which includes black carbon (BC) and organic carbon >>> (OC), >>> absorbs sunlight and can speed glacial melting if BC reaches values >>> of order 10 ng/g (nanograms per gram) or larger. The ice core data >>> revealed that BC reached values of 20-50 ng/g in the 1950s and 1960s >>> for the four stations that are downwind of European pollution >>> sources. BC and OC amounts decreased strongly in the early 1970s, >>> probably because of clean air regulations in Europe. >>> >>> However, the ice cores also reveal that in the past decade BC and OC >>> began to increase again, even on the Zuoqiupu glacier (Figure 2), >>> which is mainly subject to Asian sources. The data suggest that >>> increased black soot arises from Asian sources, especially the >>> Indian >>> subcontinent. >>> >>> The measured concentrations of BC and OC refer to fresh snow. But as >>> the snow melts in the spring and summer the black soot >>> concentrations >>> on the glacier surface increase, because the soot particles do not >>> escape in the melt water as efficiently as the water itself. As a >>> consequence, the soot noticeably darkens the glacier surface during >>> the melt season, increases absorption of sunlight, and speeds >>> glacier >>> disintegration. >>> >>> <figure2_s.gif> >>> Figure 2.Black carbon (BC) and organic carbon (OC) concentrations in >>> the Zuoqiupu ice core for the monsoon (June-Sept) and non-monsoon >>> (Oct-May) seasons, and the annual mean. (View larger image) >>> >>> In a new paper by Xu et al., we concluded that black soot is >>> contributing to the rapid melt of glaciers in the Himalayas. And >>> continued, "business-as-usual" emissions of greenhouse gases and >>> black soot will result in the loss of most Himalayan glaciers this >>> century, with devastating effects on fresh water supplies in dry >>> seasons. >>> >>> But business-as-usual emissions are not inevitable. An alternative >>> scenario, which stabilizes the glaciers and has other benefits for >>> global climate and human health, requires a reduction of major >>> human-made climate forcing agents that have a warming effect — >>> that >>> means greenhouses gases, especially carbon dioxide, as well as black >>> soot. >>> >>> Quantitative policy implications have been defined: coal emissions >>> must be phased out over the next 20 years, and unconventional fossil >>> fuels, such as tar sands and oil shale, must remain undeveloped. >>> Combined with improved agricultural and forestry practices and >>> reduction of methane and black soot emissions, these actions would >>> avoid demise of the Tibetan glaciers. >>> >>> Not coincidentally, these policy actions are the same as those >>> required to stabilize Earth's energy balance and keep the climate >>> near the Holocene climate range in which civilization developed. The >>> question is whether the global community can exercise the free will >>> to limit fossil fuel emissions and move to clean energies of the >>> future — or is it inevitable that all fossil fuels will be burned? >>> >>> The conclusion is that prospects for survival of Tibetan glaciers >>> can >>> be much improved by reducing black soot emissions. The black soot >>> arises especially from diesel engines, coal use without effective >>> scrubbers, and biomass burning, including cook stoves. Reduction of >>> black soot via cleaner energies would have other benefits for human >>> health and agricultural productivity. However, survival of the >>> glaciers also requires halting global warming, which depends upon >>> stabilizing and reducing greenhouse gases, especially carbon >>> dioxide. >>> >>> References >>> Xu, B, J. Cao, J. Hansen, T. Yao, D.J. Joswia, N. Wang, G. Wu, M. >>> Wang, H. Zhao, W. Yang, X. Liu, and J. He, 2009: Black soot and the >>> survival of Tibetan glaciers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., doi: >>> 10.1073/pnas.0910444106, in press. >>> >>> Hansen, J., Mki. Sato, P. Kharecha, D. Beerling, R. Berner, V. >>> Masson-Delmotte, M. Pagani, M. Raymo, D.L. Royer, and J.C. Zachos, >>> 2008: Target atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim? Open Atmos. >>> Sci. J., 2, 217-231, doi:10.2174/1874282300802010217. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> 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. >> >> Jim Thomas >> ETC Group (Montreal) >> [email protected] >> +1 514 2739994 >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > > 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 > . > > > Jim Thomas ETC Group (Montreal) [email protected] +1 514 2739994 -- 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.
