Hi One issue which concerns me about biochar is washout. When soil mixed with biochar is eroded, the biochar will end up in the water. It's low density and very dark in colour. It's worrying from an albedo point of view. We don't want to end up with loads of floating dark charcoal covering up the world's oceans.
Has anyone looked at this? A On 19 February 2013 18:33, <[email protected]> wrote: > > Chris cc list > > > a. Thanks for the answers. Very helpful. Obviously, I didn't get far > enough into the citations and so your recommendation on the eight references > in the Sequestration section were very helpful. > > b.. In order to save others time (especially for the biochar community > to which I will also send this), I have expanded what you said on each of > the cites. Obviously there a lot to work with. I insert my comments in > bold into your section on this topic. It doesn't seem that any of your > explicitly refer to biochar, but that s an easy additon. > > Use of Marine Macroalgae for Carbon Sequestration – > > Proposals for sequestering > carbon through growing marine macroalgae date > back to the early 1990’s – see Ritschard (1992). > [RWL1: http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-2793-6_16 > This is a book summarizing an important early "sequestration" conference of > which I was unaware. I have the book ordered on interlibrary loan. > > More recently a few papers and reports have > looked at the approach anew. > > Chung et al. (2011) > critically appraised the approach, finding that it > could play a significant role in carbon sequestration > and amelioration of greenhouse gas emissions. > RWL2: see http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10811-010-9604-9 > Journal of Applied Phycology October 2011, Volume 23, Issue 5, pp 877-886 > "Using marine macroalgae for carbon sequestration: a critical appraisal" > > > N’Yeurt et al. (2012) proposed that ‘Ocean > Macroalgal Afforestation’ has the potential to > reduce atmospheric CO2 levels. > RWL3: See: > http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582012001206 > This from a special issue of Process Safety and Environmental Protection > that does also include bochar. > > These approaches > are all at a very early stage of development with > much more research needed to explore the > possibilities, practicalities and potential problems. > > There has also been some investigation of the use > of marine macroalgae as a fuel e.g. see Roberts > and Upham (2012), > RWL4: > http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X12000449 > Marine Policy, Volume 36, Issue 5, September 2012, Pages 1047–1053, > "Prospects for the use of macro-algae for fuel in Ireland and the UK: An > overview of marine management issues" > > Hughes et al. (2013) > [RWL5 Same journal - March, 2013 "Comments on ‘Prospects for the use > of macroalgae for fuel in Ireland and UK: An overview of marine management > issues’ > > and > Kelly and Dworjanyn (2008) > [RWL6 > http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/media/211058/marine_biomass_anaerobic_biogas.pdf > free 114 p report: The potential of marine biomass for anaerobic biogas > production: a feasibility study with recommendations for further research > > and as a source of > products e.g. see Lewis et al. (2011). > [RWL7: > http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/media/271433/products_from_marine_macro-algae_2011.pdf > Product Options for the Processing of Marine Macro Algae Summary Report > (50 pp) > > Aldridge et al. (2012) have considered the wider implication of marine > macroalgal cultivation. > [RWL8: > http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/media/358662/initial_environmental_consideration_of_large-scale_seaweed_farming.pdf > This one I skimmed through; nice modeling. Seemed to support harvesting > for energy reasons. Mentions harvest of 20 dry tons biomass/ha-yr > > > I'll hope to find most in a library today - but if anyone can send #s 2-5, > that would be appreciated. > > c. Other I found some more through googling for "macroalgae biochar" - > especially by a Michael Bird in Australia. > Thanks for the other answers below - that do not need a response beyond the > above for #6 > > Ron > ________________________________ > From: "Chris Vivian" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: "Chris Vivian" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:49:58 AM > Subject: Re: [geo] Brief Summary Marine Geoengineering Techniques > > > Ron and list, > > > > In response to your points: > > > > 2. I would agree that placing biochar in soil is likely to be the best place > to put it, however, I was not commenting on that sort of issue in my paper. > I have not seen any citations for depositing biochar in the ocean. My > mention of depositing biochar/charcoal in the ocean was speculation that > this might potentially reduce the impact on the deep sea environment > compared to depositing crop wastes. > > > > 3. The paper has been submitted to the journal but is not yet on the > website. > > > 4. I have not come across any more recent citations on this point. Someone > could re-run the search that David Keith used. > > > > 6. The section ‘Use of marine algae for carbon sequestration’ includes a > number of references relevant to your point, particularly those covering the > use on marine macroalgae as a fuel. > > > > Chris. > > > On Monday, 18 February 2013 20:27:24 UTC, Ron wrote: >> >> Chris and list: >> >> 1. Thanks for forwarding your interesting 4-pager on marine >> engineering. I respond here only from the perspective of biochar. >> >> 2. On your p 2, the word "biochar" appears this way: >> "Depositing crop wastes on the deep seabed – Strand and >> Benford (2009) have proposed depositing bales of terrestrial crop wastes on >> the deep seabed and this could potentially be extended to include >> depositing biochar/charcoal or other organic remains." >> I have seen once an oblique reference (I might not be able to find >> now) to biochar possibly being beneficial when planting mangroves. But in >> general, I think the biochar community would recommend placing biochar in >> soil - perhaps the most seriously degraded coming first. The benefit would >> be centuries or millennia (?) of continuing productivity improvement that it >> is not obvious could also occur in the oceans >> Have you seen any citations to similar out-year productivity (or >> other) benefits if biochar was deposited in the ocean? >> >> 3. I liked very much your method of directing readers to links. >> However for the first (Belter and Seidel, 2013), I was unsuccessful finding >> anything at the WIREs ste. Can you/anyone help? >> >> 4. The second citation directed us to a small part of a Keith AGU 2011 >> lecture was a little disappointing as the citation history ended with 2010. >> Can anyone update that history - and/or describe how to get something from >> Google or other ? >> >> 5. Most interesting to me was the first half of the same AGU lecture - >> a talk by Ken Caldera comparing several CDR approaches. This is the topic >> of my next note - as Ken's talk had relatively little to do with oceans - >> and I have seen so few CDR comparisons. >> >> 6. I hope next time you can write something about harvesting ocean >> biomass (macroalgae and other) for use on land as input for such CDR >> approaches as BECCS and biochar. I believe the energy and soil benefits of >> such a direction of biomass movement will nicely complement the potential >> CDR benefits of ocean biomass. >> >> Again thanks for bringing your concise marine/oceans/geoengineering survey >> to our attention. >> >> Ron >> ________________________________ >> From: "Chris Vivian" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 4:22:19 AM >> Subject: [geo] Brief Summary Marine Geoengineering Techniques >> >> For your information, see the attached leaflet on marine geoengineering >> techniques that has been submitted to the IMO as a UK information paper for >> the forthcoming London Convention/Protocol Scientific Groups meeting. The >> leaflet is also on the Cefas website at: >> http://www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/20120213-Brief-Summary-Marine-Geoeng-Techs.pdf >> >> Best wishes >> >> Chris. >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
