Greg, list and ccs 1. I am not the best person to respond on this "challenge" discussion, but I recommend going to this site for latest update: http://www.virginearth.com/ There were 11 finalists for the $25 million prize; three were biochar companies. I believe we are still within the 5 year window for announcing a winner..
2. I found this quote on one biochar company site: " Ideas are assessed by a panel of judges including Richard Branson, Al Gore, James E. Hansen, James Lovelock and Tim Flannery. " All have been supportive of biochar to some extent (Lovelock used the term "only" at one point.) 3. Sir Branson also formed a companion group called the "Carbon War Room" (CWR) designed to help remove market barriers. Biochar was their first topical area. They dropped biochar after deciding (probably correctly) that the biochar industry was not far enough along for CWR help. I don't know any details, but beleve the bochar community felt let down. 4. I have not yet listened to all four videos by the individual (a friend, Lopa Brujnes) who led the CWR-biochar effort. Her first of four 15 minute videos is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH8l51Y0s34 There is more on the two Branson efforts at www.biochar-international.org This IBI group apparently feels let down over the whole activity. I wonder if the other CDR types do also?. 5. If I had to bet on a likely overall winner from both a biochar and total prize standpoint it would be the (well-funded) group at www.coolplanet.com but they probably don't qualify, since they weren't part of the 11-finalist group (came along too late). Ron ----- Original Message ----- From: "RAU greg" <[email protected]> To: "oliver tickell" <[email protected]> Cc: "david appell" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 9:59:36 AM Subject: Re: [geo] Re: Meanwhile, in CDR news... Thanks. Yes, lots of great ideas out there. Speaking of the Virgin Earth Challenge (apparently the only CDR game in town), what the heck happened to the prize? Did they quietly select a winner, split the money among finalists, or say "sorry, no winner, thanks for all of the great ideas, we were just kidding."??? For all of the initial splash, the VEC seemed to end very somberly. Given the importance of the topic and Branson's apparent enthusiasm, why? -Greg From: Oliver Tickell <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Sent: Mon, June 3, 2013 2:42:47 AM Subject: Re: [geo] Re: Meanwhile, in CDR news... But why no mention of CDR by accelerated rock weathering (AGR)? This is one of the solutions selected by the Virgin Challenge - the one from Netherlands. And it is being promoted by Olaf Schuilling, who is a member of this Geoengineering Group. This is a low tech, low cost approach - which consists of mining olivine bearing rock, grinding it up to approx 0.1mm, and spreading it land / coast where it will completely weather away over a period of under 10 years, converting CO2 to bicarbonate in solution. All for ~$10/tCO2. Emissions for mining, transport, grinding, just a few % of the CO2 gain. So what's not to include about it? Oliver. On 02/06/2013 20:29, RAU greg wrote: Thanks, David, very nice review. Where our technology departs from the higher profile abiotic methods you discuss is: 1) expensively concentrated CO2 is not formed (or stored), 2) reactions occur at ambient T and P - exotic chemicals and conditions are avoided (so far), 3) excess ocean rather than excess air CO2 can be mitigated, avoiding the need for more complex air scrubbing technology. Why go to the added expense/effort of getting air CO2 into solution to then do chemistry when vast areas of the surface ocean are already supersaturated in CO2? Doing the chemistry there completely avoids the giant land footprint and energy required for air scrubbing that you mention, as well as avoids the need for molecular CO2 sequestration or use. Obviously, the safety of doing this in the ocean needs to be researched, but generating ocean alkalinity would seem an improvement over our current ocean acidification "program". I'm not alone in my thinking; this builds on Kheshgi (1995), House et al. (2007), and Harvey (2008) among others. -Greg From: David Appell <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Sent: Sun, June 2, 2013 10:55:22 AM Subject: Re: [geo] Re: Meanwhile, in CDR news... Mark: I have an article in this month's Physics World magazine that answers some of these questions: “Mopping Up Carbon,” Physics World, June 2013, pp. 23-27. http://www.davidappell.com/articles/PWJun13Appell-air_capture.pdf David On 6/2/2013 8:05 AM, Mark Massmann wrote: > I'm wondering if anyone can respond to these questions: > > I could be missing this, but how long is it estimated to take for the devices > to capture each ton of CO2? If the systems were installed to capture coal > plant emissions, I'd imagine that the capture rate would be maximized. > However installing the systems outside of those sources might lower the > capture rate to the point that the system becomes impractical (i.e. like > installing a wind farm in a location that's simply not windy enough on > average) -- 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 geoengineering+ [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 . -- 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.
