Back on thread for a moment, I'd be particularly keen to see an analysis of the scale limitations to the electro CDR approach. I'm concerned about the localised/regional impact of changes in ocean chemistry.
Is anyone able to model this? A On Jun 3, 2013 6:45 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > ------------------------------ > *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]> <[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 [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. > > > -- 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.
