Noah, The statement that "...biochar can be burned to create electricity instead of applied to soils as a carbon sink." is questionable as biochar 'fuel' is charcoal. Only that which is buried is 'biochar'. Yet, I believe Ron Larson (IBI) can best express this point.
Also, your mission objective of "map the most prominent aspects of CDR" would seem to open up the effort to listing the many important 'prominent aspect' of the biotic approach such as the production of food, feed, fuel, fertilizer, polymers and fresh water (etc.). In short, the biotic can pay for itself while the non-biotic can not. This is a profoundly important aspect which many authors in this field ignore. We must ask ourselves if we wish climate change mitigation to be at the whims of the political purse sting or financially independent and based solely on the science...not the thin ice of political popularity. Best, Michael On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 10:53:49 AM UTC-8, andrewjlockley wrote: > > > https://carbonremoval.wordpress.com/2015/01/22/a-graphic-to-help-map-the-carbon-dioxide-removal-cdr-field/ > > Everything and the Carbon Sink > > Noah Deich's blog on all things Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) > > A graphic to help map the Carbon Dioxide Removal (“CDR”) field > > JANUARY 22, 2015 > > For the carbon dioxide removal (“CDR”) field, breadth is simultaneously > a blessing and a curse. On the bright side, the numerous approaches to CDR > suggest the potential for deploying a diverse portfolio of CDR projects > that reduces both the risks and costs of preventing climate change. But the > down side of breadth is complexity, which makes the CDR field difficult to > explain and envision, and can lead to confusion about how to catalyze > development of CDR approaches as a result. > > In the graphic below, I’ve attempted to categorize and map the most > prominent aspects of CDR in as comprehensive and clear a manner as > possible:It is critical to note that not all of the elements of this > graphic are exclusive to CDR. For example, direct air capture (“DAC”) > machines can be used to create hydrocarbon fuels (instead of for carbon > sequestration purposes). In a similar manner, biochar can be burned to > create electricity instead of applied to soils as a carbon sink. Even more > broadly, compressed CO2 can come from many places, including from > fossil-fueled power plants with carbon capture and sequestration (“CCS”) > systems. Unpacking how each of the elements for various CDR processes fit > into wider industrial systems is critical for designing effective > strategies for developing various CDR approaches — hopefully this > visualization of the field can help with that process > -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
