Noah,
Nice clear graphic. Love it.
Please add "C from N separation" within your Transformation approach.
C (carbon) from N (plant nutrients, a big one being nitrogen as ammonia or nitrate) separation can be a fermentation or a chemical process. The most common fermentation is anaerobic digestion (AD). An up and coming chemical process is hydrothermal liquefaction (HL). Both processes economically produce energy in the form of CH4 and longer chain hydrocarbons. Both have a by-product of CO2 at about 40% of the biogas produced. (The HL biogas production is at 200 atm and 350C, which allows for very inexpensive production of pure CH4 separate from the pure CO2.)
You should show both separation processes because they each scale much larger than any of the three (Biomass burial, Pyrolysis, or BECCS) you show currently. They scale larger because the plant nutrients are not sequestered with the carbon and they are both economically viable on the energy alone with wet biomass such as seaweed forests: as low as 1% solids for AD and as low as 10% solids for HL.
Include an arrow over to "Pure compressed CO2" from each separation process.
Your chart will be much more complete and accurate.
Thank you
---------- Original Message --------
Subject:
[geo]_Re:_A_graphic_to_help_map_the_Carbon_Dioxide_Removal_(“CDR”)_field_|_Deich
From: Michael Hayes <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, January 30, 2015 10:49 am
To: [email protected]
--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:Everything and the Carbon SinkNoah Deich's blog on all things Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR)A graphic to help map the Carbon Dioxide Removal (“CDR”) fieldJANUARY 22, 2015For 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.
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.
