List: cc Lockley
1. This from Para. 3 below needs noting as a first: “Some third way
alternatives are already quite well-known, such as large-scale reforestation
and the addition of biochar to the soil.” My guess (from trying to have this
come true for about ten years) is that the knowledge/understanding ratio
between the two highlighted technologies is about 100:1. That is for every
person who has heard the word “biochar” there are 100 who know what
“afforestation" means. But when the Royal Academy report came out in 2009, the
ratio was probably closer to 10,000:1 - so we are making good progress.
Extrapolating this progress another 6 years, we might then agree that the two
approaches could be compared on being “quite well known”.
2. The below partial list of additional CDR approaches (“…large-scale
seaweed farming, the manufacture of carbon-negative cement and new techniques
for making plastic that draws CO₂ from the air..” could also all be included
as parts of a biochar production operation - much as BECCS could be added to
biochar. That is, it will be much cheaper to capture the CO2 at some biochar
operations (but not those for carbon negative biofuels) for these alternatives
to releasing the CO2 produced during pyrolysis.
3. This latest Flannery book (apparently entirely/mostly on CDR) is
said on one site to be available in about 10 days (another said Ocitober). I
look forward to getting an ebook version.
Ron
On Aug 17, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://m.smh.com.au/environment/tim-flannerys-message-of-hope-new-third-way-technologies-will-help-combat-climate-change-20150812-gixwuk.html
>
> Extract
>
> ... these geoengineering options are untested, and could have dangerous side
> effects. Flannery says they are tantamount to "using poison to fight a
> poison".
>
> Flannery says the third way alternatives he has identified are very different
> from radical geoengineering proposals because they "recreate, enhance or
> restore" the processes that created a balance of greenhouse gasses prior to
> human interference. "They do not seek to fight one poison [excess carbon]
> with another [for example sulphur]," he writes. "Instead they look to restore
> or learn from processes that are as old as life itself. The third way is in
> large part about creating our future out of thin air." This encompasses
> proposals and experiments that mostly draw CO₂ out of the air and sea at a
> faster rate than occurs presently, and to store it safely. "It's what plants
> and a fair few rocks do."
>
> Some third way alternatives are already quite well-known, such as large-scale
> reafforestation and the addition of biochar to the soil. Biochar is a type of
> charcoal produced from the slow, oxygen-free burning of organic material.
> Creating biochar stores carbon for long periods and can be added to soil and
> improve soil quality. But Flannery sees even greater potential in less
> familiar methods to draw carbon from the atmosphere including large-scale
> seaweed farming, the manufacture of carbon-negative cement and new techniques
> for making plastic that draws CO₂ from the air. He canvasses strategies to
> absorb CO₂ by the "enhanced weathering" of silicate rocks and even making
> "CO₂ snow" in the Antarctic that could be stored in ice pits. Scientists are
> also investigating how the earth's albedo, or reflectiveness, could help cool
> the planet. By painting infrastructure white, cities might offset some of the
> warming they are now experiencing.
>
> In Flannery's assessment third way strategies could together be pulling about
> four gigatonnes of carbon out of the atmosphere a year by 2050, about 40 per
> cent of current emissions. "These are the technologies we need to be
> focussing on, that will give us a future," he says. But these innovations
> will only be effective if major investments are made in developing them now.
> "It's a bit like solar," Flannery says. "For the last 30 years solar PV has
> been reducing its cost by about 10 per cent per annum but for 25 of those 30
> years it was still outrageously expensive and wasn't really competitive …
> Many of these third way technologies are the same – we need to start
> investing in them now to make sure we have the tools there in future when we
> really need them, in 2030 or 2040 as the climate crisis deepens. Then we will
> be really searching for ways to deal with this and the only way we'll have
> the tools is if we start investing now."
>
> Flannery has become a favourite target of climate change sceptics who accuse
> him of exaggerating the threat of global warming and of "quasi-religious"
> activism. He was the chief commissioner of the Climate Commission, a body
> established by the Gillard government to provide information on climate
> change before it was disbanded by the Abbott government. He's now a member of
> the Climate Council, which is independent and funded by the community.
>
>
> --
> 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.
