Can 'biochar' save the planet?

[peewee's lovechild]

Can 'biochar' save the planet?


By Azadeh Ansari
CNN

ATHENS, Georgia (CNN) -- Over the railroad tracks, near Agriculture Drive on the University of Georgia campus, sits a unique machine that may hold one of the solutions to big environmental problems like energy, food production and even global climate change.

This machine right here is our baby," said UGA research engineer Brian Bibens, who is one of a handful of researchers around the world working on alternative ways to recycle carbon.

Bibens' specialty is "biochar," a highly porous charcoal made from organic waste. The raw material can be any forest, agricultural or animal waste. Some examples are woodchips, corn husks, peanut shells, even chicken manure.

Bibens feeds the waste -- called "biomass" -- into an octagonally shaped metal barrel where it is cooked under intense heat, sometimes above 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, the organic matter is cooked through a thermochemical process called "pyrolysis".

In a few hours, organic trash is transformed into charcoal-like pellets farmers can turn into fertilizer. Gasses given off during the process can be harnesed to fuel vehicles of power electric generators.

Biochar is considered by many scientists to be the "black gold" for agriculture.

Its high carbon content and porous nature can help soil retain water, nutrients, protect soil microbes and ultimately increase crop yields while acting as natural carbon sink - sequestering CO2 and locking it into the ground.

Biochar helps clean the air two ways: by preventing rotting biomass from releasing harmful CO2 into the atmosphere, and by allowing plants to safely store CO2 they pull out of the air during photosynthesis.

"Soil acts as an enormous carbon pool, increasing this carbon pool could significantly contribute to the reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere," said Christoph Steiner, one of the leading research scientist studying biochar. "It gives us a chance to produce carbon negative energy."

Worldwide use of biochar could cut CO2 levels by 8 parts per million within 50 years, according to NASA scientist James Hansen.

Global carbon levels in the air have been steadily increasing at an alarming rate since the 1980s, according to NOAA. Since 2000, increases of 2 parts per million of CO2 have been common, according to NOAA. During the 1980s rates increased by 1.5 ppm per year.

The process of making biochar can also lead to other valuable products.

Some of the gases given off during the process can be converted to electricity, others can be condensed and converted to gasoline, and there are also some pharmaceutical applications for the by-products, said Danny Day President and CEO of Eprida, a private firm in Athens, Georgia currently exploring industry applications for the biochar process.

Although scientists look to biochar to improve the future, its origin lies in the past.

For centuries indigenous South Americans living in the Amazon Basin used a combination of charred animal waste and wood to make "terra preta," which means black earth, in Portuguese.

Thousands of years later, the terra preta soil remains fertile without need for any added fertilizer, experts say.

"These terra preta soils are older than 500 years and they are still black soil and very rich in carbon," said Steiner, a professor at the University of Georgia. Reducing the need for deforestation to create more cropland.

By using biochar concepts, terra preta soils have been proven to remain fertile for thousands of years, preventing further harmful deforestation for agricultural purposes. But still more large-scale tests need to be conducted before biochar technology can be rolled out on a global scale.

Day says biomass -- that otherwise would be thrown away --could be developed into entirely new markets for biofuels, electricity, biomass extracts and pharmaceutical applications, in addition to biochar.

"We have 3 billion people out there who are at risk for climate change and they can be making money solving our global problem," said Day.

Industries can now begin to look at farmers around the world and pay them for their agricultural wastes, said Day. "They can become the new affluent."


http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/03/30/biochar.warming.energy/index.html

[CosmicCowboy]

"Biochar" is essentially charcoal.

Large scale processes are tough.

Processes for biomass pyrolysis

Since pyrolysis is endothermic,[7] various methods have been proposed to provide heat to the reacting biomass particles:

* Partial combustion of the biomass products through air injection. This results in poor-quality products.
* Direct heat transfer with a hot gas, ideally product gas that is reheated and recycled. The problem is to provide enough heat with reasonable gas flow-rates.
* Indirect heat transfer with exchange surfaces (wall, tubes). It is difficult to achieve good heat transfer on both sides of the heat exchange surface.
* Direct heat transfer with circulating solids: Solids transfer heat between a burner and a pyrolysis reactor. This is an effective but complex technology.

For flash pyrolysis the biomass must be ground into fine particles and that the insulating char layer that forms at the surface of the reacting particles must be continuously removed. The following technologies have been proposed for biomass pyrolysis:[8]

* Fixed beds were used for the traditional production of charcoal. Poor, slow heat transfer resulted in very low liquid yields.
* Augers: This technology is adapted from a Lurgi process for coal gasification. Hot sand and biomass particles are fed at one end of a screw. The screw mixes the sand and biomass and conveys them along. It provides a good control of the biomass residence time. It does not dilute the pyrolysis products with a carrier or fluidizing gas. However, sand must be reheated in a separate vessel, and mechanical reliability is a concern. There is no large-scale commercial implementation.
* Ablative processes: Biomass particles are moved at high speed against a hot metal surface. Ablation of any char forming at the particles surface maintains a high rate of heat transfer. This can be achieved by using a metal surface spinning at high speed within a bed of biomass particles, which may present mechanical reliability problems but prevents any dilution of the products. As an alternative, the particles may be suspended in a carrier gas and introduced at high speed through a cyclone whose wall is heated; the products are diluted with the carrier gas.[9] A problem shared with all ablative processes is that scale-up is made difficult since the ratio of the wall surface to the reactor volume decreases as the reactor size is increased. There is no large-scale commercial implementation.
* Rotating cone: Pre-heated hot sand and biomass particles are introduced into a rotating cone. Due to the rotation of the cone, the mixture of sand and biomass is transported across the cone surface by centrifugal force. Like other shallow transported-bed reactors relatively fine particles are required to obtain a good liquid yield. There is no large scale commercial implementation.[10]
* Fluidized beds: Biomass particles are introduced into a bed of hot sand fluidized by a gas, which is usually a recirculated product gas. High heat transfer rates from fluidized sand result in rapid heating of biomass particles. There is some ablation by attrition with the sand particles, but it is not as effective as in the ablative processes. Heat is usually provided by heat exchanger tubes through which hot combustion gas flows. There is some dilution of the products, which makes it more difficult to condense and then remove the bio-oil mist from the gas exiting the condensers. This process has been scaled up by companies such as Dynamotive and Agri-Therm. The main challenges are in improving the quality and consistency of the bio-oil.
* Circulating fluidized beds: Biomass particles are introduced into a circulating fluidized bed of hot sand. Gas, sand and biomass particles move together, with the transport gas usually being a recirculated product gas, although it may also be a combustion gas. High heat transfer rates from sand ensure rapid heating of biomass particles and ablation is stronger than with regular fluidized beds. A fast separator separates the product gases and vapors from the sand and char particles. The sand particles are reheated in fluidized burner vessel and recycled to the reactor. Although this process can be easily scaled up, it is rather complex and the products are much diluted, which greatly complicates the recovery of the liquid products.

[CosmicCowboy]

Remember the compost fire in Leon Valley? That also could have been called a large scale biochar production facility.

[101A]

Remember the compost fire in Leon Valley? That also could have been called a large scale biochar production facility.

Helotes.

How dare you.

[RandomGuy]

"Biochar" is essentially charcoal.

Large scale processes are tough.

Processes for biomass pyrolysis

Since pyrolysis is endothermic,[7] various methods have been proposed to provide heat to the reacting biomass particles:

Sounds like a job for a solar concentrator.

[Wild Cobra]

Bibens feeds the waste -- called "biomass" -- into an octagonally shaped metal barrel where it is cooked under intense heat, sometimes above 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, the organic matter is cooked through a thermochemical process called "pyrolysis".

In a few hours, organic trash is transformed into charcoal-like pellets farmers can turn into fertilizer. Gasses given off during the process can be harnesed to fuel vehicles of power electric generators.

I wonder how much carbon they sequester vs. how much carbon is burned to make the energy for this process?


Biochar is considered by many scientists to be the "black gold" for agriculture.

Only for agriculture I bet. the rest is probably bullshit for the ignorant to sell the idea.


"Soil acts as an enormous carbon pool, increasing this carbon pool could significantly contribute to the reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere," said Christoph Steiner, one of the leading research scientist studying biochar. "It gives us a chance to produce carbon negative energy."

Bzzzz... Wrong answer...

We need to figure out how to cool the oceans in order to reestablish equilibrium for the carbon cycle.


Worldwide use of biochar could cut CO2 levels by 8 parts per million within 50 years, according to NASA scientist James Hansen.

LoL... Hanson is a known activist, and is responsible for the false data of temperatures (http://samanoontheissues.blogspot.com/2008/01/nasa-1934-hottest-year-on-record.html) that NASA recently corrected.


Global carbon levels in the air have been steadily increasing at an alarming rate since the 1980s, according to NOAA. Since 2000, increases of 2 parts per million of CO2 have been common, according to NOAA. During the 1980s rates increased by 1.5 ppm per year.

True. However, if we take the extreme of us outputting 8 GtC per year, then we at best, increase carbon by 0.16 GtC because the ocean sinks most of it in the carbon cycle balance. You see, the ocean contains about 50 times more CO2 in equilibrium. The ocean will absorb about 7.84 GtC of that 8. There is about 2 GtC per ppm. That means anthropogenic CO2 is at most, about 0.08 ppm per year. Less than 1 ppm per decade. This is if all else were equal.

Temperature in the ocean has a far more dramatic effect on atmospheric CO2 levels. Since the earth is warming, the oceans are releasing CO2.

See here (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121532) for more details.


Day says biomass -- that otherwise would be thrown away --could be developed into entirely new markets for biofuels, electricity, biomass extracts and pharmaceutical applications, in addition to biochar.

Fine. Just don't claim it will help the global climate situation.


"We have 3 billion people out there who are at risk for climate change and they can be making money solving our global problem," said Day.

We cannot do a damn thing about CO2 levels, even if we went to zero output. Temperature drives CO2 levels. CO2 does not drive temperature.


Industries can now begin to look at farmers around the world and pay them for their agricultural wastes, said Day. "They can become the new affluent."

There are more productive methods in the works, using genetically altered yeast and bacteria to directly produce fuel from biomatter.

[peewee's lovechild]

Wild Cobra should run for President.

[Wild Cobra]

Wild Cobra should run for President.
No public office for me. Too many things in my past they would bring out and make issues of. Democrats are flat out evil in their attacks.

Let's see.

Jailed overnight, charged with assault. (self defense)

Two article 15's in the Army.

Wrote a few bad checks years ago.

Owe taxes.

Frequent user of Marijuana and Peyote in years past, and still like Mary.

I'm sure there's more. That's just off the top of my head.

The media would love it!

[peewee's lovechild]

No public office for me. Too many things in my past they would bring out and make issues of. Democrats are flat out evil in their attacks.

Let's see.

Jailed overnight, charged with assault. (self defense)

Two article 15's in the Army.

Wrote a few bad checks years ago.

Owe taxes.

Frequent user of Marijuana and Peyote in years past, and still like Mary.

I'm sure there's more. That's just off the top of my head.

The media would love it!



You're no worse than George W. Bush.

Plus, you've got your hatred for anything Democrat down pat.

All you need is to convince all the Jesus lovers and rednecks to vote your way. Fuck, you can even bring back the fear of terrorists to sway the vote your way.

Maybe, listen to this, you could move to Alaska and take pictures of yourself shooting cows and what not. Conservatives will eat that up.