Biochar for Climate Soils and Energy Ron Larson
Biochar - for Climate, Soils and Energy Ron Larson What Biochar is How to Produce Biochar's Impact on Climate and Soils Who is Opposing and Why What it Takes to Have a Big Impact The Boulder and Other Conferences The Copenhagen Conference
Infertile >> Fertile << Biochar
How Can Biochar Be Carbon-Negative?
What is Biochar is a fine-grained charcoal high in organic carbon and largely resistant to decomposition. It is produced from pyrolysis of plant and waste feedstocks. As a soil amendment, biochar creates a recalcitrant soil carbon pool that is carbon-negative, serving as a net withdrawal of atmospheric carbon dioxide stored in highly recalcitrant soil carbon stocks. The enhanced nutrient retention capacity of biocharamended soil not only reduces the total fertilizer requirements, but also the climate and environ-mental impact of croplands. ” (International Biochar Initiative Scientific Advisory Committee)
Major Techniques: 1. Slow Pyrolysis traditional (dirty, low char yields) and modern (clean, high char yields) 2. Flash Pyrolysis higher char yields modern, high pressure, 3. Fast Pyrolysis modern, maximizes bio-oil production, low char yields 4. Hydrothermal Carbonization under development, wet feedstock, high pressure, highest “char” yield, a different char
Ron Larson Biochar Background 1973 1977 1981 1982 1994 1995 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009 US Congress - Policy NREL – Principal Scientist UN Conference - Nairobi USAID – Sudan Retired – Charcoal-making stoves Stoves list coordinator – mostly char First learned of Terra Preta ASES Solar Today Editorial (next) Start “Terra Preta” IAI Conference – NSW, Australia IBI-1 Conference – Newcastle, UK 1 st North American (USBI) - Boulder
Last lines that I wrote in Nov. 2006 CHAIR’S CORNER Ron Larson, Ph. D. Positive Charcoal = Negative Carbon? Why adding charcoal to the Earth's soils will also address climate change. “…. . Better than any other national group, 25 x’ 25 can help Ch. Ar get the R&D start that is critically needed. I look forward to hearing from readers on other ways we can “break new ground” with the barely recognized, but, I believe, most promising potential of Ch. Ar. “● Nov. '06
ASES, Kutscher, Overend Two very short mentions of Biochar (in two chapters).
First Large (? ) Biochar Meeting – International Agrichar Initiative 2007 Conference April 29 - May 2, 2007 Terrigal, New South Wales, Australia 100 Attendees; Sponsor - Best Energy Chair? ? Stephen Joseph First day at NSW Ag station (Lukas van Zweiten) (20 attendees) Many farmers; 2/3 from Australia Change from IAI to IBI
Opening View at www. biochar-international. org
James Lovelock guardian. co. uk; 24 March 2009 “I said in my recent book that perhaps the only tool we had to bring carbon dioxide back to pre-industrial levels was to let the biosphere pump it from the air for us. It currently removes 550 bn tons a year, about 18 times more than we emit, but 99. 9% of the carbon captured this way goes back to the air as CO 2 when things are eaten”.
James Lovelock, cont'd guardian. co. uk; 24 March 2009 “There is no chance that carbon capture and storage from industry or power stations will make a dent in CO 2 accumulation, even if we had the will and money to do it. But we have to grow food, so why not help Gaia do the job of CO 2 removal for us? ”
IBI “Keys”, part 1 The keys to advancing biochar are recognition of biochar’s climate benefits, and the elucidation of biochar’s many value streams, including: 1. Biochar sequestration, and possible carbon (C) credits 2. Additional C and Non-C emissions reductions from biochar systems 3. Bioenergy co-products (syngas, bio-oil, heat) 4. Water quality impacts (reduced nutrient leaching)
IBI “Keys”, concluded 5. Enhanced productivity (crop and non-crop biomass) 6. Enhanced soil water retention 7. Reduced chemical fertilizer inputs 8. Waste reduction, utilization, and addedvalue 9. Reduced soil erosion, degradation 10. Agricultural intensification, reduced land conversion 11. Distributed, on-farm systems
Biochar Claims, Simplified List 1: Will remove Carbon From Atmosphere – in Gigaton per year levels (Gt C/yr) 2: Will restore soil carbon and increase soil productivity 3: Can add significant carbon-neutral energy (in many forms) 4: N 20, H 20, Jobs, Rural Economic Development, National Security, Ocean acidification
Lifetime of Char vs Compost
One IBI Scenario
Same, Barchart Form http: //www. biocharinternational. org/sites/default/files/final%20 carbon%20 wpver 2. 0. pdf
Cost Analysis Almost no data Costs seem to be less than $200/ton char – possibly even $100/ton Sales price $500/ton common; larger in small quantitities; Maybe $200 -$300. Raw material cost for NREL approx $30/ton
Fast Pyrolysis Fluidized Bed Reactor (2009 in press) JE Amonette Example with a match In Air or in Liquid Air: flow through updraft and downdraft Slow (more solids) Fast (more liquids and gases)
Similar, add dryer + generator
Typical Pyrolyzer – Ref. IBI
Four Temperature Influences
Different feedstocks (Lehmann)
Soils: Benefits of using biochar in the garden, Part 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Enhanced plant growth Suppressed methane emission Reduced nitrous oxide emission (50% ? ) Reduced fertilizer requirement (10% ? ) Reduced leaching of nutrients Stored carbon in a long term stable sink Reduces soil acidity: raises soil p. H Reduces aluminum toxicity Ref. http: //biochar. pbworks. com/Front. Page
• Benefits of using biochar in the garden, concluded 10 Increased soil aggregation due to increased fungal hyphae 11 Improved soil water handling 12 Increased available Ca, Mg, P, and K 13 Increased soil microbial respiration 14 Increased soil microbial biomass 15 Stimulated symbiotic nitrogen fixation in legumes 16 Increased arbuscular mycorrhyzal fungi 17 Increased cation exchange capacity
IBI Example News Items • Fertiliser demand is heating up Weekly Times Now 10/06/2009 • UK researchers aim to prove farm climate cure Reuters 10/06/2009 • Agriculture to Play a Major Role in Mitigating Climate Change; Treehugger 10/05/2009 • The Biochar debate Environmental Research Web; 10/03/2009
Examples of Claimed Results • Now dozens of Improved productivity photos like these • Terra-Preta soils in Amazon – up to 2 meters deep.
Stocks & Flows
Biofuel. Watch (BFW) Opposition -1 • First seen in Sept, 08 (Newcastle Confer'ce) • Two main: Almuth Ernsting & Rachel Smolker • Claim #1. Biochar = Biofuels (untrue) • Claim #2. Biofuels = Rainforest Destruction – – – considerable truth, but not for Biochar carbon credits can control Standards are being developed
BFW Opposition, concluded • Claim #3 – Longevity in soil not proven • Claim #4 – Increased productivity unproven – – • they no or inappropriate citations large amount of millenial life-time data selective negative citations ignore/deny all of Terra Preta Claim #5 – Toxicity – – – only supposition, zero neative data Char now used medicinally excellent absorber
Geoengineering • This perspective on geoengineering apparatus from Wall Street Journal 15 June, '09 Jamais Cascio
Royal Society Criteria & Ranks • • Using biochar to sequester carbon dioxide is also surprisingly low against all four criteria. Read more: http: //2020 science. org/2009/09/01/geoengi neering-the-climate-a-clear-perspectivefrom-the-royal-society/#ixzz 0 TZYhe. ANq
Royal Society Comparison - 1
Royal Society Comparison - 2
Royal Society Recommendation ! • 1. 2 Emerging but as yet untested geoengineering methods such as biochar and ocean fertilisation should not be formally accepted as methods for addressing climate change under the UNFCCC flexible mechanisms until their effectiveness, carbon residence time and impacts have been determined and found to be acceptable.
One view in Science • “Using biochar to sequester carbon dioxide is also surprisingly low against all four criteria. ” • Read more: http: //2020 science. org/2009/09/01/geoengi neering-the-climate-a-clear-perspectivefrom-the-royal-society/#ixzz 0 TZYhe. ANq
Recent NRC Report on Biology • "A better fundamental understanding of plant growth and productivity, as well as of how plants can be conditioned or bred to tolerate extreme conditions and adapt to climate change, will be key components in increasing food production and nutrition in all areas of agriculture to meet the needs of 8. 4 billion people by 2030 (Census Bureau, 2008), while allowing adequate land for energy production and environmental services. " • [http: //www. nap. edu/catalog. php? id=12764] •
Convention on Biodiversity “Therefore, given this conversion and emissions associated with degradation, the current terrestrial stock of ~2, 400 Gt is possibly about 40% below the natural reservoir when at equilibrium with current climate. ” http: //www. cbd. int/doc/publications/cbd -ts-43 -en. pdf
Where the land stock exists
Ten Wedges? a. Total land area b. Assumed available 15 G ha 2 G ha c. Assumed annual biomass 20 Gt /ha-yr d. Assumed annual carbon 10 Gt C/ha-yr e. Assumed annual char 5 Gt C/ha-yr f. Annual sequestered = b*e Aside: Conversion 10 Gt C/yr 10 Gt/ha = 1 kg/m 2
Ten Wedges? (cont'd) Antonietti suggests 2 million plants – each operating on 10 sq km (1000 ha) • very short transport distance! • In Gha, this is exactly same as above: 2 Gha “Heritage CO 2”: Assume 2 Gha/6 G people = 1/3 ha per capita = 3000 m 2 (if 50 yrs, then 60 m 2/yr as world average) For US: “owns” about 30% of the present excess CO 2. 0. 6 Gha/. 3 G people = 2 ha/capita. If 50 yrs, then 400 m 2/yr
Ten Wedges? (concluded) “Heritage CO 2”: A. For world: Assume 2 Gha/6 G people = 1/3 ha per capita = 3000 m 2 /capita (if 50 yrs, then 60 m 2/yr as world average) B. For US: “owns” about 30% of the present excess CO 2. 0. 6 Gha/. 3 G people = 2 ha/capita = 20, 000 m 2 person ( If 50 yrs, then 400 m 2/yr person) C. In char terms : half these amounts in kg
Newcastle Conference (Sept. 08) • Biggest name was Tim Flannery (Aus) About 200 (a full house in City council) No early site visits • Traveled with Andrew Heggie (forester) Met Nathaniel Mulcahy (World Stove) Had two posters (policy) • Maybe five companies Good report by Albert Bates (eco-village) • Approved Boulder (regional, not intern'l)
Boulder Conference • Big plus to have USDA Secr. Tom Vilsack About 300 (essentially sold out) Sunday visit to BEC (mobile unit) • Nice response to Dave Yarrow re nutrition Same for Nathaniel Mulcahy (World Stove) First detailed LCA (Cornell) New method on lifetimes (Florida) • Maybe ten companies Good report in “The Economist” • Formed USBI
Copenhagen Conference of the Parties (COP-15) Two weeks in December. Thousands of delegates, press, NGOs In September, dropped the word “Biochar” from the draft document Not clear why. (claim for needed speed in getting finished)
Ideas from Peak Oil Conference 1. “We” have been ignoring the Peak Oil driver too much. Probable peak last year. General agreement very soon if not already. 2. Shale gas may not be the panacea claimed. Huge differences in views by experts. 3. Almost no mention of climate topics. 4. Almost no mention of Biomass (or other).
Ideas from Peak Oil Conference 5. Biochar can make a huge contribution on Peak Oil (use of non-char portion of biomass) 6. Need to emphasize water more (not much needed to char; HTC produces water) 7. Need to emphasize small scale; low capital 8. Look again at EROEI (Use 30 GJ/t C? ) 7 Gt C/yr goes with 500 Quads/yr = 500 EJ/yr. So 500 E 18/7 E 9 t C = 70 GJ/t Carbon. Off roughly by factor of 2 (the non-char energy? )
Conclusion From Markus Antonietti (Hydrocoal): “Warum nicht mal „Negativ“ denken ? ” “Why not even think 'Negative'? ”
- Slides: 49