[Terrapreta] Sustained Biochar

[Brian Hans]

Richard,
   
  I just want to complement you on this post. On a global scale, I believe your dead correct. And part of the problem with humans is that we have a very hard time thinking in global terms. Tho I am not entirely sure there is a consensus on what happens to CH4 in the N/S of the ATM because at the moment (as someone posted the nice colored graph) CH4 is found mostly in the equator. All I know is that we all need to fasten our saftey belts...cuz its gonna get rough... I love the way they colored the methane a greeny haze over the north.
   
  But a real issue is in the Micro system. Burning in dirty pits may very well be better than burning raw wood and twigs (we all know straight biomass kills)...but its still has huge local impacts for virtually the same reasons, just more diffused. 
   
  Durning this whole discussion, I have not once read the word 'Nano-particles' and almost nothing about NOx. The more N and/or the less efficient combustion and/or Fe acting as a catalyst in the fumes to make 'spheres o death' and/or ... all the nasty fouls that do-infact have an impact on the local people and environment in the form of complex nano-particles. Because of technology, we are finally able to see why smoke is bad. Because we have broken (and claimed for our own) the whole of the ecosystem, we cannot assume anymore than minor infractions are insignificant to the whole. These particles and mixtures of 'stuff' coming off the biomass is not a trivial matter IMO. If I could be so bold, this is why we shouldnt be burning wood to heat houses in nasty dirty low chimney, another pet peeve of mine. Just because its 'wood' doesnt make it pure. Personally Im in favor of largescale Biomass --> char --> coal plant e' -->kwh's --> geothermal heating. 
   
  This all makes for good case for a retort or some other form of 'cleaning' what we burn before we burn it regardless of the macro. Just my 2 cents and with inflation, we all know what that's worth nowdays :)
   
  Brian 
   
   
   
  Hello Adriana

While I respect the high standards you and Best technologies maintain  
on not contributing to global warming the relative contribution from  
thousands of mound charcoal piles,  a technology which has not  
changed for a few thousand years, cumulatively, does not match the  
methane contributed to the atmosphere by permafrost destruction from  
petroleum development in the Prudhoe Bay oil field alone.

I had the privilege of meeting Dr Tim Colette, a scientist with US  
geological service who is working on commercialization of methane  
hydrates locked in permafrost of the circumpolar north. He made a  
study of the actual amount of methane released to the atmosphere by  
permafrost destruction by hot oil moving up drill stems through the   
frozen ground in the giant Prudhoe Bay, Alaska oil field. His  
calculations show that the methane released from this source only,   
an oil field perhaps 15 by 20 miles is 23 times the  total energy  
value of the all oil taken from the field.  So for every 100 million  
barrels of oil taken from Prudhoe to feed our energy needs in the USA  
2.3 billion barrels  oil equivalent of methane have been released to  
the atmosphere.

We need our hands on experience with charcoal in soil and the  
environmental cost of our small scale studies  is minute relative to  
the real scale of the problem. With global population at full tilt -  
6 billion and growing , and near universal demand for economic  
growth, with positive feedback global warming mechanisms at play ,  
survivalism or primitivism as a study topic at least is a rational  
alternative to your approach the industrial - technological fix. As  
we finish this fossil fuel feast of the last 100 years and as we  
reach our  global population limits  created by this past 10,000  
years of agriculture our numbers will return to our sustainable  
level , most likely something less than 1 billion souls.

Our mission needs to be how we might humanely return this earth to  
sustainable levels of human habitation.

I do value your insight on this and  follow your comments on what to  
expect from experimenting with charcoal in soil very closely. I am in  
the midst of my first year of a 2 year project at my farm and next  
year starting a project in closed canopy conifer forest. You do need  
to let us charco-anarchists loose. You never know what we might come  
up with.

Best Wishes

Rich Haard
Bellingham, Washington

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20070830/d6f8866c/attachment.html