[Terrapreta] Catalyst: Carbon Bigfoot

[Duane Pendergast]

Sean, Kevin

 

Is the use of char and other biomaterial for fuel really carbon neutral if
looked at on a macro scale? Probably not!  There seems a tendency to replace
forests, with large carbon content - with other crops for fuel with little
standing carbon content. Thus the use of char for fuel may turn out to be
carbon positive with respect to the atmosphere rather than carbon neutral as
simply assumed by most climate change aficionados. Environmental activists
are just starting to catch on to that possibility. 

 

I'm leery of the move to bio-fuels for that reason and the fact that we
humans and other biota need something to eat. Our government (Canada) is
putting policy in place to encourage the use of bio-fuels. That policy seems
driven by a perceived need to respond to voter's reaction to polls on
climate change while soliciting support from farm and bio-fuel interest
groups. On the positive side the policy might be a stepping stone to better
thought out solutions for greenhouse gas management.   

 

Duane

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean K. Barry [mailto:sean.barry at juno.com] 
Sent: December 8, 2007 3:22 PM
To: Kevin Chisholm
Cc: still.thinking at computare.org; 'Terrapreta'
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Catalyst: Carbon Bigfoot

 

Hi Kevin,

 

Kevin says:

 

You raise an excellent point: Char is being used as a carbon neutral 
fuel, rather than for TP.

If GW was not being caused by GHG's, and if char was not being used to 
reduce GHG's, then more char would be available for TP, with all the 
benefits you list below.

You missed my excellent point!  Using charcoal as a "carbon neutral" fuel is
NOT the best way to combat Global Warming caused from increased
concentrations of GHG.  If charcoal is used in the formation of Terra Preta
soil, then it becomes "carbon negative", instead of being just "carbon
neutral" fuel.  Charcoal made from plants that take CO2 out of the
atmosphere when they were growing, once put into soil, will sequester that
CO2 for 500 to 10,000 years or more.  That is undeniably a better form of
carbon sequestration than any carbon stored in living plants.  TP formation
can actually "mine" CO2 from the atmosphere and sequester it, darn near
permanently.  Burning charcoal only prevents the release of more CO2 from
burning fossil fuels.  Burning charcoal from biomass is only "carbon
neutral" because it recycles atmospheric carbon (versus adding fossil carbon
to the atmosphere).  It will not reduce atmospheric carbon concentrations to
just burn more charcoal and burn less fossil fuels.

 

I think burning fossil carbon should be made illegal or heavily fined or
both.  I think we should make charcoal from renewable fresh (annual growth)
biomass.  We need to put charcoal into the soil and demonstrate the
agricultural benefits.  I think the charcoal amendments to soil should be
done Terra Preta style, with other biomass amendments (compost, natural
fertilizers), microorganism inoculants, and all the working permaculture
practices you can throw at it.

 

We have to quit monkey diddling around and debating whether Global Warming
is human caused or not.  We have to rethink whether "The American Way of
Life is Not Negotiable" or whether it is and "adaptation" to imminent GW
will force greedy, self serving behaviors to die out.  Making Terra Preta
soils is a reasonable attempt to do things that will BOTH help humans adapt
to imminent Global Warming Climate Changes and will make an effective
mitigation strategy against rising GHG concentrations.  

 

Regards,

 

SKB

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Kevin <mailto:kchisholm at ca.inter.net>  Chisholm 

To: Sean K. <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>  Barry 

Cc: still.thinking at computare.org ; 'Terrapreta'
<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>  

Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 2:19 PM

Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Catalyst: Carbon Bigfoot

 

Dear Sean

You raise an excellent point: Char is being used as a carbon neutral 
fuel, rather than for TP.

If GW was not being caused by GHG's, and if char was not being used to 
reduce GHG's, then more char would be available for TP, with all the 
benefits you list below.

If we hang the future of TP on funding from Carbon Credits, TP would be 
dealt a serious blow, if Carbon Credits were not forthcoming.

On the other hand, if we develop TP in a way that it can be successful 
on its own merits for promoting more effective agriculture, then Carbon 
Credits would be a massive windfall, and an enormous boost to TP use.

What do you think we should be doing to maximize the early acceptance 
and widespread use of char for TP?

Best wishes,

Kevin

Sean K. Barry wrote:
> Hi Duane, Kevin,
> The way that Terra Preta soils can most contribute to mitigation of 
> the Global Warming problem is by reducing GHG concentrations.
> This would be done by turning 25 billon tons of biomass into 6 billion 
> tons of charcoal and burying it in the ground every year! Until Terra 
> Preta soil formation at that level occurs, then TP formation only will 
> slow the increase in CO2 concentrations.
> Terra Preta soils can reduce the need for synthetic fertilizer inputs 
> and the production of those fertilizers, further reducing GHG inputs 
> to the atmosphere. Terra Preta formation can help soils hold onto 
> nitrogen better (in nitrogen binding microorganisms), thus reducing 
> nitrous oxide-N2O emissions to the atmosphere, and soluble nitrate-NOx 
> emissions to the watersheds.
> The biggest problem I see to the formation of Terra Preta soils is 
> that charcoal is currently more highly valued as a "carbon neutral" 
> fuel, rather than as a valuable soil amendment, that can improve 
> soils, and sequester carbon. Got any ideas to change that perception!?
> Fossil carbon is rapidly being turned into atmospheric carbon. Turning 
> atmospheric carbon back into terrestrial carbon (say, with Terra Preta 
> formation?) is a way to remove carbon from the atmosphere.
> Regards,
> SKB
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Duane Pendergast <mailto:still.thinking at computare.org>
>     *To:* 'Sean K. Barry' <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>
>     *Cc:* 'Terrapreta' <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>     *Sent:* Saturday, December 08, 2007 10:30 AM
>     *Subject:* RE: [Terrapreta] Catalyst: Carbon Bigfoot
>
>     Morning Sean,
>
>     My response to you was totally sincere. After 20 years trying to
>     follow the climate issue, I'm becoming more and more skeptical
>     about the dire claims made in the name of climate change due to
>     greenhouse gas emissions.
>
>     I was just trying to point out, that if terra preta lives up to
>     expectations on this site, there is potential for excess removal
>     of CO2 from the atmosphere. Danny Day has suggested that we are
>     seeing the "stumbling steps of a brand new species evolved to
>     stabilize this recurring imbalance" with reference to the drastic
>     cycling between ice ages seen in the long term climate change
>     record. He sees the burgeoning human population, including some
>     three billion now impoverished farmers, as key to planetary
>     survival and prosperity. The ultimate outcome of successful
>     demonstration of terra preta benefits could thus be an incentive
>     to geo-agricultural engineering on a massive scale. That vision
>     will be self limiting if plant growth is suppressed by a shortage
>     of atmospheric carbon dioxide. A next logical step for humanity
>     could be to continue to transfer carbon from fossil fuel into the
>     soil.
>
>     There is plenty of scope for climate change ballyhoo at the UNFCCC
>     meeting in Bali and in the media. Kevin Chisholm's gentle
>     suggestion in his response to your post that the list focus on
>     demonstrating the efficacy of the terra preta concept has
>     considerable merit.
>
>     Duane
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     *From:* Sean K. Barry [mailto:sean.barry at juno.com]
>     *Sent:* December 7, 2007 9:51 PM
>     *To:* still.thinking at computare.org; 'lou gold'
>     *Cc:* 'Terrapreta'
>     *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Catalyst: Carbon Bigfoot
>
>     Hi Duane,
>
>     WHAT?! Is your response to my post "tongue in cheek"? I hope so
>     ... or you really do not see things the way I do, either. Burning
>     coal and oil has to slow way down, even to stopping altogether. If
>     coal energy is required, then it has to change over to "clean"
>     coal, without the release of CO2 emissions.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071209/ab1c2aa1/attachment.html