[Terrapreta] carbon sequestration but where is TP?

[joe ferguson]

Life Cycle Analysis?

I have been following this thread and pondering just what is at issue 
here, and think people are talking past one another.

For a discussion of LCA see this article: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_cycle_assessment
Or do a Google search on ' "life cycle analysis"  '

And as an aside, if we must have non-extrapolated data on the lifetime 
of char sequestered in the soil, that is to say char produced by modern 
industrial methods, I fear we'll never  get a handle on the problem 
before this part of North Carolina is under water.

Brian Hans wrote:
> If I could be so bold as to offer a few reasons;
>  
> As I and others have pointed out, the LifeCycle analysis of most char 
> systems doesnt seem to offer any real advantage overall.
>  
> Additionally, TP is a relatively new science and as the banter on this 
> site shows, is still pretty thin in real data. Example is show me a 
> study where we can see the charcoal we make now will remain charcoal 
> in the soil for 100 + years... ?  
>  
> Lastly and likely most importantly, there are no major corp's pushing 
> char because they dont see economic models in a distributive 
> productionlike char in the fields would likely be. Its much easier to 
> think how someone is going to make $ on a $200m project injecting CO2 
> into a well from a coal plant than a whole bunch of farmers making 
> charcoal out of stumps and corn cobs... and unfortunately $ talks.
>  
> On a bright note...I do see this worm starting to turn, the word is 
> getting out. The more data we have (ground truth), the louder the 
> voice becomes. Also, the economy of CO2 is still in its infancy, its 
> still to fully mature.
>  
> The group needs to remember that even tho the technology is 1000's of 
> years old, we are all still early adopters.
>  
> Brian Hans
>  
>  
>  
>
>
> */Duane Pendergast <still.thinking at computare.org>/* wrote:
>
>     Michael,
>      
>     I searched through the UNFCCC's 2001 and 2007 IPCC reports on
>     mitigation and found no mention of Terra Preta or char. They come
>     close in the 2007 report by talking about burning biomass for
>     energy, and capturing and sequestering the carbon dioxide. It's
>     not too much of a leap of imagination to go to the concept of
>     partial combustion with the production of char -- but it seems to
>     be taking a long time. A cynic might think the UN and the IPCC are
>     not interested in techniques that might work - and also produce
>     side benefits which might be more important than their original
>     goal to manage atmospheric carbon dioxide.
>      
>     Duane
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071012/1a9ad19c/attachment.html