[Terrapreta] Terra Preta Future Goals?
Folke Günther
folke at holon.se
Tue Apr 15 03:59:40 CDT 2008
Exactly what I think. See my comments below, and on my blog.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Folke Günther
Kollegievägen 19
224 73 Lund, Sweden
home/office: +46 46 14 14 29
cell: 0709 710306 skype: folkegun
Homepage: http://www.holon.se/folke
blog: http://folkegunther.blogspot.com/
_____
Från: terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org
[mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org] För Sean K. Barry
Skickat: den 15 april 2008 00:39
Till: joe ferguson
Kopia: terra pretta group
Ämne: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta Future Goals?
Hi Joe,
Terra Preta Nova has to be on a massive world-wide industrial scale, like
that of the biggest industries on the planet; mining, oil pumping, gas
extraction, agriculture, transportation, etc. to even work. We already
handle an estimated ~40 billion tons per year (I think, this number could be
checked?) of waste biomass in all of agricultural production. Nothing is
done with most of it but leave it to waste (net CO2 increase into the
atmosphere). Nature is recycling ~120 billion tons of waste biomass carbon
every year, too.
[FG:] Gross primary producion is esimated to 160 gigatonnes (billion tons)
C. Respiration about half of this, thus about 80 gigatonnes (=recycled into
carbon dioxide .) 80 gigatonnes will be found as biomass in the end of the
year. (NB As in most scientific fields there is an arguing about this, and
there are annual variations, these figures are only between thumb and
forefinger). Say that half of his is available for charring, the rest is
fine roots and leaves, then we have 40 gigatonnes C as a gross plant
sequestration.
To offset total worldwide annual fossil carbon emissions of ~6.3 Gt yr-1 to
the atmosphere now,
[FG:] Sorry, the latest estimates are about 29 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide,
i.e. about 8 gigatonnes carbon.
using just charcoal-in-soil, would require the production of ~3.1 tons of
charcoal to put into soil,
[FG:] If we stunned ALL accessible plant growth by cutting it away and
charring it, leaving nothing to growth or wood industry, we might be able to
seqester 16 gigatonnes, but I see this as totally unrealistic. Instead,
assuming a char sequestration climbing to ,say, 3 gigatonnes C per year,
which is abou 11% of the available biomass (about 6% of the global plant
production) COMBINED with a massive, but not total stop of the use of
fossil fuels (isn’t it that the most wise decision in a post-peak world?) to
about 89% (declining the annual emission rate to 1 gigatonne C). That would
give us a net sequestration of 2 gigatonnes annually.
using ~12 Gt yr-1 of biomass (3.67 [w/w CO2/C] * ~3.1 GT yr-1). This 12 GT
of biomass is out there, annually reproducing every year now (and decaying
every year).
Additionally, fossil fuel energy use must be immediately curtailed and here
is important point. We cannot just let others do one in lieu of we do the
the other here. I refer to the dirty little selfish game of someone else
making charcoal so we can keep burning fossil fuels. This is the moral trap
issue with carbon sequestration (and it is also the freaking business model
of the Kyoto Protocol, if you think about it?). BOTH of these steps must be
taken simultaneously and to the hilt, if we can. The situation demands it.
The scientific evidence to date supports working theories that would predict
a catastrophic outcome, if BOTH issues of carbon removal from the atmosphere
(Terra Preta Nova style) and immediate curtailment of fossil fuel
consumption aren't done on a vast scale, in a hurry. Some undesirable
outcomes are even certain, even if we act large scale and decisively now.
The set of outcomes without immediate widespread ACTION to combat GW/GCC are
way not desirable for the vast population of the planet.
[FG:] I culd not agree more. In the above scenario, the first intermediate
goal, an atmospheric carbon dioxide level of 350 ppm (Jim Hansen) is
achieved after 70 years. Naturally many other scenarios of the increase of
carbon sequestration and the decrease of emissions could be imagined, some
disastrous, but to prevail, a COMBINATION of sequestration AND emission
reduction is necessary.
Everyone is going to feel the effects from progressing GW/GCC. There will
definitely be some who suffer more as a result of these outcomes.
This can easily become "the moral question of our times". Do we ignore the
plight of billions of people around us, to service ALL of our personal needs
any longer? Or, do we recognize our correct behavior as world citizens and
ALL of us combat GW/GCC with fervor and without selfishness, until the world
is a better place to live in for everyone (even ourselves)? This seems an
easy choice for me.
Harvesting biomass for enough charcoal to bury fast enough plus provide some
energy to replace the fossil fuels previously is a GREAT BIG JOB!
It is a great big opportunity for energy providers that expect to be in
business in the future, I think.
Focusing on future goals and not stuck in analysis of "conjectures" about
the past is a great idea, Joe. I like it.
Regards,
SKB
----- Original Message -----
From: joe <mailto:jferguson at nc.rr.com> ferguson
To: Sean K. <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com> Barry
Cc: terra pretta group <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> ; Robert
Klein <mailto:arclein at yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Earthen Kiln Conjecture
In reply to this thread, I've long ago concluded that for the C
sequestration goal to be significant, it must be carried out on an
industrial scale. By this I mean a scale comparable to the GWatt coal
burning plants that are cropping up like daffodils in spring. And this
scale of operation will require a refined process that captures all the by-
and co-products, including liquid fuels, heat, possibly electricity,
feedstocks for other processes, what have you.
By all means carry out the necessary research to determine whether the
pottery sherds are important for other aspects, such as the agricultural
effects.
But I don't think we'll get anywhere by trying to reconstruct the specific
process used by the ancients. I will posit that there were several
variations on the process developed by them depending upon where they were
in the development cycle, and depending very much upon the materials and
capabilities available to each individual village that was involved.
Let us focus on the goals.
Joe Ferguson
Sean K. Barry wrote:
Hi Robert,
Again with this post. Whatever the Indios did to make charcoal out of
whatever they used DOES NOT MATTER TODAY! When are you going to grasp this?
Recommending to make charcoal in earthen kilns (in the open air) made from
corn stalks is a bad idea. There is no way to do this without massive
releases of Methane-CH4, which has been discussed ad-nauseum with you as a
significant potential problem with this plan. Also, just like there isn't
enough corn grown in the world to make enough ethanol to supply the world's
thirst for transportation fuel, there IS NOT ENOUGH CORN STALKS IN THE WORLD
to make the amount of charcoal we need to form enough Terra Preta and/or
make any kind of difference on agricultural food production or global
climate mitigation.
Move on. Your past one idea (Earthen Kiln Conjecture) is too limited and
problematic to be a solution or of any value to us, Robert. That's my
opinion and widely held in this group, I think.
Best Regards,
SKB
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Klein <mailto:arclein at yahoo.com>
To: terra pretta group <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 1:14 PM
Subject: [Terrapreta] Earthen Kiln Conjecture
Ihave reposted an article by David Bennet with Lehmann on Terra Preta
publishedin 2005. This outlines the most criticalinformation as well as
describing the original scope of the Indian civilizationitself. It is
at:http://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com/2008/04/earthen-terra-preta-kil
ns-and-pollen.htmlAgainthis lays out the limiting factors and fully supports
my earthen kilnconjecture, particularly the following quotation.“There has
been some pollen analysis. It suggests manioc and maize were
being grown 2,000 to 3,000 years ago. In the pollen bank, these crops didn’t
pop up sporadically but in large numbers.”
Ihave also polished my description of the protocol and am activelypromoting
field trials.Firstly,the maize or corn exists in an environment that
mitigated against its use forpurely food production. There werealternatives
far better suited. to the non terra preta environment, startingimmediately
with manioc which I think is a rainforest friendly plant. Secondly,the only
viable source of meat protein to these peoples at this populationdensity was
through fish. Withoutconfirmation, a pond with tilapia makes great sense.
It was a staple for the Maya.The waste from the daily meal could be readily
folded into any growing seedhill. Human waste could simply have beenburied
in the field itself avoiding any storage. This is common practice to this
day. Themaking of the earthen kiln is no more difficult than uprooting the
dehydratedcorn stalks after harvest and properly stacking them to form an
earthen walledkiln with a wall thickness of two to three root pads
and an interior of tightlypacked corn stalks. Obviously, any otherplant
material, including wood can be built into the stack as available. The
earthen wall nicely restricts air flowduring the burn phase and lends itself
to optimization by changing the wallthickness. It also minimizes the
amountof human effort needed which is through the roof if you are attempting
to coveror bury a ten ton pile of stubble or branches. Thisgives you a kiln
with vertical earthen walls and a possibly domed top that canbe easily
covered with earth. Again,field trials will optimize this protocol very
easily. The kiln could be squared off or perhaps evencircular though
unlikely. The only tool to this point is a strong back ortwo. We have
gathered several tons ofcorn stover over perhaps an acre of land with only a
little more effort thanthat annually required to clear the field and burn
the waste. Nowwe must fire the kiln. The easy way isto take a clay lined
old basket
and fill it up with coals from a woodfire. Carry this ember charge to
thecenter of the kiln top and tip the charge onto the exposed center and
place thebasket as a cap to the newly forming chimney.
More clay may be necessary to widen the chimney cap. Throw more earth on
top of this to preventbreakout of the fire. Keep throwingearth on any
breakout points that start.
The chimney will serve to burn all the volatiles produced as the hotzone
expands to fill the collapsing kiln until they are exhausted. Thereupon the
hot zone will cool off leavinga blend of biochar, ash and earth and some
root ends for the next kiln. And yes, we should have a lot of fired clay.
Thebiochar itself will be a range of nonvolatile combustion products that
willrange from even dried vegetation to activated charcoal following a nice
bellcurve. The material can be then gatheredin baskets and redistributed
into the field onto the seed hills again reducingwastage and effort.
Irealized originally that the only ancient plant that could accommodate a
highenough volume of terra preta production was good old maize. It just
seemed an unlikely option fortropical rainforests. That is when I started
looking for references to thepollen record. The article by DavidBennett and
Lehmann is one of those reverences that then emerged. Iwould like to get a
full
spectrum of the pollen profile since it seems verylikely that while the
fence rows held the food trees, it seems more likely thatthey also used a
variation of the three sisters using some form of convenientlegume.
Squashes also, of course, butnot nearly as important. Thekey point of all
this is that a family can convert a field into terra preta inone short
season, allowing them to repeat the process thereafter as necessaryuntil the
field is completely transformed to depth. Today, we can do the same thing
using shovelsand a garbage can lid.
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
_______________________________________________
Terrapreta mailing list
Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org
_____
_______________________________________________
Terrapreta mailing list
Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org
_____
Jag använder en gratisversion av SPAMfighter för privata användare.
16556 spam har blivit blockerade hittills.
Betalande användare har inte detta meddelande i sin e-post.
Hämta gratis SPAMfighter <http://www.spamfighter.com/lsv> idag!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080415/35fb8bbb/attachment.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 21242 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /attachments/20080415/35fb8bbb/attachment.gif
More information about the Terrapreta
mailing list