[Terrapreta] Sequestering CO2

[Sean K. Barry]

Hi Kurt,

About 1/4 to 1/3 of the weight (1/2 the volume) of biomass can be converted to charcoal.

Compressing CO2 is energy intensive.  Piping (pumping) CO2 gas is energy intensive.  Pumping it down, at pressure into the ground is energy intensive.  It would probably take more energy to compress/pipe/pump CO2 into the ground, than all of the energy that was harvested from the fossil fuel to emit the CO2 in the first place.  There are not enough CO2 reservoirs in the ground to house all of the CO2 we produce.

Now what?  Quit calling TP and "clean charcoal production" an "airy-fairy plan".  You DO NOT propose a better more workable plan.

Regards,

SKB
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Kurt Treutlein<mailto:rukurt at westnet.com.au> 
  To: terra pretta group<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> 
  Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 11:28 PM
  Subject: [Terrapreta] Sequestering CO2


  Just imagine yourself trying to tell the great unwashed public about 
  carbon sequestration.
  On the one hand: Here is a powerstation burning fossil fuel. Carbon 
  dioxide  going up thge stack and dissipating out into the atmosphere, 
  where it will cause global warming. We are going to capture that carbon 
  dioxide, comp[ress it and send it off through that pipeline there to an 
  old oilwell, where we are going to pump it deep underground into the old 
  oil reservoir, where it will stay for ever.

  A very simple scenario.

  Then we try the TP system.

  Here's a powerstation, burning fossil fuel and the carbon dioxide goes 
  up the stack and dissipates into the atmosphere where it contributes to 
  global warming. Down here in the ground we have a whole lot of plants, 
  that over their growing season will capture carbon dioxide from the air. 
  Then we harvest the plants, dry them and burn them in this thing we call 
  a pyrolyser. From this machine we will get all sorts of things that we 
  can use instead of crude oil and we also get about half the weight of 
  the original dry plantmatter as charcoal. This charcoal is mainly carbon 
  plus some other minerals. We'll bury that in the soil, where it will 
  make the soil more productive . That carbon will stay there forever, 
  thus removing the carbon dioxide that the plant took from the air 
  forever as well. We'll also get some energy from the pyrolises machine 
  which can help with out energy needs.

  A somewhat more airy fairy scenario, that will take a lot longer than 
  the compress and bury it CO2 one.

  I wonder which scenario people will go for more?

  Kurt

  _______________________________________________
  Terrapreta mailing list
  Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/>
  http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org<http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/>
  http://info.bioenergylists.org<http://info.bioenergylists.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080427/8a33e220/attachment.html