[Terrapreta] Critical thinking or lack thereof

[Kurt Treutlein]

Hi folkes,
The critical thing that seems to have been missed in what Crichton said
was not his take on climate change, but his discussion about complexity.
To paraphrase an old German saying:

Firstly things are more complicated and secondly, than we think

Do a Balance sheet on charcoal production. Instead of using dollars, use
CO2 produced in the calculations. Each process uses so much CO2 or
produces so much.

Take first of all some primitive people, using stone axes and wooden
implements, making charcoal  in "the traditional" manner. There is
obviously the CO2 produced in the actual burn, but as well, there is the
CH4 produced (we need to do a bit of currency conversion here). Stone
axes? knapped from flint they ought to be pretty well free of CO2 costs.
A firehardened digging stick? Some cost involved in firehardening it. It
might be useful for several kilns, but might need maintenance in
re-hardening the point from time to time. Treat it as a capital item,
just like any tool. Take into account any use of the heat and smoke for
cooking, primitive people often smoke meat etc. Allow a CO2 credit if
appropriate. Work out the credit for the produced charcoal in CO2
equivalents. Draw up a Balance sheet and profit and loss account--- did
you come out in the red or in the black. 

Do the same for a 200l drum based unit, used as a TLUD, while flaring
off the off gases. The steel in the drum was manufactured from iron ore
and processed into sheet, formed and welded etc. Every step of that
involved the use of 'carbon' burning of fuel in mining, transport,
smelting, manufacturing etc. The drum has an embodied CO2 value as a
result. It will be useful for a number of burns, take this into account,
the drum, and ancillary piping, stack etc etc is a capital item,
apportion the cost appropriately. The biomass you will be using has to
be harvested, transported prepared,. this will need tools, vehicles,
machinery., All have embodied CO2, all will be capital items, useful for
many burns. Don't forget the cost of producing the biomass in the first
place, this will depend on what it actually is. If "waste" crop residue,
it isn't really waste, it's part of the crop production, it will have an
embodied value, dependent on the cost of production (in CO2 units).
If the off gases can be profitably used, allow credits for that, but
don't forget the similar analysis you need to do for THAT use. Now do
the balance sheet etc for this process. Any better than the primitive
system?

Now. do it all again for the "you beaut, all singing and dancing
pyrolysis system" you've dreamed up that is going to cost a couple of
million dollars to process 100t of biomass per day. Don't forget the
embodied CO2 costs of the buildings, roads etc that will be involved.
Concrete needs cement which involves mining, lots of head,
transportation, energy etc, as well as reo steel, tools used in
building, all that stuff.

Are things getting complex enough yet? Consider the impact on humanity
as a whole, what will be the effect of adding all that charcoal to the
soil? (we don't really know yet, aside from the Amazonian Jungles). To
have a real effect on Global Warming, how much land will have to be
used, will such land be useful for other purposes at the same time etc
etc etc. Such complexity is likely to be never ending.

THAT sort of thing was what Crichton was on about.

Thimk about it.

Kurt