13 Mar 2009
Giant microwave ovens that can "cook" wood into charcoal could become our best tool in the fight against global warming, according to a leading British climate scientist.
Chris Turney, a professor of geography at the University of Exeter, said that by burying the charcoal produced from microwaved wood, the carbon dioxide absorbed by a tree as it grows can remain safely locked away for thousands of years. The technique could take out billions of tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere every year.
Fast-growing trees such as pine could be "farmed" to act specifically as carbon traps — microwaved, buried and replaced with a fresh crop to do the same thing again.
Turney has built a 5m-long prototype of his microwave, which produces a tonne of CO2 for $65. He plans to launch his company, Carbonscape, in the UK this month to build the next generation of the machine, which he hopes will process more wood and cut costs further.
He is not alone in touting the benefits of this type of charcoal, known as biochar or biocharcoal. The Gaia theorist, James Lovelock, and Nasa's James Hansen have both been outspoken about the potential benefits of biochar, arguing that it is one of the most powerful potential solutions to climate change. In a recent paper, Hansen calculated that producing biocharcoal by current methods of burning waste organic materials could reduce global carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere by 8ppm [parts per million] over the next 50 years. That is the equivalent of three years of emissions at current levels.
Turney said biochar was the closest thing scientists had to a silver-bullet solution to climate change. Processing facilities could be built right next to forests grown specifically to soak up CO2. "You can cut trees down, carbonise them, then plant more trees. The forest could act on an industrial scale to suck carbon out of the atmosphere."
The biochar could be placed in disused coal mines or tilled into the ground to make soil more fertile. Its porous structure is ideal for trapping nutrients and beneficial micro-organisms that help plants grow. It also improves drainage and can prevent up to 80 per cent of greenhouse gases such as nitrous oxides and methane from escaping from the soil.
In a recent analysis of geo-engineering techniques published in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry, Tim Lenton, a climate scientist at the University of East Anglia, rated producing charcoal as the best technological solution to reducing CO2 levels. He compared it to other geo-engineering techniques such as dumping iron in oceans or seeding clouds to reflect the sun's radiation and calculated that by 2100 a quarter of the effect of human-induced emissions of CO2 could be sequestered with biochar production from waste organic matter, giving a net reduction of 40ppm in CO2 concentration.
Johannes Lehmann of Cornell university has calculated that it is realistically possible to fix 9.5bn tonnes of carbon per year using biochar. The global production of carbon from fossil fuels stands at 8.5bn tonnes.
Charcoal is usually produced by burning wood in high-temperature ovens but this process is dirty and only locks around 20-30 per cent of the mass of the wood into charcoal. Turney's idea to use a microwave, which he found could lock away up to 50 per cent of the wood's mass, came from a cooking accident when he was a teenager, in which he mistakenly microwaved a potato for 40 minutes and found that the vegetable had turned into charcoal. "Years later when we were talking about carbon sequestration I thought maybe charcoal was the way to go," he said.
A number of governments are investing their hopes for sequestering CO2 from the atmosphere in large-scale carbon capture and storage projects. But Turney said this would not provide a full solution. "It's only for large single sources of emissions like large power stations and that accounts for about 60% of emissions. It doesn't deal with anything up in the atmosphere already which is driving the changes we see today."
Chris Goodall, writer of the Carbon Commentary blog, proposed biochar as a solution to climate change in his recent book, Ten Technologies to Save the Planet. "The only big problem is organising it on a large enough scale, " he said. "Organising it so that farmers get paid and put the charcoal in the ground rather than burning it for their own food is a big problem to organise on a global scale."
This could be done if biochar were incorporated into the carbon markets making it more profitable to bury rather than burn. There is an emerging campaign, he said, to get governments to recognise biochar in the post-Kyoto agreement on climate change that will be negotiated in Copenhagen later this year.
This article first appeared on The Guardian
BusinessGreen.com is part of The Guardian Environment Network
LATEST STORIES ABOUT TECHNOLOGY
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
LATEST JOBS
TODAY'S TOP STORIES
HIGHLIGHT
The best green companies in the UK should be preparing their entries for annual BusinessGreen Leaders Awards
INSIGHT
INSIGHT
The science and practical application of an improved method for the specification of power and cooling infrastructure for data centres
A look at alternative approaches to managing energy for cost and/or sustainability reasons in data centres
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Add your comment
biochar book
The world is a great place, but it is falling apart and we all are responsable for this. Be responsable now and try to make it better. Biochar, one of the newest option can contribuate to atmospheric CO2 reduction. Find out more: http://www.biochar-books.com The Biochar Revolution is exactly what it says !
Posted by new_biochar_land, 14 Feb 2011
A real help in understanding Biochar
I heard about biochar a few months ago from a friend of mine. I never thought that something as simple as charcoal could do so much for the soil and the environment. I was amazed after reading "The Biochar Revolution" from http://biochar-books.com/The_Biochar_Revolution. Check it out. It was a great help in opening my mind to issues that affect us all.
Posted by landboy09, 26 Jan 2011
Biocharing applied to massive waste messes
For some reason no one wants to apply biochar techniques to the massive ever-expanding messes of organic wastes and sewage that are being handled at present to allow unneeded reemitting of GHGs, mainly carbon dioxide, as the carbon biochemicals in the messes undergo natural biodegrading. Proper biocharring would also destroy germs, toxics and drugs so that they can not cause water pollution problems via seepage or floodouts. For more you can google my name to find many comments about using pyrolysis on those messes. Dr. J. Singmaster
Posted by Dr. James Singmaster, 14 Jul 2009
Biochar not the answer
Concerted international efforts on the scale of the Manhattan Project that developed the atomic bomb during the second world war are needed to develop alternative non-fossil energy sources, not feeble-minded attempts to continue business as usual with oxymoronic "clean coal" to lessen greenhouse emissions and biochar for carbon capture. Consider George Monbiot's recent article at http://tinyurl.com/ckyza9 The international community is struggling to fix the current economic crisis, which is seeing millions facing unemployment and poverty. But this is a mere dress rehearsal for the imminent onset of peak oil, which promises global unemployment on a scale never before contemplated, with the imposition of strategic fuel rationing by governments, the grounding of commercial aircraft, and the end of petrol-fuelled transport. The challenge is not to restore the economic status quo tied to fossil fuel, but to effect a radical change in the way societies think about material production and quality of life. Continued plunder of the earth's finite resources to satisfy the material cravings of a global population whose growth is out of control makes no sense.
Posted by Roy Garner, 25 May 2009
Very Good but...
This article hits a good spot. All the political talk is about approaching carbon neutrality, but we need to be carbon-negative. But why bother to make charcoal? Why not just bury the wood, which is what happened in carboniferous times. Or could it be sunk in a subduction zone in the ocean? And there's no point in burying anything while people are still digging up fossil fuels to burn. By all means let's produce biomass, but until we've got non-carbon alternatives, let's use it to produce energy and reduce the use of fossil fuel. You can make diesel from biomass for example, or burn it.
Posted by David Baird, 16 Mar 2009
Produce? or Sequester
I think they meant to say; $65 per ton to fix/sequester CO2 as biochar Does this $65 price for CO2 mean that their biochar production cost is $65 / 3.67 = about $17.50 for the 1/3.67 ton (carbon)Biochar to lock up 1ton CO2? also, what is the value of syn-gas & bio-oil products from the pyrolysis reaction? Other Biochar News' UNCCD Submission to Climate Change/UNFCCC AWG-LCA 5 "Account carbon contained in soils and the importance of biochar (charcoal) in replenishing soil carbon pools, restoring soil fertility and enhancing the sequestration of CO2." http://tinyurl.com/cqwabf This new Congressional Research Service Biochar report (by analyst Kelsi Bracmort) is the best short summary I have seen so far - both technical and policy oriented. http://tinyurl.com/cep9zs
Posted by Erich J. Knight, 15 Mar 2009