GAS-L: Fwd: sequestratioon of carbon, for use

[Carefreeland@aol.com]

    Hi friends, this is a recent letter I have sent to the Biomass Energy 
Foundation stoves list, global discussion for clean wood energy. Tami is a 
NOAA meteorologist studying the greenhouse effect.  She was discussing 
burying charcoal to bring the destructive greenhouse gas level down.  Read, 
SMILE and look forward to the future. It will be here before you know it. 
                                                          Daniel Dimiduk

---

• To: adkarve@pn2.vsnl.net.in, stoves@crest.org
• Subject: Re: sequestratioon of carbon, for use
• From: Carefreeland@aol.com
• Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 10:12:37 EDT
• Delivered-To: mailing list stoves@crest.org
• List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
• List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
• List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
• List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
• Mailing-List: contact stoves-help@crest.org; run by ezmlm

    Tami, 
    You make a very good point about sequestration of CO2.  Lets look at it 
another way. Any biomass taken out of the decomposition cycle, weather from 
the actual slow natural decay, or wildfire, is not a net greenhouse gas gain 
to the atmosphere when used for energy source. The advantage of clean burning 
Vs slow decay is the lessening of methane and particulate emissions in 
exchange for CO2 emissions. From what I understand, this is a 21 to 1 
advantage in less greenhouse effect. 
    On the other hand, any biomass energy that replaces coal, oil, or natural 
gas in that order of carbon content, is a net loss of additional destructive 
greenhouse gas to the current system.  I will suggest that charcoal can be 
stored in stable coal mines with the assumption that if we produce enough we 
can actually put the carbon back from where it came, yet still have it in 
accessible storage for a rainy day such as an atmospheric disruption. 
    There are other factors to keep in mind. Why should we bury charcoal, the 
cleanest burning biomass, only to dig more coal somewhere else? The digging 
is a direct assault on the environment of the highest magnitude. One only has 
to travel a hundred miles east from my home to witness thousands of square 
miles of what was once 1x logged forest, or even in some cases pristine old 
growth, completely destroyed 200 ft. down into the earth.  Then another 
hundred miles south and east, you see extensive mountaintop removal, the 
absolutely worst destruction, of the most beautiful land, ever by man. 
    Once we dig the coal at net energy expense (have you ever witnessed the 
energy expended to dig rock)? Then we transport it great distances at more 
energy expense. It sits in piles leaching pollution into the environment.  
Finally it is burned with the emission of everything from sulfur and 
nitrogen, to heavy metals and radon gas. 
    If we could just harness the energy of some of the millions of acres of 
timber that go up in smoke every year from unnatural management of land, we 
could replace a great deal of this coal, while reducing the emissions from 
the fires. What is the figure for lost board feet of timber? We can add to 
this equation, the expenditure in man days, resources, and lives wasted, 
fighting fires. 
     Around here in Ohio, nearly every farmer burns off a semi load or more 
of brush and low grade firewood yearly.  Common practice now with the EPA 
complaints about burning, is to doze it into a ravine. This destroys the 
land, and the methane emitted is worse than burning. 
    I am working on a devise that would be useable for the common farmer to 
derive extra income in the off season, by clean converting waste to charcoal. 
I believe the devises can be rented through rental stores and the charcoal 
picked up for distribution there as well. If the market price for charcoal is 
down, the farmer will have the option of burning the char himself or storing 
it outside, damp and safe from accidental ignition.
      It would make my day to see barge loads of clean produced charcoal, 
heading down the Ohio River to mix with and reduce the amount of coal burned 
in power plants, cleaning up some emissions.  The farm economy would have one 
more prop to keep the bills paid in times of low crop prices and high fuel 
prices. 
    I don't think the farmers would care what their income per hour was if it 
raised some cash while managing a land use problem. They waste that much time 
making and watching fires anyhow.  Charcoal stores outdoors indefinitely, so 
a farmers wealth would be measured by the size of his charcoal pile while 
waiting for a peak market price.  Charcoal could be traded like grain now is, 
for other agriculture products, such as food for the family and animals.
    Any jobs lost in the mines would be replaced by jobs created by the 
additional farm income, and handling the char.  The charcoal devises would 
advance in technology. Small generators operating off the waste heat could 
contribute to the farmers power grid at times of peak usage, such as grain 
drying, ventilation of barns, and welding shop work.  Also don't count out 
battery powered tractors recharging on solar, wind, and biomass energy. How 
much diesel would this save? Add the cost of transporting the diesel to the 
farm.  Rotating batteries could run them indefinitely. 
    Has anyone thought of these things?  Even old straw and corncobs could be 
thrown in with the brush, adding greatly to the supply of biomass, WITHOUT  
transportation cost, until the energy is dry and concentrated to char. 
    When one looks at the practicality of all improved biomass fuels, 
charcoal comes out a winner every time. It can be packaged and stored 
indefinately, even converted to gas or liquid. Why is there no significant 
market for it here yet? 
                                                              Daniel Dimiduk
                                             Shangri-La Research and 
Development
                                                              Dayton, Ohio, 
USA

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com

List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>

Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

---

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,  Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF
List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>

Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Gasification Events and Information:
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/