-
*rc3 preroll music 2021*
-
Herald: Welcome to the "gehacktes from
Hell", we're streaming from the
-
Bierscheune in Alte Hölle in Brandenburg.
The coming talk, looks at the method of
-
carbon sinking, a way to limit climate
change. Hans-Peter Schmidt will tell us
-
how to do this with the help of biochar.
We're really happy to have him as a
-
speaker because Hans-Peter is a pioneer in
the field of biochar science, and he has
-
worked on the development of its
technologies and the application.
-
Following the talk, we have a short Q&A
session from your devices at home. You can
-
send your questions via Twitter to the
hashtag rc3Hell or via the I.R.C. chat or
-
the rocket chat at hashtag
rc3-gehacktesfromhell. Later, you can also
-
meet Hans-Peter in a jitsy room called
Discussion.altehölle.de. And now over to
-
Hans-Peter.
HP: For 15 years now, I work on methods to
-
extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere
and to sequester the extracted carbon in a
-
stable form and then soil on sediments.
And we found in many others who work on
-
the same subject found several methods
that can extract significant amounts of
-
carbon dioxide. And also methods that can
transform the extracted carbon dioxide
-
into stable carbon forms that do not
degrade biologically or chemically. And
-
the Ithaca Institute for which I work also
developed the first carbon sink
-
certificate, and it can certify and assess
the amount of carbon that are stored in
-
carbon sinks. And now at the end of 21, we
are the stage that several of these
-
technologies could be scaled and have to
be scaled to reach the objectives of
-
climate policy. But this scale up of these
technologies is so massive that it will
-
have an influence on the geo physics of
our planet and that we have to consider
-
and those risks we have to sink them now.
Without. Further waiting. To scale climate
-
technologies, but we need to take care
that the scale up is done sustainably and
-
and in our talk, I want you to make some
of these points that we will not hopefully
-
save the climate to get extinguished by
other means and didn't. So did. The
-
situation is rather clear, and most in the
world, most governments and people are
-
understood by now that we need to reduce
the emissions to close to zero by 2050.
-
And and in all scenarios, we should have
reached already the point of highest
-
emissions by now. But in fact, emissions
still rise. But. Everybody counts on on
-
emissions reductions to happen rather
soon. So to be honest, we cannot see these
-
reductions happening in the close future,
but. Let's let's assume emissions will be
-
reduced, then according to the plan, until
2050, even then, we will need massive
-
carbon sinks because of the effect of the
CO2 that was already admitted to the
-
atmosphere and that is not degraded, but
has a global warming effect that continues
-
for several hundreds and thousands and
thousands of years. So to clean up legacy
-
emissions, we need to extract carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere and need to
-
establish carbon sinks. And we know that
if everything goes according to all the
-
plans of the Paris Treaty and other
decision makers. Then we need to extract
-
800 billion tons of CO2 from the
atmosphere by the year 2100. So this is
-
not to balance further emissions. This is
only to balance the effect of the
-
emissions already occured, but the
technologies that are available to extract
-
carbon dioxide, they are called the
negative emission technologies. It's
-
negative because it's positive is when you
emit to somewhere negative would be just
-
this abstraction. Not a nice name, but
that's what it is. So net technologies are
-
nature based like afforestation and the
growth of biomass, which in fact is the
-
way to extract natural carbon dioxide from
the atmosphere. And as long as these
-
biomass is growing and does not decompose,
carbon is stored. However, when you
-
transform the biomass carbon by pyrolysis
into a stable form like biochar and
-
paralytic oiles, this transformed carbon
can be stored for longer times. And that's
-
what is here in the middle of the biochar
or power organic carbon capture and
-
storage method, which is partly nature
based and partly persistent and measurable
-
because you have long term carbon sink
that cannot just go away by accident, like
-
in a forest fire. There are other means
like enhanced weathering take volcanic
-
stone powders that can react to
carbonates. And then there is direct air
-
capture is when when you extract by
adsorption the CO2 and so you filter air
-
and extract CO2 and transform it then into
something that you can store. So our
-
specialty is picks the biochar method and
just shortly to show you how this works.
-
So you have biomass, you heat the biomass
in the absence of air. Up to 400 to 800
-
degrees and then it's like cooking without
air. And these biomass and then you have
-
solid residue, which is the biochar and
liquid residue that you can condense from
-
the gas phase, which is the paralytic oil.
And you still have a permanent gas, which
-
usually is combusted to drive the whole
process, which is energy neutral. So you
-
do not need external energy to run this
process. And and then this biochar can be
-
used, for example in agryculture to
increase yields and to improve soil
-
quality. And then this makes that you can
grow more biomass that then again, can go
-
back to to the production of biomass and
then transforming by paralysis by truck
-
can also be used in industrial products
and in building materials in plastics and
-
and composite materials where the carbon
does not decompose. Neither. So so this is
-
in very short what is picks out any carbon
capture and storage. This is a pyrolysis
-
unit of of a smaller size that can produce
up to something like 1500 tonnes of
-
biochar per year. So shortly again, how it
looks inside paralysis, so biomass that is
-
shredded to smaller particles goes into
this screwdriver. And so it's avoided. Any
-
air can enter this process and then it
goes into this cruel reactor and the
-
biomass is transported here in this
reactor, which is heated from environment
-
temperature of 20 degrees up to 600
decrease. And then the biochar is the
-
solid residue of this cooking. It flows
out of the process, while the other 50
-
percent of the carbon is in the gas phase,
which is separated here. And then in this
-
case, all the gases are burned to produce
thermic energy that drives the process and
-
is then be used for heating purposes.
However, if you do not burn the gases, you
-
can also condense the gases and use the
liquid off of the process. And the biochar
-
is looks like this. It's a very porous
material that conserves the biological
-
structure. Here you have a piece of wood
that is carbonized. It looks like
-
charcoal. And if you look on the
microscope, you see this enormous porous
-
structure, which explains a lot of
functions and effects that we see in
-
biochar. For example, you can impregnate
it was organic fertilizers, and then all
-
these pores are filled with organic
fertilizers is preserved, so it cannot be
-
leached out. The soil and plants and
microbes can feed from this conserved
-
organic fertilizers. So we have an effect
of this biochar on economic systems. But
-
what I want to talk about today is only
the effect that if you put this biochar to
-
soil this carbon, which was CO2 in the
atmosphere, which was assimilated by the
-
biomass which was transformed in the
pyrolysis, to aromatic carbon, which is
-
this black stuff, this aromatic carbon
cannot be degraded over centuries by
-
microorganisms. So if you put it to soil,
it is a long term carbon sink. So. To have
-
a global effect, we need a lot of biomass.
In the European context we could say,
-
yeah, we use residual biomass leftovers
from food processing or harvest residues
-
or manure or sewage sludge. So these are
all biomass that could be transformed by
-
pyrolysis. However, the amount of this
residue carbon is not as much as it could
-
have a climate effect. We need a lot more
biomass, and it means we have to grow
-
biomass, especially for the extraction of
carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and the
-
transformation by pyrolysis. So we have to
combine. Carbon farming systems was picks
-
or separates any carbon capture and
storage. And there are different methods
-
that are not just monocultures, highly
intensive production, but these are, what
-
we call carbon farming systems, like you
can see here. These are several arable. So
-
you combine wood and crops with arable
crops, or you have this kind of
-
agroforestry systems that are highly
productive in regard to biomass. Instead
-
of having just pastries, you can have zero
pastries. So animals range below trees
-
that produce additional biomass. We would
also need eggy farms that are highly
-
productive and could be combined to
shellfish and Ardis, which also clean
-
coastal water from exceeding nutrients.
And so we can see that if we investigate
-
different farming systems, that in
addition to food production, because we do
-
not want to replace food production by
biomass production, but in addition to
-
food production, which is the green bar in
the tropical agroforestry system, we can
-
produce the same amount of food as now.
But in addition, we can produce biomass
-
for carbon sequestration. Also in systems
like Tropical Forest Garden, you can have
-
both. And you can intensify the systems.
However, the suggested eucalyptus
-
monoculture, as you can see here is would
only be for carbon capture and would not
-
produce fruit. And as you can see, is not
very efficient anyway. It just doesn't
-
make much work. And also, marine seaweed
is quite efficient in this regard. Now, if
-
you come back, if we want now this part,
this green part, this is the carbon sink
-
part that we need to balance global
temperatures and we know we need 270
-
billion tonnes of carbon in this carbon
sink. So this is 800 gigatons CO2
-
equivalent. And what does it mean, if we
would with this message, Paragon carbon
-
capture and storage deliver 30 % of the
necessary carbon sink. What does it mean
-
for global resources? So for this to
happen, for this 30% of the minimum
-
necessary carbon sink, we would need about
100 billion tonnes of biochar and that
-
gigatons of biochar into 2100. And just to
get an imagination on how much this is,
-
this is the amount of 1500 of this
Matterhorn mountains. So the volume of one
-
Matterhorn that you find in the Swiss Alps
multiplied by 1500 was dense biochar. So
-
just the imagination of how much we need
to extract and sink. And that's only 30%.
-
And this amount corresponds to a thin
layer of two centimeter of biochar to a
-
centimeter of biochar on each hectare of
global agricultural land. So we would have
-
to cover all agricultural land by two
centimeters of biochar, which then will be
-
dicked or plowed into the soil as a carbon
sink. So it is a massive, massive mess and
-
it only makes 30 percent of the biochar.
So we would need to produce this amount of
-
biochar. We would need 190 gigatons of
biomass. And. So this and it's kind of 90
-
gigatons of biomass. We need to compare to
the global standing biomass. And that's
-
about 0.8 percent of the global standing
biomass and 0.8 percent of the global
-
standing biomass would have to be
paralyzed every year from the year 2050 to
-
2100 to produce the amount of carbon sink.
That's necessary to preserve 30 percent of
-
the climate. And that would need about he
handed 80000 industrial paralysis plants.
-
So we calculated and looked and what does
it mean to produce 500000 pyrolysis
-
industrial pyrolysis plants? We imagine it
could be, or there has to be produced in
-
chain production like cars. But to reach
the negative emission potential that's
-
necessary by 2050, we need an exponential
growth of the production of this pyrolysis
-
units, which would be possible. And you
you see you see here, this is the blue
-
line. So we have this exponential growth.
And as you can see, we have then the
-
slowdown of of the growth of absolute
numbers. So the the orange line here, you
-
see the production numbers per year, so
you have to grow until 2043 to produce
-
50000 units per year. But then you have to
to slow down the production because we can
-
only use 400000 pyrolysis units on Earth.
After that, we do not have more biomass to
-
treat. So we need an exponential growth
because of the severity of the problem of
-
the problem. And then we need an
exponential growth after 2043 to a steady
-
state of the production of few plants that
are needed to renew these standing plants.
-
So this is a very interesting from
economic point of view, and we will see
-
this in several areas because of the
global economy and global problems and the
-
global limits of resources that we need.
Exponential growth and growth for several
-
technologies. And how that will be done.
It's very interesting. That's subject of
-
today. So, so you saw it's massive. What
would be needed? 400000 plants in one
-
plant costs about 1.3 million euro, so
that's about 500 billion euro, and that is
-
not so much in the end, it's less than 50
percent of the annual military spending.
-
So from an economic point of view, it
would certainly be possible to make it
-
happen. So more problematic is how can we
make it happen on an economic point of
-
view? Financially, this is very
attractive, as we can see first, the
-
production of the industrial units and
then you have a global carbon sink market.
-
If you calculate a 100 per tonne of CO2
equivalent and we know how much CO2 we
-
need to extract. So this is a 400 billion
euro markets per year only for carbon sink
-
credits. So massive and very interested
market. And that's why you see a lot of
-
financial institutes going already now
into these markets. Well, what do we have
-
with the risks and side effects? So. The
0.8 percent of the global plant mess that
-
has to be paralyzed every year, that's
about 0.75 ton biomass per hectare of
-
agricultural land. So if we extract from
every sector of the world's crop land and
-
bit less than one ton of biomass, we could
solve the problem so that that's not seem
-
too much. However, this biomass is
everywhere, and there are now millions of
-
farmers that all would have to be
convinced to do it. And then we have to
-
bring the industry close to them so that
they can extract the biomass. So let's say
-
if 10 percent of agricultural land was
used for biomass production by carbon
-
farming. So we set aside 10 percent of the
global agricultural land and then we only
-
need 7.5 tons of biomass per hectare. And
that would be feasible because thanks to
-
biochar based fertilization, crop
productivity can increase about more than
-
20 percent. So to have 10 percent aside
would be possible. So let's say. It would,
-
in theory, be possible to produce the
biomass necessary for the carbon sinks on
-
the available agricultural land without
decreasing food production. But in the
-
last five minutes of my talk, I want to
give you another outlook because socially
-
and environmentally, it's still very much
on the edge to do this huge scaling carbon
-
by organic carbon storage project, because
we have several other problems on Earth
-
and not only the climate problem, we have
the biodiversity crisis, other ecosystem
-
crisis and therefore the Half Earths
project was announced about five years ago
-
to say that. It is needed that 50 percent
of the Earth's surface is preserved for
-
nature recovery, and there are, in fact,
quite a lot of governments that agreed to
-
this program astonishingly. And it has a
lot of support this initiative from Archie
-
Wilson. You find more information and half
earths project on the website that you see
-
here below, because that's that's the
point. If we do all this climate action,
-
we do not have enough land to preserve it
for natural revival. However, we have
-
technology that's possible. And in the
latest Saudi Arabian solar energy project,
-
the kilowatt hour was produced at zero
point eighty eight cents. And that means
-
energy becomes so cheap that we have new
possibilities for technology to produce.
-
In fact, carbon sinks without plants. So
the Obrist company, they created this
-
project a fuel, which is methanol factory
that runs entirely on renewable powered
-
energy, so you have this large solar
panels and then you have here. The
-
chemistry that's behind. So in short, you
have direct air capture here where you
-
filter out the CO2 from the atmosphere.
The energy is used for electrolysis that
-
is done with desalinated water. So they
produce hydrogen from desalinated water,
-
which the solar energy. And with the CO2
from direct air capture, there is methanol
-
synthesized. In methanol is a liquid form
of carbon. It's a bit like alcohol, but
-
just methanol, and which is not toxic,
which can be pumped, which can be
-
transported, which can be used as a fuel,
and which could also be used as a carbon
-
sink. So you can find here and when you
have more time, you can go into details.
-
We calculated the total balance. So for
500000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
-
in the carbon sink, so that means we
extract 500000 tons of CO2 from the
-
atmosphere. We need 11.5 km^2 square
kilometers of solar panels that produce
-
6000 gigawatt hour of energy. Part of this
energy is used for the direct air capture.
-
Part of this energy is used for
desalination and electrolysis, which
-
produces oxygen, and then the hydrogen and
CO2 are synthesized to methanol great
-
produce some energy that goes back to the
process. We produce also water that also
-
goes back to the process. And then you
have the carbon sink. And this methanol,
-
in fact, can be pumped back into old
fossil storages like in the Saudi Arabian
-
desert. And so we scale this up and. We
would need only 21% of the surface of
-
Saudi Arabia used for this Methanol carbon
sink technology to sequester the necessary
-
800 gigatons of CO2 equivalent and pump it
back into abundant fossil oilfields until
-
2100. And the interesting thing here is
that only. This is only 10 percent of the
-
surface that would be needed if we do the
same thing with plants and biomass and
-
where everything works perfectly optimized
without chemical fertilizer, without
-
irrigation and not counting the risk of
fire. And as a disaster is happening to
-
the biomass production, there is this
technological solution. I think we could
-
prepare the biggest, the biggest hack
ever. To turn. The Arabian fossil fuel
-
producers into carbon sink produces and
pumped back the liquified carbon extracted
-
from the atmosphere to the fossil
oilfields. Thank you very much.
-
Herald: So how can we avoid the risk of
deployment of CO2 sinks becoming a cheap
-
excuse for not pursuing the necessary
reduction of CO2 emissions on the other
-
hand?
HP: Yeah, this is this is and the main
-
problem, I think now when we enter this
carbon sink markets, because all the
-
carbon sinks to the bottom now are used
for emission compensation. And but but we
-
have no choice. We have to curb the
emissions. So normally policy makers
-
should defend the compensation of
emissions with carbon sinks because the
-
carbon sinks we need for the compensation
of legacy emissions of all the CO2 it was
-
already emitted before now.
Herald: Yes. So how do you estimate the
-
potential of picks against the background
of increasing interest in biomass for
-
food, energy and chemical industry?
HP: Yeah, we need all of it. And we will
-
not have enough of it. And that's why I
presented the possibility to extract
-
carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, for
the chemical industry, for fuel, for
-
materials, for plastics and also for
carbon sinks. I think we will not achieve
-
the protection of our ecosystems and of
the climate with the biomass that we have
-
on the planet only.
Herald: All right. Actually, just a fourth
-
question came in. I think we have time for
one more little question. How can we be
-
sure that Oprah's would be more successful
than an example? Desertec.
-
HP: And what was the first one?
Herald: How can we be sure that this
-
operation will be more successful than
this attack?
-
HP: Yeah, I. The economics are much better
now because solar energy is so much
-
cheaper than 20 years ago when desetec
started, and the system is more complex
-
because of decoupling with chemical
industry with carbon sink, and the
-
necessity is also higher. So I think we we
can achieve this and and desetec is not
-
dead yet and could continue also towards
more complex systems.
-
Herald: All right, thank you. Hans-Peter,
thank you very much. I'm saying goodbye to
-
you in the stream now about everyone is
invited to join further discussion in the
-
Jitsy room now, which you can reach and
discussion dort alte-hoelle@de Goodbye
-
from Bierscheune and sieh you in the jitsi
room.
-
HP: Thank you.
-
*rc3 postroll music 2021*
-
Subtitles created by many many volunteers and
the c3subtitles.de team. Join us, and help us!