Quote:
Originally Posted by Eclipse Now
Yeah, Big Gav's a mate... another Sydney peak oiler.
I don't think that article answers the questions about how much fuel this could provide to the farming community though, and how dispersed the Biochar factories would have to be to make it fuel economical. How much biomass can those big-rigs carry to the factory, how far, using how much fuel, and then carry all the biochar and fuel back?
|
Good question that's why I would like to see mobile rigs.
Or factories with large amounts of waste to have their own plants.
Most council separate green waste now so we could have a plant at every council depot and the char milled fine and given to gardeners to save water, river-run-off-pollution ,and fertiliser. Milled fine it would be more difficlt to burn.
I notice my local Land Care Group harvests bags of weeds every week and 'tidies up' /collects things like fallen bits of tree etc. In effect they are harvesting from the land every week. Some charcoal could be given to Land Care Groups to make up for the lack of regular fires, & therefore charcoal, that the bush used to get.
Quote:
How are we going to do farming if oil imports are cut by 50% over the next 10 years? (rationing)
How are we going to continue mining, farming, freight and construction of the next generation of renewable energy systems (including Biochar power-plants) if many nations hit as low as 1/5 their fuel in the same amount of time? (Australia peaked in 2000 and our oil production has plummeted! If we can't import... we're stuffed. Instant Greater Depression, just add water. Well, remove oil.  )
|
You could of course collect bio-oil from the pyrolysis waste stream.
You can use algae and sugar cane.
BUT
Lets hope we have cracked the hydrogen genie by then.
If you think bio-char has problems,energy wise, look at this wacky idea from
Professor Garaut!
How can people ignore Terra preta so profoundly?
Quote:
Ross Garnaut has bush answer to climate change
Michael Stutchbury and Christian Kerr | September 30, 2008
On the eve of delivering his final report on climate change, Professor Garnaut said this would include so-called bio-sequestration, which could be as simple as revegetating much of Australia's marginal wheat and grazing land back to its original mulga coverage.
This could include a form of rotation in which parts of the revegetation would be chopped down and buried to store the carbon. "In this country there might be huge opportunities for doing that over the next 30 or 40 years," he told The Australian. "It basically could do the job for the next 20 to 30 years."
By absorbing carbon, such land restoration could help halve Australian emissions, he said. But this would require a change to the international rules for accounting for carbon use under emissions reduction schemes, which would provide monetary incentives for such measures.
|
Ross Garnaut has bush answer to climate change | The Australian
