Carbon sequestration

Use of biochar (charcoal) to replenish soil carbon pools, restore soil fertility and sequester CO2

Last updated February 24, 2009

Use of biochar (charcoal) to replenish soil carbon pools, restore soil fertility and sequester CO2

Submission by the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
4th Session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the
Convention (AWG-LCA 4), Poznan, 1-10 December 2008
Submission containing ideas and proposals on Paragraph 1 of the Bali Action Plan:
Use of biochar (charcoal) to replenish soil carbon pools, restore soil fertility and sequester CO2

Abstract

The world's soils hold more organic carbon than that held by the atmosphere as CO2 and vegetation, yet the role of the soil in capturing and storing carbon dioxide is often one missing information layer in taking into consideration the importance of the land in mitigating climate change. Extraordinary demands are being placed on agricultural systems to produce food, fiber and energy and yet the inevitable changes in the flow of carbon into or out of soils have significant effect on a global scale. Biomass burning and the removal of crop residues reduce carbon in soil and vegetation, which has implications for soil fertility and the global carbon cycle.
The land has an unparalleled capacity to hold carbon and to act as a sink for green house gases making it imperative to focus on activities that enhances rehabilitation, protection and sustainable management of degraded lands. Conventional means to increase soil carbon stocks depend on climate, soil type and site specific management. Over the years, most efforts to manage greenhouse gases have involved planting trees, since the amount of carbon that can be sequestered in this way is substantial. However, the drawback of conventional carbon enrichment is that this carbon-sink option is of limited duration. The associated humus enrichment follows a saturation curve, approaching a new equilibrium level after some 50 to 100 years. The new carbon level drops rapidly again as soon as the required careful management is no longer sustained.

There exist opportunities to include sustainable land management processes and in particular the use of biochar into the CDM negotiation process through focused policy actions that include institutional synergy as well as better understanding of the sustainability cost-benefit of Biochar. This process could be undertaken starting in Poznan and towards the Copenhagen agreement.
Pyrolysis (of agricultural residues resulting in charcoal and energy production) with biochar carbon sequestration provides a tool to combine sustainable soil management (carbon sequestration) and renewable energy production. The process of pyrolysis or carbonization is known globally and can be implemented at both small scale (e.g. cooking stove) and large scale levels (e.g. biorefinery).

About 50% of the carbon can be captured if biomass is converted to biochar. Charcoal enriched soils like Chernozems and in particular Terra Preta soils are among the world’s most fertile soils and prove that soil organic carbon enrichment beyond the maximum capacity is possible if done with a recalcitrant form of carbon such as biochar.

The soil properties determine the different capacities of the land to act as a store for carbon that has direct implications for capturing greenhouse gases. Biochar offers unique options to address issues emerging from the conflicts and complementarities between cultivating crops for different purposes, such as for energy or for CO2 sequestration or for food and the impacts on food security, land/soil degradation, water, and biodiversity. The fact that many of the drylands soils have been degraded means that they are currently far from saturated with carbon and their potential to sequester carbon may be very high (Farage et al 2003) making the consideration of Biochar, as a strategy for enhancing soils carbon sequestration, imperative.

Required policy actions

The global carbon trade market must be made accessible to land managers, especially in the tropics where sustaining SOC and soil fertility is most challenging and CO2 emissions due to land use change are highest.

All stakeholders need to engage in the dialogue for the post 2012 climate regime. This approach of soil organic carbon restoration constitutes a significant adaptation tool to climate change, in addition to sequestering carbon. This could be a strong link between the three Rio conventions as it simultaneously addresses climate change, desertification and biodiversity issues.

There is the need to include into the negotiation agenda of UNFCCC practical approaches such as biochar-related mitigation (CDM) and other LCA adaptation initiatives, focusing on increased land productivity, which simultaneously takes into account the issue of climate change, desertification and biodiversity issues.

According to the IPCC biochar management would be a valid C sink in the current and post 2012 LULUCF guidelines. However, the following policy action is urgently required:

1. Raising awareness on the role of the land on mitigation and adaptation to climate change and in particular the importance of Biochar in enhancing the sequestration of carbon in the soils.
2. Inclusion of biochar in the CDM mechanism along with currently already included afforestation and reforestation (A/R).
3. Revision of the additionality rules in order to take into account the fact that biochar is a permanent means of carbon capture that has more value than the potentially reversible (A/R).
4. In view of item 3 above, increase the level of CERs that an annex I Party can use towards meeting the Kyoto Protocol targets from the current 1% to a higher percentage. This would result in large financial flows for both mitigation and adaptation to developing countries where use of this technique would result in the highest returns, due to the high losses of SOC.
The Values of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC)

According to Sombroek et al. (1993) it is important to separate effects due to organic matter per se (maintenance and improvement of water infiltration, water holding capacity, structure stability, retention of nutrients, healthy soil biological activity) from those due to decomposition (source of nutrients). The SOC pool is an important indicator of soil quality, and has numerous direct and indirect impacts on it such as, improved structure and tilth, reduced erosion, increased plant-available water capacity, water purification, increased soil biodiversity, improved yields, and climate moderation (Lal 2004). This is essential to sustain the quality and productivity of soils around the globe, particularly in the tropics where there is a greater proportion of nutrient poor soils with a greater susceptibility to carbon loss.

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Agriculture

The global SOC pool in the upper 1 m for the world’s soils contains 1220 gigatons (Gt, 109 = billion tons) carbon, 1.5 times the total for the standing biomass (Sombroek et al. 1993). The total soil carbon (organic and inorganic) is 3.3 times the size of the atmospheric carbon pool (Lal 2004). As most agricultural soils have lost 50 to 70% of their original SOC pool (Lal 2003) they represent a considerable carbon sink if efforts are made to restore SOC, but also a huge source of GHG if soil management and deforestation rates are not changed. There is high agreement and much evidence that with current climate change mitigation policies and related sustainable development practices, global GHG emissions will continue to grow over the next few decades (25-90% between 2000 and 2030) (IPCC 2007).

Replenishing SOC Pools and the Global Potential of Biochar Carbon Sequestration
Increasing SOC with conventional means e.g. conservation tillage, use of manures, and compost, conversion of monoculture to complex diverse cropping systems, meadow-based rotations and winter cover crops, and establishing perennial vegetation on contours and steep slopes can sequester carbon. The sequestration potential depends on climate, soil type, and site specific management. SOC of cropland increases only if either SOC additions are enhanced or decomposition rates reduced (Sauerbeck 2001). Accumulating crop residues in the field can cause considerable crop management problems (increasing the susceptibility to wildfire, insect attach and disease, increasing N2O and CH4 emission). Therefore many farmers find it more expedient to burn crop residues than to incorporate them into the soil. Worldwide, the total carbon release from fire is of the order of 4-7 Gt of carbon per year. This flux is almost as large as the rate of fossil fuel consumption (about 6 Gt per year in 1990) (Goudriaan 1995).

Reduced decomposition is an advantage of charcoal (biochar). Biochar formation has important implications for the global carbon cycle. In natural and agroecosystems residual charcoal is produced by incomplete burning. As the SOC pool declines due to cultivation, the more resistant charcoal fraction increases as a portion of the total carbon pool (Zech and Guggenberger 1996, Skjemstad 2001, Skjemstad et al. 2002) and may constitute up to 35% of the total SOC pool in ecosystems (Skjemstad et al. 2002). Carbon dating of charcoal has shown some to be over 1500 years old, fairly stable, and a permanent form of carbon sequestration (Lal 2003).

An anthropogenically-enriched dark soil found throughout the lowland portion of the Amazon Basin and termed Terra Preta de Índio is one example how soil management can increase the productivity of soils for centuries (Woods 1995). These soils contain high concentrations of charcoal (Glaser et al. 2001); and significantly more plant available nutrients than in the surrounding soils (Lima et al. 2002). The existence of Terra Preta proves that infertile soils can be transformed into permanently fertile soils in spite of rates of weathering 100 times greater than those found in the mid-latitudes.

Systems (pyrolysis) converting biomass into energy (hydrogen-rich gas and bio-oil) and producing biochar as a by-product offer an opportunity to combine renewable energy production, carbon sequestration and soil restoration. Biochar can be produced by incomplete combustion from any biomass, and it is a by-product of the pyrolysis technology used for biofuel and bioenergy production. If the demand for renewable fuels by the year 2100 was met through pyrolysis, biochar sequestration could exceed current emissions from fossil fuels (Lehmann et al. 2006).

Biochar and Soil Fertility

The recalcitrant nature of charcoal makes biochar rather exceptional. Recent studies showed that soil biochar amendments are indeed capable of increasing soil fertility by improving chemical, biological, and physical properties. Biochar significantly increase plant growth and nutrition (Lehmann et al. 2003, Steiner et al. 2007). Lehmann et al. (2003) and Steiner et al. (2008) found
improved efficiency of nitrogen fertilizers on biochar containing fields. The effects on soil biology seem to be essential as biochar has the potential to alter the microbial biomass (Steiner et al. 2004) and composition (Birk 2005) and the microbes are able to change the biochar’s properties (Glaser et al. 2001). The majority of experiments conducted show that biochar soil amendments result in enhanced colonization rates my mycorrhizal fungi (Warnock et al. 2007). Rondon et al. (2007) found increased biological nitrogen fixation by common beans through biochar additions. Lehmann and Rondon (2006) reviewed 24 studies with soil biochar additions and found improved productivity in all of them ranging from 20 to 220% at application rates of 0.4 to 8 tons carbon ha-1.

Advantages of Biochar Carbon Sequestration

• No competition between SOC restoration, bio-fuels and food production

Numerous researchers warn of deleterious effects on soil fertility if crop residues are removed for bio-energy production (Sauerbeck 2001, Lal 2004). Pyrolysis with biochar carbon sequestration provides a tool to combine sustainable SOC management (carbon sequestration), and renewable energy production. While producing renewable energy from biomass, SOC sequestration, agricultural productivity, and environmental quality can be sustained and improved if the biomass is transferred to an inactive carbon pool and redistributed to agricultural fields. The uses of crop residues as potential energy source or to sequester carbon and improve soil quality can be complementary, not competing uses.

• Pyrolysis or gasification with biochar carbon sequestration

Bioenergy with biochar carbon storage facilitates the generation of carbon-negative energy. Biochar producing gasifiers can have a broad range in size and in technological complexity. Biochar can be produced as a byproduct from cooking (biochar producing kitchen stoves). Decentralized small scale projects are feasible and large capital investments are not necessary. As biochar is a byproduct of gasification, no carbon capture technology is necessary. There is no risk of harmful CO2 leakage from biochar.

• Fast SOC buildup beyond the maximum sequestration capacity

From biomass to humus a considerable fraction of carbon is lost by respiratory processes, and also from humus to resistant soil carbon. Only 2-20% of the carbon added as above ground residues and root biomass enters the SOC pool by humification. The rest is converted to CO2 due to oxidation, and furthermore the SOC pool is not inert to oxidation (Lal 2004). Soils can only sequester additional carbon until the maximum soil carbon capacity, or soil carbon saturation, is achieved, which requires a steady input of biomass and careful management practices. In contrast, about 50% of the carbon can be captured if biomass is converted to biochar (Lehmann et al. 2006).

The existence of Terra Preta proves that SOC enrichment beyond the maximum capacity is possible if done with a recalcitrant form of carbon such as biochar. These soils still contain large amounts of biochar derived SOC in a climate favorable for decomposition, hundreds and thousands of years after they were abandoned.

• Reduced deforestation

Only re-growing plant biomass can establish a carbon sink. The carbon trade could provide an incentive to cease further deforestation; instead reforestation and recuperation of degraded land
for fuel and food crops would gain magnitude. As tropical forests account for between 20 and 25% of the world terrestrial carbon reservoir (Bernoux et al. 2001), this would reduce emissions from tropical forest conversion which is estimated to contribute globally as much as 25 % of net CO2 emissions and up to 10 % of N2O emissions to the atmosphere (Palm et al. 2004).

• Easy accountability and reduced risk

Current CDM projects dealing with charcoal aim either at reduction of methane emissions during charcoal production or substitution of fossil fuels by burning charcoal. In both cases the charcoal does not reduce GHG in the atmosphere.

Biochar as a soil amendment would provide a large permanent carbon sink. Potential drawbacks such as difficulty in estimating greenhouse gas removals and emissions resulting from land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF), or destruction of sinks through forest fire or disease do not apply to biochar soil amendments. Furthermore, the biochar carbon sink is easily quantifiable. Biochar production transforms carbon from the active (crop residues or trees) to the inactive carbon pool. Biochar is a formally authorized soil amendment in Japan and is discussed to be part of Australia’s emissions trading scheme. New Zealand invested in research development and commercialization of biofuel and biochar. The 2008 Farm Bill (H.R. 2419, the Food and Energy Security Act of 2008) was passed by the U. S. Congress and establishes the first federal-level policy in support of biochar production and utilization programs in the world, and is one of a handful of new, high-priority research and extension areas.

The avoided emissions of greenhouse gases are between 2 and 5 times greater when biochar is applied to agricultural land than used solely for fossil energy offsets. The potential revenues from carbon trading alone can justify optimizing pyrolysis to produce biochar for application to land (Gaunt and Lehmann 2008).

References (click on story title to see more)

PINE NEEDLE CHARCOAL IN VILLAGE OF UTTARAKHAND INDIA

Last updated November 16, 2008

In Our state We are having 70% Forest .Mainly Pine forest in every summer it is cause of forest fire . We face huge loss of trees, properties and life too.This is cost to Forest department . We develop the method to convert pine needle into CHARCOAL BRIQUETTE. Which use as cooking fuel. Now they are not cutting the tree for fuel.Save the forest use this method. This low cost method. for rural area. Apart of that it is produce local emplyment. Get the chrcoal with cutting tree.Like  LANTANA,PINE NEEDLE.

Carbon sequestration for everybody: decrease atmospheric carbon dioxide, earn money and improve the soil

Last updated March 10, 2009

Carbon sequestration for everybody: decrease atmospheric carbon dioxide, earn money and improve the soil
Folke Gunther, Submitted to Energy and Environment, 2007-03-27

Summary:
The easiest way to sequester atmospheric carbon dioxide is to convert plant biomass into charcoal
and bury it in agricultural land. Doing this will open a new way for farmers and laymen to earn
money (from carbon sequestration funds) and improve land fertility. It is also a way to avoid
nutrient loss from land to sea.March 27, 2007

See attached

Carbon dioxide, deciding for our future

Last updated February 27, 2008

Carbon dioxide, deciding for our future
Folke Günther, Holon Ecosystem Consultants, Lund, Sweden, February 26, 2008

A file has been sent to you via the YouSendIt File Delivery Service.
Download the file - carbseq-JAK080119.ppt
Delivered By YouSendIt - the fast, secure and reliable File Delivery Service for all documents.

I am also trying to describe the benefits of buried charcoal to counteract the ‘carbon dioxide cloud’ (see my blog), why I am not the least surprised of the reaction of ignorance on he issue. I have been around here in Sweden, trying to lift the mental fog, and have been met with the same surprised skepticism (..if that is so good, why have nobody done it before?)
However, seen from the other side, Lester Brown is quite right. Diminishing the carbon dioxide emissions by 80% to 2020 is just about right (to abot 1 Gt/year). But it must be combined with a massive sequestration (to about 2 Gt annually) ,thus creating a net diminishing of the ‘carbon cloud’ by about 1 Gt per year . For further details, see my blog.

Download the ppt- presentation that seems to be rather clarifying. The drawback is that if takes about one hour to convince a person with it.
FG
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Folke Günther
Kollegievägen 19
224 73 Lund, Sweden
home/office: +46 46 14 14 29
cell: 0709 710306 skype: folkegun
Homepage: http://www.holon.se/folke
blog: http://folkegunther.blogspot.com/
folke@holon.se

Also by Folke Gunther, "Carbon sequestration for everybody: decrease atmospheric carbon dioxide, earn money and improve the soil," March 27, 2007, attached.

The Charcoal Vision: Producing Bioenergy while Simultaneously Enhancing Soil and Water Quality, Permanently Sequestering Carbon

Last updated December 02, 2007

The Charcoal Vision: Producing Bioenergy while Simultaneously Enhancing Soil and Water Quality and Permanently Sequestering Carbon
David Laird, Science Magazine, August 30, 2007

Interpretive Summary: The US is rapidly pursuing development of a cellulosic ethanol industry. This strategy is of concern to agricultural scientists, farmers, and conservationists because harvesting biomass crops will have an adverse impact on soil and water quality. This report describes the Charcoal Vision, which is a scenario for processing biomass by pyrolysis to generate bio-oil and charcoal. The bio-oil could be used to offset fossil fuel oil and the charcoal could be returned to the soil from which the biomass was harvested. Returning the charcoal co-product of pyrolysis to the soil is anticipated to build soil quality, increase agricultural productivity, and improve water quality. National deployment of the Charcoal Vision could generate enough bio-oil to meet 25% of the current US consumption of fossil fuel oil. The scenario would simultaneously reduce net US emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere by about 10%. This report will help policy makers develop strategies that simultenously benefit energy security, global change, environmental quality, and rural economies.

Technical Abstract: Processing biomass through a distributed network of fast pyrolyzers has many advantages relative to the cellulosic ethanol platform. Fast pyrolyzers thermally transform biomass into bio-oil, syngas, and charcoal. The syngas can be used to provide the energy needs of the pyrolyzer. Bio-oil is an energy raw material (17.0 MJ/kg) that can be burned to generate heat or electricity or shipped to a refinery for processing into transportation fuels. Charcoal should be returning the charcoal to the soils from which the biomass was harvested. Application of charcoal to soils is hypothesized to do several positive things for soils, including; supply nutrients, increase bioavailable water, build soil organic matter, enhance nutrient cycling, lower the bulk density, and act as a liming agent. Application of charcoal to soils is also anticipated to reduce the leaching of pesticides and nutrients to surface and ground water. The half-life of carbon (C) in soil charcoal is in excess of 1,000 years. This means that soil-applied charcoal will make both a lasting contribution to soil quality and the C in the charcoal will be removed from the atmosphere and sequestered in the soil for millennia. Assuming the U.S. can annually produce 1.1x10^9 Mg of biomass from harvestable forest and crop lands, then, national implementation of the Charcoal Vision would generate enough bio-oil to displace 1.91 billion barrels of fossil fuel oil per year or about 25% of the current U.S. annual oil consumption and thus offset 234 Tg of fossil fuel C emissions to the atmosphere per year. Furthermore, assuming that fixed C in the char is not biologically degraded, application of char to soils would sequester 139 Tg of C per year. The combined C credit for fossil fuel displacement and permanent sequestration, 373 Tg per year, is 10% of the average annual U.S. emissions of CO2-C.

Comment to bioenergy with carbon storage (BECS)

Last updated November 23, 2007

Comment to bioenergy with carbon storage (BECS)
Christoph Steiner, to the Terra Preta Discussion List, November 8, 2007


Carbon-negative bioenergy to cut global warming could drive deforestation:
An interview on BECS with Biopact’s Laurens Rademakers Mongabay.com (November 6, 2007) http://news.mongabay.com/2007/1106-carbon-negative_becs.html


The article on mongabay.com deals about a proposed mechanism for generating carbon-negative bioenergy. Bioenergy with carbon storage (BECS) holds out the prospect of reducing CO2 from the atmosphere while producing carbon-negative energy. The article provides an informative introduction on how “carbon-negativity” is feasible and assumes geosequestration (developed from the “clean coal” industry,
CO2 capture in depleted oil and gas fields, saline aquifers etc.) as the sequestering tool. Laurens Rademakers delineates the risks such as deforestation of tropical rainforests and leakage of geosequestration. In addition these technologies require vast capital inputs and large scale projects.


A substantive difference of bio-energy to fossil-energy allows Charcoal Carbon Capture!
Geosequestration and carbon capture technologies are currently being developed by the coal industry in order to produce the so-called “clean coal”. Using this technology, the coal industry can at best reduce its CO2 emissions, while using re-growing biomass would establish a carbon sink. This substantive difference allows bio-energy (energy from re-growing biomass) production systems to apply yet another way to capture carbon – Charcoal Carbon Sequestration! Bio-energy with charcoal carbon sequestration (BECCS) would only capture a maximum of 50% of the carbon stored in the biomass but offers the following
advantages:


1)Decentralized and small scale projects are feasible


2)Large capital investments are not necessary. The technologies range from small cooking stoves to large bioenergy production units. No carbon capture technology is necessary as charcoal is a byproduct of gasification. As price for the incomplete gasification a proportion of the energy (geosequestration demands energy too) is invested to capture carbon in charcoal


3) Biochar (Charcoal used as soil amendment) increases soil fertility and sustainability (important for continuous cropping for energy or food
crops)


4) No risk of harmful CO2 leakage as in systems like geosequestration.
Most scientists agree that the half life of charcoal is in the range of centuries or millennia.


5) Only re-growing resources can establish a carbon sink. Tropical Rainforest is not considered as re-growing resource in a BECCS scenario.


An access to the C trade market holds out the prospect to reduce deforestation of primary forest, because using intact primary forest would reduce the C credits. The estimated above-ground biomass of unlogged forests is around 400 Mg ha 1, about half of which is C. This C is lost at a high percentage if used for gasification and only < 50% is captured by BECCS. The C trade could provide an incentive to cease further deforestation; instead reforestation and recuperation of degraded land for fuel and food crops would gain magnitude.

Carbon Sequestration by Carbonization of Biomass and Forestation: Three Case Studies

Last updated November 23, 2007

Carbon Sequestration by Carbonization of Biomass and Forestation: Three Case Studies
Makoto Ogawa,Yasuyuki Okimori, Fumio Takahashi, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Volume 11, Number 2, March 2006 , pp. 421-436(16)
Publisher: Springer


Abstract:
We proposed the carbon sink project called “Carbon Sequestration by Forestation and Carbonization (CFC),” which involves biomass utilization and land conservation by incorporating the products of biomass carbonization into the agents for soil improvement, water purification, etc. Our purpose was to demonstrate the potential of the CFC scheme for carbon sequestration, particularly carbon storage in soil.


Case studies were conducted in both developing and developed countries.


1. In southern Sumatra, Indonesia, 88,369 Mg-C year−1 of wood residue from a plantation forest and excess bark from a pulp mill would be converted into 15,571 Mg-C year−1 of the net carbon sink by biochar for soil improvement. The fixed carbon recovery of the system is 21.0%.


2. In a semiarid region in western Australia, the carbonization of wood residue was incorporated with multipurpose projects of a mallee eucalyptus plantation that involved the function of salinity prevention. During the project period of 35 years, the total carbon sink would reach 1,035,450 Mg-C with 14.0% by aboveground biomass, 33.1% by belowground biomass and 52.8% by biochar in soil.


3. In southern Kyushu, Japan, the study was focused on the effective use of surplus heat from a garbage incinerator for carbonizing woody materials. Sawdust of 936.0 Mg-C year−1 would be converted into the net carbon sink of 298.5 Mg-C year−1 by carbonization, with the fixed carbon recovery of the system being 31.9%.


Consequently, the CFC project could encourage the creation of a carbon sink in soil. However, we recognize that the quality standard of biochar, the stability of biochar in soil, and the methods for monitoring biochar utilization must be clarified before incorporating biochar carbon into the carbon credit system.


Keywords: biochar; biomass utilization; carbonization; carbon sequestration; carbon sink


Document Type: Research article
DOI: 10.1007/s11027-005-9007-4
Affiliations: Email: okimori_yasuyuki@kanso.co.jp

Rethinking biochar: Will amending soil with charcoal make it more fertile and combat global warming?

Last updated November 23, 2007

Rethinking biochar Will amending soil with charcoal make it more fertile and combat global warming?
Environmental Science and Technology, Technology News, August 1, 2007

NETL Carbon Sequestration Video

Last updated July 13, 2007

NETL Carbon Sequestration Video
NETL,USDOE, YouTube July 2007

Current sequestration costs are in the range of 1-$300/ton of carbon emissions avoided. The goal is to reduce the cost of carbon sequestration to $10 or less by 2015.

NETL Carbon Sequestration

The U.S. Dept. of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory profiles a research program to capture and sequester Carbon Dioxide in underground rock formations.

Bio-energy in the Black

Last updated June 05, 2007

Bio-energy in the Black
Johannes Lehmann, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2007

Syndicate content