7 ms·
Actually we aren’t burning the biomass, we’re heating it without oxygen (pyrolysis) to create a transportable biomass intermediate called bio-oil. That bio-oil
by pkrein 4y ago
Actually we aren’t burning the biomass, we’re heating it without oxygen (pyrolysis) to create a transportable biomass intermediate called bio-oil. That bio-oil is rich in carbon, molasses-like consistency, and the overwhelming odor of barbecue sauce. Today we primarily pump that bbq sauce underground as carbon removal (Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage - BiCRS), but in the future it could be used for BECCS processes like you outline.
- CoastalCoder 4y agoOkay, I've got to ask: Does it actually taste like BBQ sauce?
- ryanmcbride 4y agoprobably mostly tastes like carbon but you might notice a smokey aftertaste
- mcronce 4y agoTo be fair, the smokey flavor you get from barbeque is primarily carbon
- ryanmcbride 4y agoYup I just assume bitterness would be front and center
- rmccue 4y agoThis is pretty cool! Presumably it takes some amount of energy currently to run this process, so the "cost" of the carbon removal is energy usage currently. Would a BECCS process remove the need to use external energy altogether?
- bob29 4y agoHow are you heating it? How are you powering all the chippers, blowers, conveyer belts, and other machinery? Along with the transportation of crop residue to your facility, how much carbon is re-emitted with your consumption of all these industrial products of the primarily fossil fueled powered energy system?
- carbadtraingood 4y agoPyrolysis is an energy positive reaction. It requires an initial heat input, but after getting started it produces more heat than it needs. That heat can be used to generate electricity or warm water.
- bob29 4y agoPyrolysis is entirely endothermic - it requires applying heat to biomass. Pyrolysis yields a vapor that will combust in the presence of oxygen and release energy. The energy released in the combustion of pyrolysis products can be used to drive further pyrolysis. A "Top Lit Updraft Gasifier" is a simple apparatus to achieve this. Capturing the heat from pyrolysis in this way does however convert the pyrolysis vapor from hydrocarbon into combustion byproducts, namely C02. This company claims to be condensing all of these hydrocarbons, not combusting them. For a nice and understandable example of pure pyrolysis without combustion, there is this project [0] wherein an airtight vessel is loaded with biomass, heat/energy is applied with electrical resistive heating elements. The pyrolysis occurs and the resulting vapors are captured and stored as a low pressure vapor for later use in cooking or powering internal combustion engine. [0]https://www.patreon.com/posts/story-of-thing-i-61916621 https://www.patreon.com/posts/story-of-thing-i-61916621
- carbadtraingood 4y agoTotally. I am currently experimenting with TLUDs for waste products from some forest land I own. I didn't realize they were also attempting to capture the gases from pyrolization rather than using them to continue the pyrolysis. In that case, you are totally correct, they'll need an input heat source.
- dreamcompiler 4y agoPyrolysis could in theory be done with concentrated solar thermal energy. The issues would be: -- How much mirror area [heat] would be needed? -- Mirror geometry: Troughs may lend themselves to continuous processing and gas recovery a bit better than central point concentrators but they provide less heat potential. -- Can the economics work if you only process when the sun shines?
- mnw21cam 4y agoNeat idea. My main concern is about whether you're sealing all the plant nutrients deep underground too, or are they separated out at some stage? As a world, we're going to need to put all those nutrients back into the soil to be able to keep growing stuff. Particularly phosphorous has limited mineable stocks.
- photochemsyn 4y agoI'd guess the ash/gunk remaining from the pyrolysis would be a mixture of carbon, phosphorous, maybe some nitrogen. It'd probably make a decent fertilizer/soil amendment, particularly for degraded low-carbon soils.
- dbcurtis 4y agoHow is this an overall improvement over leaving the corn stalks in the field to decompose and return nutrients to the soil? This process moves soil nutrients away from point of origin. (Serious question from former Iowa farm boy who still owns corn ground operated by others. Should I let my tenants ship stover away? I want to be a good steward of the soil. )
- RosanaAnaDana 4y agoWhatever their answer they'll need to account for the fuel cost of the trip to a facility, lifecycle cost of the instrumentation, and fuel cost of a return trip for where ever the whatever is going to go. I can tell you right now having done experimental LCA previously, its not gonna pen out. The cost of moving massive amounts of 'stuff' to do 'something' with it when its an extremely low margin, low value add product; this will end up generating more CO2 than it sequesters. If you can't do it in place, you likely can't do it.
- colechristensen 4y agoYou usually have to have entirely renewable generated electric powered processes in order to actually sink meaningful amounts of carbon. And even then, to actually sink carbon the correct thing to do would be to electrify the farm machinery for a much higher carbon ROI.
- YeGoblynQueenne 4y agoCouldn't the bio-oil generated by the process be used to power the transport and supply lines? Or don't the maths work out? I don't know any of the numbers here...
- RosanaAnaDana 4y agoYou have to drive the 'stuff' to 'somewhere' to turn it into 'whatever'. The stuff costs more in CO2 to drive to the place than you get from turning it into 'whatever'.
- ed 4y agoOh, this is your company! I heard you were working on this and thought dang way to go Peter. Are there companies buying bio-oil yet? If I understand correctly, I like that you’re plugging into a larger system and applying engineering to make a piece of it more efficient. It’s always easier to get bigger than it is to get smaller!