[Stoves] Fwd: [CDR] [geo] EASST 2018 - CfP - The politics of negative emissions

Paul Anderson psanders at ilstu.edu
Tue Dec 26 11:12:34 CST 2017


Jorund,

Interesting comment that might open some door in the future. Factors 
include the number of stoves and their concentration that would make 
char collection (buy-back) financially viable.   Do you know what the 
people do with the char now?   Sorry, no funding source is in view at 
this time.

Paul

Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu
Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com

On 12/25/2017 6:30 PM, Jorund Buen wrote:
> Dear all,
> We mentioned the potential for charcoal gathering&selling in our 
> proposal in 2012 or 2013 to USAID/Conservancy International for a 
> stove distribution project in North Sumatra. The project was funded, 
> and formed the basis for our Indonesia distribution today, but that 
> specific idea wasn’t picked up. I’d be interested in piloting it, if 
> the context (and, yes, funding) is right.
>
> Kind regards
> Jorund Buen
> CEO
> Mobile/WhatsApp: +47 932 83 350
> Skype: jorundb1
> www.primestoves.com <http://www.primestoves.com>
>
> 24. des. 2017 kl. 05:25 skrev Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu 
> <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>>:
>
>> Ron and Julien,
>>
>> Good that your did the monetary exchange rates and the conversion 
>> from C to CO2e to get the cost per ton.   That needs to be done with 
>> the raw numbers for the Deganga TLUD project in India.   I will ask 
>> the project implementer to make those calculations and sent them to me.
>>
>> We need to build the case for the value of the char from TLUD 
>> stoves.   Whether sold to be burned or to be used as biochar is not 
>> the issue.
>>
>> I have not heard of other TLUD projects with selling of the charcoal 
>> made in TLUDs.   Maybe Prime has an example???
>>
>> Paul
>> Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>> Email:psanders at ilstu.edu
>> Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>> Website:www.drtlud.com
>> On 12/23/2017 1:01 AM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
>>> Stoves List:  (many on this list are also biochar list members - so 
>>> apologies for sending this twice.)
>>>
>>> I could have used many ways to make biochar as I supported a French 
>>> CDR (carbon dioxide removal) person, who objected to the way 3 
>>> organizers of a future CDR conference were describing all CDR 
>>> approaches as “controversial".  I chose Dr.  Julien’s message to 
>>> this list because I think it really well proves the beauty of 
>>> char-making stoves, while also making a real positive statement 
>>> about both biochar’s CDR’s potential.  So many thanks to Julien for 
>>> his message a few weeks ago.
>>>
>>> i just looked up the value of  a “tk” = Taka, which is 1.2 cents. 
>>>  So the woman quoted below made $9.00 in a “few months” just in 
>>> charcoal - but also was buying less wood.  And someone else was 
>>> making money off increased soil productivity and less expense for 
>>> fertilizer.  The price for her char was (at 1000 times 12 cents) 
>>> $120/tonne char.  This is about $40 tonne CO2 - and many CDR 
>>> approaches are bragging they can get down to $100/tonne CO2.
>>>
>>> Anyone on this list see why biochar (and char-making stoves) should 
>>> be “controversial?   (This thread being about CDR controversiality.)
>>>
>>> Ron
>>>
>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>> *From: *"Ronal W. Larson" <rongretlarson at comcast.net 
>>>> <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>>
>>>> *Subject: **Fwd: [CDR] [geo] EASST 2018 - CfP - The politics of 
>>>> negative emissions*
>>>> *Date: *December 22, 2017 at 11:34:52 PM MST
>>>> *To: *Biochar <biochar at yahoogroups.com 
>>>> <mailto:biochar at yahoogroups.com>>
>>>>
>>>> List:
>>>>
>>>> I suggest below that biochar proponents _*not*_ attend a meeting 
>>>> where biochar will certainly be discussed.  But if anyone can 
>>>> attend this meeting (time and place TBD),  you might have a very 
>>>> interesting time.  I do of course hope some list member will be 
>>>> able to submit an abstract per instructions at 
>>>> https://nomadit.co.uk/easst/easst2018/conferencesuite.php/panels/6270
>>>>
>>>> Ron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>
>>>>> *From: *"Ronal W. Larson" <rongretlarson at comcast.net 
>>>>> <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>>
>>>>> *Subject: **Re: [CDR] [geo] EASST 2018 - CfP - The politics of 
>>>>> negative emissions*
>>>>> *Date: *December 22, 2017 at 11:22:16 PM MST
>>>>> *To: *Renaud de RICHTER <renaud.derichter at gmail.com 
>>>>> <mailto:renaud.derichter at gmail.com>>, Carbon Dioxide Removal 
>>>>> <CarbonDioxideRemoval at googlegroups.com 
>>>>> <mailto:CarbonDioxideRemoval at googlegroups.com>>
>>>>> *Cc: *n.markusson at lancaster.ac.uk 
>>>>> <mailto:n.markusson at lancaster.ac.uk>, rob.bellamy at insis.ox.ac.uk 
>>>>> <mailto:rob.bellamy at insis.ox.ac.uk>, d.mclaren at lancaster.ac.uk 
>>>>> <mailto:d.mclaren at lancaster.ac.uk>, RAU greg <ghrau at sbcglobal.net 
>>>>> <mailto:ghrau at sbcglobal.net>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dr.  de Richter and CDR list
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Thanks for your contribution - adding the word “some”.  I like 
>>>>> your emphasis on methane and N2O removal via solar towers; 
>>>>>  biochar can do some of the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2.  Being active on the biochar side of CDR, I was very pleased to 
>>>>> hear this past month of a successful biochar operation in a report 
>>>>> on a “stoves” list by Dr. Julien Winter.  His Bangladesh biochar 
>>>>> organization’s website had two articles on a new stove type that 
>>>>> both used less wood and produced about 20% charcoal, which is 
>>>>> being placed in soil as biochar.  The articles and a brief excerpt 
>>>>> from each are:
>>>>>
>>>>> a.  One and a half years ago: 
>>>>>   http://www.biochar-bangladesh.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2016_06_03_TheNewNation.pdf 
>>>>> <http://www.biochar-bangladesh.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2016_06_03_TheNewNation.pdf>
>>>>> /If one household burning 3kg of wood per day produced 0.6kg of 
>>>>> biochar per day, they would have 18kg of biochar per month. For a 
>>>>> village of 500 households, that could amount to 108,000 kg biochar 
>>>>> per year. Across the landscape, the people of Bangladesh could 
>>>>> become the World’s largest per capita sequesters of carbon. This 
>>>>> is, as a by-product of cooking without cutting any additional 
>>>>> forest. /
>>>>>
>>>>> b.   One year ago: 
>>>>>  http://www.biochar-bangladesh.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2016_12_11_DhakaTribune_Akha.pdf 
>>>>> <http://www.biochar-bangladesh.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2016_12_11_DhakaTribune_Akha.pdf>
>>>>> /In Manikganj, Monkhusi Halder has been using them for a few 
>>>>> months and she sells the bio-char to farmers as fertiliser, making 
>>>>> some extra cash along with dinner. “I have been using this stove 
>>>>> for the last few months and sold 75kgs of bio-char for Tk10 per 
>>>>> kg, reducing the cost of fuel,” Monkhusi told the Dhaka Tribune 
>>>>> while using her Akha stove. Khorshed Ali, a farmer in Manikganj, 
>>>>> was visibly excited about the new bio-char fertiliser./
>>>>>
>>>>> These articles are not emphasizing CDR - but there is zero 
>>>>> conflict with soil improvements, increased food production and, 
>>>>> income generation.  And trivial investment- we heard the stoves 
>>>>> cost about $20.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3.    At  http://www.biochar-international.org/network/communities 
>>>>> <http://www.biochar-international.org/network/communities> you can 
>>>>> see the names of more than 50 similar regional biochar groups.   
>>>>> About 10 years ago, there was only IBI, the International Biochar 
>>>>> Initiative  (see same site for its 10-year history) .  Does any 
>>>>> other CDR approach have 10% as much global grassroots CDR support? 
>>>>>   What is the  evidence that biochar is “deeply controversial”?  I 
>>>>> don’t believe China is finding the subject controversial;  the IBI 
>>>>> site describes a very aggressive 5-year plan that is well along. 
>>>>>  China is clearly the world biochar leader - and the IBI 
>>>>> headquarters has been moved there.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4.  I now find it difficult to encourage any biochar supporter to 
>>>>> attend this meeting.  Pity - as we need more multi-CDR meetings - 
>>>>> if the discussion is not pre-ordained to prove universal 
>>>>> “controversiality”.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 22, 2017, at 1:10 PM, Renaud de RICHTER 
>>>>>> <renaud.derichter at gmail.com <mailto:renaud.derichter at gmail.com>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does not start very friendly:
>>>>>> ... /Much like their taxonomic cousins, geoengineering by 
>>>>>> reflecting sunlight back into space, negative emissions ideas are 
>>>>>> also deeply controversial, potentially propping up carbon 
>>>>>> capitalism, making sweeping changes to land-use and posing 
>>>>>> significant environmental risks./ ...
>>>>>> Why not adding the word "/*some*/" just before "... /negative 
>>>>>> emissions ideas are //also deeply controversial,..."/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nils, Rob & Duncan, there are many NETs that are not 
>>>>>> controversial, but are just not yet well known nor discussed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bw, and Season's Greetings!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017-12-22 20:31 GMT+01:00 Greg Rau <ghrau at sbcglobal.net 
>>>>>> <mailto:ghrau at sbcglobal.net>>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Dear all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     We invite you to submit proposals for papers to our open panel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     *The politics of negative emissions***
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     At /Meetings – Making Science, Technology and Society
>>>>>>>     together/, EASST2018 Conference, Lancaster, UK, 25-28 July
>>>>>>>     2018 - https://easst2018.easst.net/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Convenors:
>>>>>>>     Nils Markusson (Lancaster University)
>>>>>>>     n.markusson at lancaster.ac.uk <mailto:n.markusson at lancaster.ac.uk>
>>>>>>>     Rob Bellamy (University of Oxford)
>>>>>>>     rob.bellamy at insis.ox.ac.uk <mailto:rob.bellamy at insis.ox.ac.uk>
>>>>>>>     Duncan McLaren (Lancaster University)
>>>>>>>     d.mclaren at lancaster.ac.uk <mailto:d.mclaren at lancaster.ac.uk>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     The Paris Agreement on climate change has set out global
>>>>>>>     commitments to keeping global warming well below 2 °C above
>>>>>>>     preindustrial levels and to aim for limiting the rise to 1.5
>>>>>>>     °C. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has
>>>>>>>     concluded that meeting these targets is possible – but
>>>>>>>     nearly all of their scenarios rely on the extensive
>>>>>>>     deployment of large-scale technologies that remove
>>>>>>>     greenhouse gases from the atmosphere but do not currently
>>>>>>>     exist (as complete socio-technical systems). Critics have
>>>>>>>     argued that assumptions about when such ‘negative emissions’
>>>>>>>     technologies might be ready and how they might be deployed
>>>>>>>     at an impactful scale are desperately optimistic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Much like their taxonomic cousins, geoengineering by
>>>>>>>     reflecting sunlight back into space, negative emissions
>>>>>>>     ideas are also deeply controversial, potentially propping up
>>>>>>>     carbon capitalism, making sweeping changes to land-use and
>>>>>>>     posing significant environmental risks. This panel seeks to
>>>>>>>     explore the politics of these prospective negative emissions
>>>>>>>     technologies and what they imply for our changing
>>>>>>>     relationship with nature in the age of the Anthropocene. We
>>>>>>>     ask: what political imaginaries and interests are
>>>>>>>     co-produced with negative emissions ideas in climate models,
>>>>>>>     experiments and policies? How might research, development
>>>>>>>     and deployment of carbon removal be governed responsibly
>>>>>>>     where power relations and socio-technical systems are
>>>>>>>     co-evolving? What are the implications for power, knowledge
>>>>>>>     and politics of (discursive) decoupling of carbon removal
>>>>>>>     from other forms of geoengineering? How does negative
>>>>>>>     emissions politics compare to other technoscientific
>>>>>>>     politics? What should our roles as STS scholars be when
>>>>>>>     engaging with negative emissions?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     To submit a paper please go to
>>>>>>>     https://nomadit.co.uk/easst/easst2018/conferencesuite.php/panels/6270<https://nomadit.co.uk/easst/easst2018/conferencesuite.php/panels/6270>
>>>>>>>     The call for papers closes at midnight CET on 14 February, 2018.
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Stoves mailing list
>>>
>>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>>> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
>>>
>>> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
>>> http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>>>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171226/61fff4c2/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list