<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Nikhil,</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">If the captured carbon has an economic benefit, better and increased crop yields, then it is a benefit to all farmers, regardless of their local economy. That it has a draw benefit is an added bonus.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">All of us who want to avoid the worst of climate disruption need to support as many forms of draw down as we can, where ever were can. Global agriculture needs to become regenerative agriculture. Best if we can find low tech solution we can implement today, rather than wait for large centralized government sponsored moonshots.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Cheers,</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Jock<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Jan 28, 2017, at 12:54 AM, Traveller <<a href="mailto:miata98@gmail.com">miata98@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr">Jock: <br><br>Why should poor people's stoves have to worry about CO2 drawdown? <br><br>The White House just put out a <a href="https://unfccc.int/files/focus/long-term_strategies/application/pdf/mid_century_strategy_report-final_red.pdf">United States Mid-Century Strategy FOR DEEP DECARBONIZATION</a> (November 2016). <br><br>I wish the White House all success and note that the document has no reference to BIOCHAR, brother Ron's favorite goal. It does, however, advocate the development and deployment of BECCS -Carbon-Beneficial Biomass Energy plus Carbon Capture and Sequestration: "Any facility that combusts biomass
for electricity or converts biomass to fuel and captures resulting CO2 for utilization (e.g., enhanced oil recovery) or storage in
underground reservoirs." <br><br>When biomass stove designers come up with "storage in underground reservoirs" rather than just soil, perhaps CDM will grant them the credits they deserve. <div><br></div><div>I am fortunately old enough to remember the late 1970s and early 1980s when irrational exuberance led IIASA to advocate uranium ore extraction from seawater to keep on fueling a breeder world. Other things that appear crazy in retrospect were also advocated.<br><br>The more the world changes... <br><br>Nikhil <br><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px"><br>--------- </span></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px">(India +91) 909 995 2080</span><font face="georgia, serif"><br><i> </i></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Jock Gill <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jock@jockgill.com" target="_blank">jock@jockgill.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>A interesting post. It fails, however, to address the issues of the imperative for CO2 drawdown. The pyrolysis of biomass provides one method of drawdown.</div><div id="gmail-m_-6425144639983634120AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="gmail-m_-6425144639983634120AppleMailSignature">Regards,</div><div id="gmail-m_-6425144639983634120AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="gmail-m_-6425144639983634120AppleMailSignature">Jock<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><div class="gmail-h5"><div> </div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></body></html>