Day lunch

Slide1: 

LUNCHEON WORKSHOP On Cutting-Edge Biomass Technologies For Mitigating Acute Climate Change (July 7, 2004) Washington, DC Danny Day, Eprida danny.day@eprida.com 716-316-1765 Bob Evans, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO James Lee, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN Don Reicosky, USDA Soil Conservation, Morris, MN Matthew Realf and Ling Zhang Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA Biomass Conversion to Hydrogen with Agricultural Carbon Utilization To Scrub GHG Emissions from Fossil Fuels, Restore Soil Fertility and Sequester Carbon

Background: 2002 Renewable Hydrogen Production: 

100-Hour Demonstration of Hydrogen by Biomass Catalytic Steam Reforming (August 2002) Plus 20-30% (by weight) Charcoal Catalytic Steam Reforming 60% H2 20% CO2 7% CO 3% CH4 6CO2 + 6H2O + hv --andgt; C6H12O6 + 6O2 --andgt; Background: 2002 Renewable Hydrogen Production Leveraging photosynthesis

Facing an Immediate Concern: Abrupt Climate Change: 

Facing an Immediate Concern: Abrupt Climate Change

Pyrolysis Conversion and Hints: 

Pyrolysis Conversion and Hints 50kg per hour feed Used a inert gas generator to maintain bed temperature profiles Start-up procedure included filling unit with cool charcoal as inert media to distribute heat. The missing turnips

Global Charcoal Research: 

Global Charcoal Research Surface oxidation of the char increased the cation exchange capacity (Glaser) Char decreased leaching significantly (Lehmann) Char traps nutrients and supports microbial growth (Pietikainen)  Char increased available water holding capacity by more than 18% of surrounding soils (Glaser) Char experiments have shown up to 266% more biomass growth (Steiner) and 324% (Kishimoto and Sugiura)

Charcoal Research in Japan: 

Charcoal Research in Japan

Christoph Steiner Field Studies: 

Christoph Steiner Field Studies

Charcoal Research in Brazil: 

Charcoal Research in Brazil Christoph Steiner1, W. G. Teixeira2, J. Lehmann3 and W. Zech1 1 Institute of Soil Science, University of Bayreuth, Germany 2 Embrapa Amazonia Ocidental, Manaus, Brazil 3 Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, USA

Pyrolytic conversion of biomass offers options : 

Pyrolytic conversion of biomass offers options It is a well understood globally, where ever charcoal is made Simple system improvements allow for the capture and use of pyrolytic off-gases (ex: Cars/Trucks in Sweden were converted to run off wood gas during WWII) Pyrolytic conversion does not destroy the porous carbon structure created by nature Pyrolysis is natural. Nature has spent billions of years building systems and life forms that can take advantage conversion of biomass created by natural fires Pyrolysis can offer some of the best economics for hydrogen (as well as bio-oil) production partly because of the options for co-product production* Pyrolysis facilities can have reduced capital costs and small foot-prints *Spath, et al, Update of Hydrogen from Biomass -Determination of the Delivered Cost of Hydrogen, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Milestone Report for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Hydrogen Program 2001

Progression of Pyrolysis: 

Progression of Pyrolysis

Typical TGA of Pyrolysis: 

Typical TGA of Pyrolysis

Progression of Pyrolysis: 

Progression of Pyrolysis Well designed continuous process systems can be self-sustaining 1 1. Optimal Zone 2 2. Complete devolatilization Requires addition of energy (and/or oxygen) Our investment for a sustainable planet

Current uses of non renewable hydrogen: 

Current uses of non renewable hydrogen Synergistic opportunities for renewable hydrogen can be found in hydrogen’s largest use Under intensive modern agriculture H2/Ammonia = Food

Low Temp Charcoal Advantage: 

Low Temp Charcoal Advantage

Charcoal experiments: 

Charcoal experiments Chars were produced at 900, 600, 500, 450, and 400C. Crushed and sieved to #30 mesh, wt 20g. Soaked 5 min. in 48% NH4NO3 solution. Each rinse = 100 ml water 8.0 pH

Chemical Pathways for Simultaneous Removal of Major CO2 and ppm Levels of NOx and SOx Emissions by Innovative Application of the Fertilizer Production Reactions: 

Chemical Pathways for Simultaneous Removal of Major CO2 and ppm Levels of NOx and SOx Emissions by Innovative Application of the Fertilizer Production Reactions Oak Ridge National Laboratory US Patent 6,447,437 OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Chemical Pathways for Simultaneous Removal of Major CO2 and ppm Levels of NOx and SOx Emissions by Innovative Application of the Fertilizer Production Reactions: 

Chemical Pathways for Simultaneous Removal of Major CO2 and ppm Levels of NOx and SOx Emissions by Innovative Application of the Fertilizer Production Reactions Oak Ridge National Laboratory US Patent 6,447,437 OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Typical Composition of the Resulting Nitrogen Compounds 97.5% Ammonium Bicarbonate 2% Ammonium Sulfate 0.5% Ammonium Nitrate

PilotTest : 

Pilot Test Operated at ambient pressure and temperature CO2 separation is not required

Crushed Interior 2000x SEM: 

Crushed Interior 2000x SEM The residual cell structure of the original biomass is clearly visible The ABC fibrous buildup has started inside the carbon structure After complete processing, interior is full Trace minerals are returned to the soil along with essential nitrogen.

A Simple System: 

A Simple System Profit Centers Exhaust Scrubbing Fertilizer Hydrogen

Integrated System with H2 and Ammonia from Biomass: 

Integrated System with H2 and Ammonia from Biomass

Integrated with fossil fuel combustion & Nox reduction: 

Integrated with fossil fuel combustion andamp; Nox reduction SOx, NOx and CO2 Capture (optional hydrogen produced) Patent Pending

A simplified process: 

A simplified process SOx, NOx and CO2 Capture (no hydrogen produced) Patent Pending

Even simpler: 

Even simpler SOx, NOx and CO2 Capture (no hydrogen produced) Patent Pending

Carbon Negative Energy : 

Carbon Negative Energy Analysis calculations by: Stefan Czernick, Research Scientist, National Renewable Energy Laboratory Mathew Realf, Prof. Chem. Eng. Dept, Georgia Institute of Technology

Slide26: 

The potential for restoring soil carbon

Is it Technically Possible to Go Carbon Negative?*: 

Based on IPCC (2001) and Steffen et al. (1998) GPP 120 Gt C yr-1 Atmospheric Pool Is it Technically Possible to Go Carbon Negative?* YES! *Michael Obersteiner International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

The Opportunity: 

The Opportunity Materials that can represent sequestered atmospheric carbon

The Future: 

The Future Eprida is a social purpose enterprise which plans to: Facilitate a global research plan for rapid dissemination of information and best use of global resources Build a consortium of interested stakeholders to participate in a roadmap for implementation. Develop university based demonstration and outreach centers to provide local research, support and training. Develop a socially responsible sustainable business model for the rapid deployment of opportunities designed to create value through environmental stewardship. Use profits to return socially responsible capital to re-invest in research for global solutions. Come Join us!

Contact Information: 

Contact Information Danny Day EPRIDA http://www.eprida.com danny.day@eprida.com 706-316-1765 University of Georgia Bioconversion Center 1151 E. Whitehall Rd, Athens, GA 30605

Final Note: A Limiting Factor: 

Final Note: A Limiting Factor Material Balance and Production Limits (Energy is not the limiting factor) At theoretical maximum H2 –CO2 conversion there would only be enough CO2 to convert 61% of H2 to ABC and since our target nitrogen content for the pyrogenic carbon is 10%, (requiring 45% carbon by weight), our limit becomes the 20% carbon char (wt. 12) vs the 56% of ABC (mol.wt. 79). The limit is therefore the carbon char as a carrier utilizing only 31% of available hydrogen but sequestering 112kg of carbon dioxide (as measured experimentally) per million BTU of hydrogen utilized for energy. In addition, there is more than 112kg-150kg when the carbon sequestered in the form of additional plant growth and CO2 equivalents from reduced greenhouse gas emissions from lower power plant and fertilizer NOx release.