Thanks for your focus and research on nature-based mechanisms, in your case, trees, to capture CO 2 from the atmosphere, to mitigate Climate Change.
However, I would respectfully suggest, if you are serious about understanding the full potential of nature-based CO 2 capture strategies, that you conduct research to determine which plants and trees capture the most CO 2/Acre/5,10 & 15-Year Time Periods, and efficiently
create the most Climate Smart Biomass.
For example, a preliminary analysis done by, UC Berkeley, at our request, indicates that the above-ground portion of Biomass Sorghum, which captures roughly 7 Tons of CO 2/Acre, is roughly 4 times the CO 2, acre, over a 15-year period, as an equal acreage of Pine Trees, and roughly twice as much as Switchgrass. Note their chart on our website(https://www.agri-techproducers.biz). And Texas A&M researchers indicate that the roots of Biomass Sorghum will capture another 1 Ton of CO 2/Acre, in the ground, per season.
See: https://today.tamu.edu/2022/01/05/bioenergy-sorghums-roots-can-replensih-carbon-in-soil/
Using my patented Combined Remediation Biomass and Bio-Product Production (CRBBP) Process, one plants then multi-tasks very fast and large-growing Bio-Crops, like Biomass Sorghum, to use photosynthesis, one of nature’s oldest CO 2 capture processes, to capture large amounts of atmospheric CO 2, at one of the world’s lowest costs ($35/Ton). We can also multi-task this Bio-Crop to simultaneously remediate air, soil and water, and then convert the resulting Climate-Smart Biomass into a variety of Climate-Smart Bio-Products, in which the captured Carbon can be sequestered, for very long, as well as varying periods of time.
And our CRBBP Process’ multi-tasking feature creates cost-sharing opportunities, which could make all of its potential applications, including its CO 2 Capture application, even less expensive.
In one of our ever-expanding initiatives, we have been partnering with utilities, in utility funded, CRBBP Process Demo Projects, planting Biomass Sorghum on their underutilized sites, then converting the resulting Biomass into Climate-Smart Biochar, then embedding it in utility sites, to long-term sequester the captured Carbon, with the intention of earning carbon credits.
In addition to Biochar, we are making or planning to make several other Bio-Products, from our Climate-Smart Biomass. For example, we are collaborating with a university to convert Biomass Sorghum into a “Climate-Smart Coating", which protects military vehicles from chemical warfare.
And, as you may know, Carbon Black is made by converting raw oil into what is, unfortunately, a pollutant-laden powder, which is used in making composites, plastics and tires. We are commercializing a patent-pending, safer and more sustainable, Climate-Smart Bio-Based Filler Powder.
And, in support of that effort, our Team was honored to be among the first 16 grantees of the new, federal BioMADE Program, which seeks to create a Bio-Economy, by encouraging Bio-Product development.
Again, I hope you all, and others, including the federal government, will conduct research to determine which plants and trees capture the most CO 2/Acre/5,10 & 15-Year Time Periods, so the world might most strategically utilize its lands to mitigate Climate Change.
I look forward to your reply.
Regards,
Joe
Joseph J. James, President
Agri-Tech Producers LLC
116 Wildewood Club Court
Columbia, SC 29223
Cell: (803) 413-6801
Email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Website: https://www.agri-techproducers.biz
I share concerns about the use of credits when they enable lower effort to reduce emissions by companies and wealthier countries. And I agree that there are always challenges with working out how much climate impact any effort has (not limited to credits or forests) - and that makes it problematic to claim that one activity ‘offsets’ another. However we do need to provide resources on a huge scale for climate action in developing countries including forest protection and accelerated energy transition. Calling these transfers a ‘contribution’ is attractive (and not original - but still good to see the use to add to the conversation) but it does not detract from two needs: first to know whether the contributions are being made to activities that are likely to be effective and probably wouldn’t have happened and that are using the support relatively efficiently and equitably; and second, to provide a way to recognise, reward and, where possibly compel, companies and governments to make such contributions. We need to have ways to say how much each company / government might be expected to contribute. Pushing out ‘offsetting’ doesn’t solve the challenge or create the opportunities needed for more action. Suggestions welcome! Our new Handbook https://www.edf.org/natural-climate-solutions/handbook provides a great introduction to those who want to help solve this in the NCS space.
COMMENTS
BY Joe James, President Agri-Tech Producers LLC
ON February 3, 2024 02:32 AM
Dear Dr. Angeregg, Dr. Blanchard and Dr. Haya:
Thanks for your focus and research on nature-based mechanisms, in your case, trees, to capture CO 2 from the atmosphere, to mitigate Climate Change.
However, I would respectfully suggest, if you are serious about understanding the full potential of nature-based CO 2 capture strategies, that you conduct research to determine which plants and trees capture the most CO 2/Acre/5,10 & 15-Year Time Periods, and efficiently
create the most Climate Smart Biomass.
For example, a preliminary analysis done by, UC Berkeley, at our request, indicates that the above-ground portion of Biomass Sorghum, which captures roughly 7 Tons of CO 2/Acre, is roughly 4 times the CO 2, acre, over a 15-year period, as an equal acreage of Pine Trees, and roughly twice as much as Switchgrass. Note their chart on our website(https://www.agri-techproducers.biz). And Texas A&M researchers indicate that the roots of Biomass Sorghum will capture another 1 Ton of CO 2/Acre, in the ground, per season.
See: https://today.tamu.edu/2022/01/05/bioenergy-sorghums-roots-can-replensih-carbon-in-soil/
Using my patented Combined Remediation Biomass and Bio-Product Production (CRBBP) Process, one plants then multi-tasks very fast and large-growing Bio-Crops, like Biomass Sorghum, to use photosynthesis, one of nature’s oldest CO 2 capture processes, to capture large amounts of atmospheric CO 2, at one of the world’s lowest costs ($35/Ton). We can also multi-task this Bio-Crop to simultaneously remediate air, soil and water, and then convert the resulting Climate-Smart Biomass into a variety of Climate-Smart Bio-Products, in which the captured Carbon can be sequestered, for very long, as well as varying periods of time.
And our CRBBP Process’ multi-tasking feature creates cost-sharing opportunities, which could make all of its potential applications, including its CO 2 Capture application, even less expensive.
In one of our ever-expanding initiatives, we have been partnering with utilities, in utility funded, CRBBP Process Demo Projects, planting Biomass Sorghum on their underutilized sites, then converting the resulting Biomass into Climate-Smart Biochar, then embedding it in utility sites, to long-term sequester the captured Carbon, with the intention of earning carbon credits.
In addition to Biochar, we are making or planning to make several other Bio-Products, from our Climate-Smart Biomass. For example, we are collaborating with a university to convert Biomass Sorghum into a “Climate-Smart Coating", which protects military vehicles from chemical warfare.
And, as you may know, Carbon Black is made by converting raw oil into what is, unfortunately, a pollutant-laden powder, which is used in making composites, plastics and tires. We are commercializing a patent-pending, safer and more sustainable, Climate-Smart Bio-Based Filler Powder.
And, in support of that effort, our Team was honored to be among the first 16 grantees of the new, federal BioMADE Program, which seeks to create a Bio-Economy, by encouraging Bio-Product development.
See: https://www.biomade.org
Again, I hope you all, and others, including the federal government, will conduct research to determine which plants and trees capture the most CO 2/Acre/5,10 & 15-Year Time Periods, so the world might most strategically utilize its lands to mitigate Climate Change.
I look forward to your reply.
Regards,
Joe
Joseph J. James, President
Agri-Tech Producers LLC
116 Wildewood Club Court
Columbia, SC 29223
Cell: (803) 413-6801
Email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Website: https://www.agri-techproducers.biz
BY Suzi Kerr
ON February 3, 2024 10:13 AM
I share concerns about the use of credits when they enable lower effort to reduce emissions by companies and wealthier countries. And I agree that there are always challenges with working out how much climate impact any effort has (not limited to credits or forests) - and that makes it problematic to claim that one activity ‘offsets’ another. However we do need to provide resources on a huge scale for climate action in developing countries including forest protection and accelerated energy transition. Calling these transfers a ‘contribution’ is attractive (and not original - but still good to see the use to add to the conversation) but it does not detract from two needs: first to know whether the contributions are being made to activities that are likely to be effective and probably wouldn’t have happened and that are using the support relatively efficiently and equitably; and second, to provide a way to recognise, reward and, where possibly compel, companies and governments to make such contributions. We need to have ways to say how much each company / government might be expected to contribute. Pushing out ‘offsetting’ doesn’t solve the challenge or create the opportunities needed for more action. Suggestions welcome! Our new Handbook https://www.edf.org/natural-climate-solutions/handbook provides a great introduction to those who want to help solve this in the NCS space.