Most interesting idea, Nathan. With your permission, I'm taking the liberty of cross-posting your email (with links attached), that fleshes out the idea.
===========================================
Bob,
Here is a simple hypertext outline of the idea I mentioned in the forum post. I had two goals in writing it up this way, to present the idea as simply as possible with as much backup research as possible without being intimidating.. and to experiment with the hypertext medium for expression (something I am working on with the English teacher at the school for a poetry unit, so some of the links are for creating combined experience rather than actual research.)
Anyway, have a look at 'er and let me know what you think -- to start with, if you think it is even remotely feasible, you have my permission to cross post this email to the forum in your discussion.
An experiment in transferring content:
Last spring I, with the assistance of
four grade twelve students at
Gronlid School in
Gronlid Saskatchewan developed the following project for
AITC s Youth Vision for Agriculture.
The goal of the project was to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from a hypothetical farm in the
Vanscoy area of Saskatchewan.
The Proposal: If the farmer
removes all the
crop residue along with the crop, and uses it as
feedstock for an
anaerobic digester,
The
digester will produce
methane gas which can be
decomposed thermally into a
high quality carbon black and
hydrogen.
The
hydrogen can be used to
fuel all the farms
energy needs
safely and
cleanly.
The carbon can be sold.
The heat for thermal decomposition can be produced with an
inexpensive solar furnace. The sludge from the digester is returned to the field as fertilizer but can have nutrients added as necessary and under ideal conditions before spreading on the fields.
Note: -all nutrient content removed from the field is returned except for the crop seed, which is removed anyway. -there are now three (crop, carbon, hydrogen) marketable commodities with (thus far) independent prices which improves both the economic viability and stability of the farm. As farms develop this process it removes the need for large scale hydrogen
distribution infrastructure: every farm will have a tank of hydrogen for sale -- you can pull into the yard and buy a tank when your car is low just like you can with gas now. Farms immediately surrounding urban centers will likely produce enough H<sub>2</sub> to supply the city, with the only exceptions being larger urban mage cities like LA and New York
-with conservation tillage the carbon sequestration is difficult to quantify. With this proposal it is simple to measure the amount of carbon removed from the atmosphere. Thus carbon credits from the Kyoto agreement will be easy to administer. (This is a fourth possible source of income for the farmer so long as the carbon black is sold only for stable, non combustive uses.)
-remember that unlike other environmentally
friendly practices being looked at for farm diversification (ethanol etc) this is the only one which results in a net negative carbon dioxide production, a self sufficient farm, and a clean fuel source for the nation/world and no nutrient loss to the farm soil (pyrolosis).
-the amount of hydrogen and carbon produced is enormous & much larger than you think, I guarantee it. Try the math yourself but assuming a worst case scenario:
--35 pounds of residue per bushel of crop (lowest number from
this site)
--20 bushels per acre yield for the crop (lowest average yield from
this site)
--50% of the biomass converted to biogas (85% yield should be possible but this is a
guess?)
--50% of the biogas methane (98% yield should be possible &lost this link& will recover soon)
--50% conversion of the methane to hydrogen and carbon (
98% should be possible)
--
2.21 pounds to the kilogram
--1 kg hydrogen equal to 1 gallon gasoline (
BTU equivalent anyway)
--a 2,000 acre farm, entirely cropped (assumption from AITC competition guidelines)
-- the production of 79,185 kg of Methane (19,796 kg of Hydrogen (equivalent BTU s to 20000 gallons of gasoline), 59,389 kg of Carbon should be possible.
Under ideal conditions (top end of the numbers sourced above) the yields become
84,378 kg CH4, 1,033,630 kg H2, 31,00,891 kg C.
--even given $0.10/kg for these commodities
(very low), they come to between $15,850 and $421,890 in extra revenue for the farm & surely enough to justify research and development into such a venture?
--this extra farm income could be applied to reducing the environmental impact of other areas of the farm & solar & wind generation of electricity would for example become affordable, further freeing resources for other purposes (income).
Yours in Saving the World,
Nathan Lamothe
Sr. Science Teacher
Gronlid Central School
Other interesting related reading:
http://www.ncga.com/research/pdfs/Energ ... uction.pdf
http://www..eap.mcgill.ca/MagRack/SF/Fall%2095%20G.htm
http://www.iowaagopportunity.org/ethano ... tegrat.pdf
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/boron_blast.html
[This message has been edited by Bob (edited 09-24-2002).]