Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Carbon Capture Storage Sequestration (merged)

Re: Carbon sequestration farming methods

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 11:24:48

alokin wrote:What backdraws do these mulch Fuku.. (this Japanese guy I can't remember the name - one straw revolution) have? Does any serious farmer use it?
And how about those nice theories like agroforestry, forest farming or food forest? Are there farmers using this technique? And did traditional societies farm that way? (I always ask for the traditional systems, as this seems to me proven methods and maybe useful post PO)


I'm not claiming expert status here. Just a hobby to me but that said.
The drawbacks to mulch is the time and labor involved in placeing the mulch around the young plants without damaging them or transplanting seedlings into a mulched bed. I haven't been there but I'm guessing the mile long lettuce patches of southern California have zero mulch in them.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Carbon sequestration farming methods

Unread postby patience » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 12:04:18

The commercial produce farmers in Indiana use strips of black plastic as "mulch" to reduce culivation needs. This is not sustainable, of course. They still cultivate row middles, using the plastic under the plants (poke a hole in it to set the plants), to stop weed competition and warm the soil faster for early planting. This is plowed land. I don't know of any way to mulch 40 acre fields the way gardeners like myself do it. There just isn't enough mulch material available. I think plowing will be around for a long time.
Local fix-it guy..
User avatar
patience
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 3180
Joined: Fri 04 Jan 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Carbon sequestration farming methods

Unread postby Ludi » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 12:17:35

I don't hoe or till, though I do sometimes dig out some rocks (we have tons of them) and sometimes use a broadfork to aerate the soil. I've posted about these methods and my own gardens for years here, and I'm not interested in debating with people who like to till. I don't find it necessary, and I'm lazy, so I don't do it. :)

Permaculture is based on traditional farming methods.

Lasagna gardening


garden video

Fukuoka farming


The Land Institute perennial prairie polyculture
Ludi
 

Re: Carbon sequestration farming methods

Unread postby StormBringer » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 12:50:42

Although I have a large garden, about 1 acre, It is very long and narrow. I do not use fertilizers or pesticides, and I do mulch. In a garden that size no till would be a nightmare.I do put all veggies on raised beds and have had a lot of luck with it. I use a hand push cultivator for weed control as much as possible and the rest is done with a hoe. I am always open for suggestions though if it can be done better.
"All you need for happiness is a good gun, a good horse, and a good wife." Daniel Boone
____________________________________
It is not that which we endeavor to build, but that which we destroy to do so, will be the downfall of mankind.
User avatar
StormBringer
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 922
Joined: Sat 06 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: BFE Mo.

Re: Carbon sequestration farming methods

Unread postby Pops » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 18:53:34

If one cares to understand commercial farming get up early and watch the local farm report or go to agweb.com

Lacking that, Google "No-till" for a primer.

Commodity farming is a business just like any other and it has no more to do with what you do in your garden than your local furniture store has to do with how you care for your shade tree.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Carbon sequestration farming methods

Unread postby kpeavey » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 21:06:31

Where to start...

My method uses aspects of several other gardening methods. DDRBs (Double Dug Raised Beds), SFG (Square Foot Gardening), Lasagna Gardening to a limited extent, and a combination of pitcher and drip irrigation. I have been unable to incorporate, or even find sense in, any of Fukuoka's methods. I till the soil deeply when the bed is established, incorporate large amounts of organic materials, mulch heavily, companion plants are employed, as well as compost tea. I've been studying vermiculture, will be including it in the future, and intend to look into biochar.

Any single aspect may give my crops a boost, but the more features I employ, the better the results. Each feature offers a benefit, with the combination being an example of the whole exceeding the sum of the parts. Ecosystems thrive on complexity, and your garden is no exception.

After going to all the trouble of making compost and tea, amending the soil with heavy amounts of it, starting the plants in the greenhouse, transplanting them in just the right spot, neglecting the soil by leaving it exposed to the elements is a waste of all your time and effort. Mulching protects the soil ecosystem you have developed. My hoe handle broke 4 years ago, has not been repaired or replaced, and until someone shows me the practical benefits of breaking my back on the thing, It never will be.

Conventional farming with rows, plows and hoes has been practiced for so long that the idea of doing it any other way has almost been bred out of the population. There is a better way, it takes time for it to be effective, results in yields improving and effort decreasing.

Plowing or tilling the soil initially breaks up the compacted sod layer, exposes the soil for planting, kills off existing plants by placing them in position to serve as green manure, aerates the soil, and brings nutrients to the surface from below.

A hoe is used to kill weeds after the plants have started to grow back. Rain compacts the soil, the hoe serves to decompact it, but this is an ancillary benefit: how often you hoe is determined by weed growth. If there were no weeds, the hoe would be left in the shed.

Soil left unmulched is exposed to the elements. Rain will compact it. The sun will dry it out. UV rays can kill off the microbes on the surface. Once compacted and the microbe population restructured, the water absorbing ability of the soil is lost, resulting in erosion and runoff. A hoe used to chop and uproot weeds exposes more of your soil to the sun and rain, and destroys the tilth on the surface layer. When the sun dries it out and the wind comes, the dust on your plates and shelves is your topsoil and fertility blowing away. The solution is to irrigate regularly. This compacts the soil further, promotes weeds, and uses large amounts of water and energy to pump it. Shut of the irrigation for a few days, the sun evaporates the water, leaving mineral salts behind in ever increasing concentrations until the soil is so heavily salinized that your crops fail.

And all this makes sense to people?

This is the best soil you have available, nourishes the crops that you need to survive. Why would you not give it the attention it deserves?

Till your beds deeply when you establish them. Give your plants loose soil which allows their roots to grow. More roots means more water can be extracted from drier soil, more nutrients can be absorbed from less fertile soil. Less water and fertilizer/inputs are needed.

Add copious amounts of compost, turning it in the top few inches. Along with the compost comes the microbe population which will live symbiotically with your plants, steadily breaking down the compost to provide nutrients in a form your plants can use. The microbes enhance the tilth of the soil by binding it together. The compost itself is able to absorb water in greater quantity when the rains come, and hold it longer when the sun shines. Less irrigation water is needed. It takes a while for the compost to be completely digested by the soil microbes, resulting in increased fertility over time with less compost added over time. Increasing fertility with decreasing work.

Left exposed, your soil will darken, giving you an earlier start in the spring as the soil absorbs more sunlight, but you will find that you will want to cover it with mulch. All the work you put in to create a loose fluffy soil can be protected with a simple layer of organic materials. Leaves, hay, straw, grass clippings, even compost can be used if you like. Rain smashes into your mulch rather than the soil directly. It will still percolate into the soil, but without damaging it. If rain is more than the soil can absorb, runoff is slowed down by interference with the mulch. Erosion is greatly reduced. Mulch shades the soil and adds an insulating layer. When the air is cool, the soil and plant roots are warmer, stay warmer longer. When the sun shines, the mulch protects the soil and its microbe population from drying and damaging effects. Soil tilth is allowed to continue to improve rather than be destroyed. In the shade of the mulch, water evaporates at a considerably slower rate.

Mulch serves the plants as well as the soil, by removing competition in the form of weeds. Without sunlight, germinating weed seeds have a greatly decreased ability to survive long enough to interfere with your plants. Those that do are considerably easier to hand weed out of a bed of loose soil. Fewer weeds means less work and more water/nutrients available for your plants. Follow the growing season, fewer weeds means fewer weed seeds for next years crop to contend with.

Its all interconnected, so add another factor. Tilling regularly disrupts the soil life, including earthworms. If it does not kill them outright, it can reduce the population by driving them out to less turbulent pastures. Its the worms that will do the tilling for you. Surface feeders will consume some of the mulch material as it breaks down. Burrowers add tunnels through which water and plant roots travel. They bring materials from deep in the soil to the surface and from the surface to the depths. They consume soil, in the process destroying harmful nematodes, adjusting the pH, and producing castings rich in beneficial microbes, amino acids, proteins, and other substances which promote microbe activity in the soil. A particular material they produce is humic acid, a powerful plant growth stimulant. As they move, they coat their burrows with mucous, offers excellent feed for microbes and plants alike. The burrows themselves help move water in great quantity into the soil, spreading it out to be absorbed by the soil and compostables in great quantity. Runoff is reduced, water retaining ability is greatly enhanced, and at the same time, too much water is readily drained away. Worms add balance. They do the work for you. No Till refers to your work. A worm population of 20-25/sqft will add up to a pound or so in 100 sqft. Over an acre, this would amount to a ton and a half of worms. They can consume hundred of times their body weight in a year, converting what the eat into the worlds finest soil amendment and spreading it out across and into your fields.

With each crop, rake the mulch to the side, add more compost and mix it into your soil lightly, just the top 3-4 inches is all you need. Set in your plants, return the mulch and add more as needed. You disturb the ground as little as possible. The ecosystem of the soil is left intact. Your soil will improve each year. Weeds decline. Water demands decrease. Crop yields improve with healthier plants growing in healthier soil.

Less work, better results. Does this make better sense?
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--for ever."
-George Orwell, 1984
_____

twenty centuries of stony sleep were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, and what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
-George Yeats
User avatar
kpeavey
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon 04 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

The Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) thread

Unread postby vampyregirl » Sat 26 Dec 2009, 11:37:59

The Government of Alberta and the Government of Canada have jointly announced funding plans for the Shell Quest Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) project. The project will be based at Shell's Soctford Upgrader located near Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta.
CCS is a process that captures CO2 from industrial sources, then transports it to a storage site and injects it underground. Underground CO2 storage is based on geological trapping mechanisms that have contained oil and gas reservoirs for millions of years.
Last edited by Tanada on Sat 23 Feb 2019, 16:19:22, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Expanded title.
vampyregirl
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2007, 04:00:00

Re: CCS project

Unread postby Ludi » Sat 26 Dec 2009, 12:00:58

Does the project store more than it produces?
Ludi
 

Pairing Oil Recovery With Carbon Capture a Win-Win for U.S.

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 11 Mar 2010, 20:41:17

Pairing Oil Recovery With Carbon Capture a Win-Win for U.S.

Enhanced oil recovery -- a technique that stimulates aging wells -- combined with carbon capture and storage (CCS) could slash U.S. petroleum imports if there is a strong price on carbon, according to a report commissioned by an environmental group and released yesterday.

The Natural Resources Defense Council backed the report (pdf) that says combining CCS with enhanced oil recovery could boost U.S. production by 3 million to 3.6 million barrels a day.

"Significant growth is dependent on sourcing affordable carbon dioxide," said Mike Godec, vice president of Advanced Resources International, which prepared the report. "Climate legislation obviously would give enhanced oil recovery a kick start and allow the technology to grow most rapidly."


nytimes
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Pairing Oil Recovery With Carbon Capture a Win-Win for U.S.

Unread postby AAA » Fri 12 Mar 2010, 15:02:00

The Sacramento Valley of California would be perfect for this. There are hundreds of small depleted gas fields. It could actually enhance gas recovery also.

I know Rosetta Resources tried to this a few years ago but the pilot project never proceeded.

I also know Denbury Resources uses CO2 Sequestration in some of the EOR projects.
How can Ludi spend 8-10 hrs/day on the internet and claim to be homesteading???
User avatar
AAA
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed 12 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Carbon Sequestation (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 03 Nov 2013, 18:23:16

From: http://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2012/0 ... -pump-oil/

This is the second largest fossil fuel burning plant in the country...and it burns coal. The reports indicates the expectation that little of the CO2 will come back up with the oil that is produced. That may be a tad optimistic IMHO. OTOH fears that the reservoirs will eventually leak the CO2 back to the surface are greatly overblown. And earthquake potential? Even more absurd: they will be injecting into reservoirs that have had their pressures drawn down from their original conditions. Which is exactly why they chose those reservoirs: lower required injection pressure. Either that concern comes from complete ignorance of the engineering involved or a blatant propaganda attempt to enflame the gullible. Those trapping seals have contained the equivalent pressures for millions of years and obviously with no leakage since they trapped the oil/NG in the first place. And my personal editorial note: if the biggest concern someone has is that the CO2 might leak out in a couple of thousands then that person has no other worries in the world or he's an idiot IMHO. First, these reservoirs have trapped methane at the same pressures for millions of years. And methane molecules have a greater propensity for leakage than CO2 molecules. Greenpeace doesn't like anyone burning coal...fine. But they are going to protest an effort to requester GHG emissions from one of the largest sources in the country? Why exactly? I can promise you that the plant is going to keep burning coal and producing the GHG. GP hasn't stopped this plant and never will...it's part of Houston's power grid for goodness sakes. But they want to prevent the first large scale effort to requester GHG from a US power plant? This makes as much a sense as it would be for Chevron to protest the gov't granting Deep Water drill permits in the GOM. Greenpeace doesn't want us to try sequestration...fine...we'll just keeping dumping it from this plant into the atmosphere as we've been doing for years.

"In past years, the W. A. Parish power plant outside Houston in Fort Bend County has ranked near the top of national lists for “Most Polluting Power Plants.” It has also been lauded for it’s efforts to reduce emissions. Now, this power behemoth, the biggest power plant in Texas and second biggest fossil fuel-burning plant in the nation, is planning to build one of the country’s more innovative pollution control projects. It will use some of its pollution to pump oil out of the ground. Plant owner NRG said it will begin construction next year of its “carbon capture” system. The system, made up of pipes and flues and sprayers, will be installed on one of the plant’s four coal-burning power generation units (four other units burn natural gas). “This will be the first commercial-scale carbon capture on a power plant in the United States,” said Jeff Baudier, CEO of Petra Nova, NRG’s wholly-owned carbon capture business.

Here’s how it’s suppose to work: the W.A. Parish plant burns some 36,000 tons of coal a day, producing tons of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas linked to climate change. The CO2 would normally go up and out the smokestacks. But now with the new system, the gas will be “captured” before it leaves the stack by spraying it with a chemical solvent. Then, the CO2 gas will be compressed and fed into a pipeline. This is where what had been pollution becomes a way to produce oil. The pipeline will run some 80 miles to the West Ranch Oil Field east of Victoria, Texas. There, the CO2 will be pumped a mile underground to expand oil deposited in rock formations, allowing the oil to be piped up to the surface. This process of rejuvenating old oil fields by pumping in CO2 has been used for several decades, especially in West Texas. But getting the CO2 from a power plant is what’s new.

“From the technical side, there’s pretty good confidence we can do this,” said Michael Young, with the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin. The UT group has been partnering with the energy industry, including NRG, to research what the carbon dioxide will do when millions of tons of it is pumped thousands of feet underground. The goal is for 99% of the carbon dioxide to stay locked underground… forever. But not everyone is convinced it’ll work. “Anybody who’s independent enough and really worth their salt is never going to guarantee you that you can store this highly pressurized (CO2) underground for thousands of years and expect it to stay there,” said Ryan Rittenhouse with the environmental group Greenpeace. It’s backing a protest organization called Quit Coal. Rittenhouse contends there is not enough research to determine if the CO2 won’t just leak back to the surface, defeating the whole idea of reducing greenhouse gases. Critics also have said there is the added worry that pumping such quantities deep into the ground might increase seismic activity or leak into underground water supplies, increasing the water’s alkalinity and causing other changes to degrade water quality. Proposed projects to “sequester” carbon dioxide underground have met public opposition in other states, including Ohio, where one project was abandoned in 2009.

The U.S. Department of Energy is behind the power plant project, giving NRG $167 million in matching funds to build the project at the W.A. Parish station. The DOE said it wants to see if the carbon capture technology can be used in existing power plants in a way that makes it economically feasible. NRG hopes to have the new carbon-capture system in operation by early 2016."
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Texas size sequestation

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 03 Nov 2013, 18:52:16

Doesn't this coal-fired power plant sit virtually on top some of the biggest natural gas resources in the country?

And isn't NG much cheaper than coal?

Why not just convert this Texas electrical plant to run on NG, like all the other utility companies are doing with their old coal-fired power plants.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26619
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Texas size sequestation

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 03 Nov 2013, 19:14:26

We know there is lots of NG out there....Obama promised Americans the US has a 100-year-supply of NG just a year ago in the exact same speeches where he promised folks they could keep their existing healthcare plans. :)
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26619
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Texas size sequestation

Unread postby Synapsid » Sun 03 Nov 2013, 23:54:03

Plantagenet:

Four of the power-generation units burn coal and four burn NG. It would seem that converting entirely to coal would be relatively straightforward but there's an ongoing return to coal for generating electricity in the US because the price advantage of NG over coal isn't what it used to be. I'd guess that that advantage is what will determine what the company does about fuel balance in the plant. Just a guess, though.
Synapsid
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 21:21:50

Re: Texas size sequestation

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Mon 04 Nov 2013, 11:56:08

I haven't found the details about exactly what type of coal this plant is burning but bear in mind that many coal contracts run 10 to 20 years so you just can't flip back and forth very quickly. Texas has been burning a lot of lignite for a long time. From: http://www.tmra.com/mining-resources/lignite-mining

"Texas is the 5th largest producer of coal in the United States. Coal reserves in Texas amount to some 23 billion tons, of which 10 billion tons are economically recoverable. Lignite is the most abundant coal found in Texas, generally from northeast Texas in a swath southwestward to near the Rio Grande River. Mining operations in the state are located along this area of deposits. Bituminous and sub-bituminous coal is located in some western and southern parts of the state. Energy can be produced much more economically from lignite than from other fossil fuel sources. Long-term price stability is another positive aspect of electricity generated from lignite as a fuel. Keeping electricity costs as low as possible is very important to all Texans. Local economies in lignite regions of the state are positively impacted by these operations. Lignite mining and the electricity produced provide approximately 33,000 safe and secure jobs to Texans and about $10.5 billion in economic impact.

Due to increases in population, Texas must double its power supply by 2025. This urgent need for more electricity must meet two demands: affordable electricity and ever cleaner technology.In Texas, emissions have been dramatically reduced in the past 20 years. The Texas coal-based power industry has spent over $1.0 billion since 2000 to reduce NOx emissions and now has the best NOx emission rate, as a fleet, in the nation. Overall, it has the 6th best emission rate of any state in the nation."

As I said if Greenpeace doesn't want us to sequester the GHG from these plants we'll just keep dumping the crap into the air. Their protest just confirms they've lost the righteous rudder that had guided them in the beginning IMO.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Texas size sequestation

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 05 Nov 2013, 13:46:11

Again I feel the need to point out that the state that is supposedly in the hip pocket of the oil patch is leading the country in wind power by a very wide margin and now appears to be taking the lead on CO2 sequestration while similar efforts are being blocked in other states.

Plans in Texas to capture CO2 from NG-fired power plants. From: http://www.summitpower.com/story/summit ... n-capture/

February 9, 2013 “Summit Power Group and The Linde Group have teamed up to develop commercial-scale natural gas-fired power plants that will capture up to ninety percent of the CO2 that would otherwise have been emitted. A typical gas-fired power plant with carbon capture developed by Summit and Linde will produce approximately 250 megawatts (MW) of net electric power, enough to provide electricity for 250,000 homes, and will capture up to 750,000 tons of CO2 annually.

Both Summit and Linde are already active in developing power projects with CO2 capture where the CO2 can be either geologically sequestered in depleted gas fields and deep saline formations, or injected into depleting oilfields. Summit is currently developing two major coal gasification projects that will capture 90% of the CO2 they produce, namely the Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP) in the United States and the Captain Clean Energy Project (CCEP) in the United Kingdom.

“Merely increasing reliance on natural gas is not a sufficient carbon-reduction strategy for the hydrocarbon sector of the global power industry,” said Professor Dr. Aldo Belloni, member of the Executive Board of Linde AG. “It is still necessary, valuable, and eminently feasible to capture and geologically sequester the carbon dioxide that natural gas-fired plants would otherwise emit, just as it is with coal-based plants.”

And a little help for EOR projects in the Permian Basin. With the financial assistance from none other than our cohorts in China. From: http://www.zeroco2.no/projects/texas-su ... oject-tcep

“Summit Power Group is developing a 400MW, integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant at Penwell, Texas, which will also incorporate CCS technology. The project - known as the Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP) - ...has an anticipated with start-up planned for 2015. In September 2012, the project signed an MoU with Sinopec and The Export-Import Bank of China which cleared a path for Sinopec to be given EPC work for the project. After contracts are in place, the bank is expected to provide a loan of over $1 billion towards financing.

In July 2011, a long-term CO2 sales agreement was signed with Whiting Petroleum Corporation. Milestone EPC and operational contracts were signed in December 2011. Other progress includes major utility firm CPS Energy signing an agreement in January 2012 to purchase about 200MW of power from TCEP - the first US purchase of low-carbon power by a utility from a coal-based power plant fitted with carbon capture.

The project will be sited above the Permian Basin in West Texas, where the world’s largest and most active enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operations are in progress. It will be the first coal-fired power facility in the US to combine both IGCC and CCS, and could well be a world first. The US Department of Energy considers it a major demonstration project in its pursuit of clean energy.”

I wonder if Greenpeace will also protest against these sequestration projects.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Texas size sequestation

Unread postby Subjectivist » Tue 05 Nov 2013, 14:39:56

How much do you actually have to process the exhaust gasses before you can compression inject them into an oil reservoir? Can you just set up an injection well at a Natural Gas turbine plant and use an electric compressor set to force the CO2 andsteam into the reservoir, or do you have to do some fancy chemistry first?
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Subjectivist
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4701
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 07:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 114 guests