Biochar: Environmental and Socio-Economic Issues - Revision history

Claire Robinson: /* Biochar and agrofuels */

2009-12-01T15:39:30Z

Biochar and agrofuels

Claire Robinson at 15:39, 1 December 2009

2009-12-01T15:39:01Z

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:34:17Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:32:52Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:30:01Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:27:44Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:25:37Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:24:57Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:23:29Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

Claire Robinson: /* Charcoal vs people or ecosystems? */

2009-12-01T15:22:34Z

Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 ==Biochar and agrofuels==
-Many objections to the industrial production of charcoal center on the diversion of land from small-scale farming and food production to industrial agriculture and large-scale plantations of non-food crops. This argument also applies to the production of agrofuels. Indeed, biochar and agrofuels are being promoted by the same multinational companies. This is no coincidence, as charcoal is a byproduct from a type of bioenergy production which can also be used to make second-generation agrofuels, i.e. liquid agrofuels from wood, straw, sugarcane residues, palm kernel residues and other types of solid biomass.<ref>“[http://home.snafu.de/watchin/Biochar_eng.htm 'Biochar', a new big threat to people, land, and ecosystems],” open letter, 8 April 2009</ref>
+Many objections to the industrial production of biochar center on the diversion of land from small-scale farming and food production to industrial agriculture and large-scale plantations of non-food crops. This argument also applies to the production of agrofuels. Indeed, biochar and agrofuels are being promoted by the same multinational companies. This is no coincidence, as charcoal is a byproduct from a type of bioenergy production which can also be used to make second-generation agrofuels, i.e. liquid agrofuels from wood, straw, sugarcane residues, palm kernel residues and other types of solid biomass.<ref>“[http://home.snafu.de/watchin/Biochar_eng.htm 'Biochar', a new big threat to people, land, and ecosystems],” open letter, 8 April 2009</ref>
 ==Resources==

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:39, 1 December 2009
Line 26:		Line 26:

	Effects of industrial scale charcoal plantations on biodiversity have also attracted criticism. Chris Goodall suggests that biochar plantations could maintain a profusion of animals and plants in the forests that would be cleared by planting a mixture of fast-growing species, rather than a monoculture.<ref>Chris Goodall, Ten Technologies to Save the Planet, Green Profile, 2008, pp. 227-228</ref> But the Amazon ecologist Philip Fearnside says that a mixture does "not substantially change the impact of very large-scale plantations from the standpoint of biodiversity".<ref>Philip M. Fearnside, "Tropical Silvicultural Plantations as a Means of Sequestering Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide", mimeo, Manaus, 29 June 1993.</ref>		Effects of industrial scale charcoal plantations on biodiversity have also attracted criticism. Chris Goodall suggests that biochar plantations could maintain a profusion of animals and plants in the forests that would be cleared by planting a mixture of fast-growing species, rather than a monoculture.<ref>Chris Goodall, Ten Technologies to Save the Planet, Green Profile, 2008, pp. 227-228</ref> But the Amazon ecologist Philip Fearnside says that a mixture does "not substantially change the impact of very large-scale plantations from the standpoint of biodiversity".<ref>Philip M. Fearnside, "Tropical Silvicultural Plantations as a Means of Sequestering Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide", mimeo, Manaus, 29 June 1993.</ref>
		+
		+	==Biochar and agrofuels==
		+
		+	Many objections to the industrial production of charcoal center on the diversion of land from small-scale farming and food production to industrial agriculture and large-scale plantations of non-food crops. This argument also applies to the production of agrofuels. Indeed, biochar and agrofuels are being promoted by the same multinational companies. This is no coincidence, as charcoal is a byproduct from a type of bioenergy production which can also be used to make second-generation agrofuels, i.e. liquid agrofuels from wood, straw, sugarcane residues, palm kernel residues and other types of solid biomass.<ref>“[http://home.snafu.de/watchin/Biochar_eng.htm 'Biochar', a new big threat to people, land, and ecosystems],” open letter, 8 April 2009</ref>

	==Resources==		==Resources==

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Similarly, an environmental risk assessment of the impacts of these toxins on terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems has not been done.<ref>Saran Sohi, Elisa Lopez-Capel, Evelyn Krull and Roland Bol, “[http://www.csiro.au/files/files/poei.pdf Biochar, climate change and soil: A review to guide future research],” CSIRO Land and Water Science Report 05/09, February 2009, p. iv</ref>  CSIRO says that such an assessment is critical for three reasons: “the irretrievability of biochar once added to soil, the apparent general permanency of biochar once in the soil and the scale and speed at which the strategy needs to be implemented to contribute to climate change mitigation.”<ref>Saran Sohi, Elisa Lopez-Capel, Evelyn Krull and Roland Bol, “[http://www.csiro.au/files/files/poei.pdf Biochar, climate change and soil: A review to guide future research],” CSIRO Land and Water Science Report 05/09, February 2009, p. iv</ref>
-==Charcoal vs people or ecosystems?==
+==Biochar vs people or ecosystems?==
-Many of the problems identified with charcoal center on the conversion of large areas of land to charcoal production.
+Many of the problems identified with biochar center on the conversion of large areas of land to charcoal production.
 An open letter signed by a variety of NGOs from across the world warns against large-scale production of charcoal as “a new big threat to people, land, and ecosystems.” It says that converting large areas of land to produce charcoal “poses a major threat to biodiversity and ecosystems that play an essential role in stabilising and regulating the climate and are necessary to ensure food and water security” and “threatens the livelihoods of many communities, including indigenous peoples.”<ref>“[http://home.snafu.de/watchin/Biochar_eng.htm 'Biochar', a new big threat to people, land, and ecosystems],” open letter, 8 April 2009</ref>

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 An article for Links, an Australian journal, says that including industrially produced charcoal in carbon trading schemes would have disastrous effects on food security in the developing world: “An assured world market for biochar would turn the substance into an internationally traded commodity. Biochar is non-perishable and easily transported; give it a further boost by allotting it carbon credits, and producing it for export would in all likelihood yield better profits in developing world settings than growing food crops.”<ref>Renfrey Clarke, “[http://links.org.au/node/1060 Biochar: An answer to global warming or a menace?]” Links, 21 May 2009</ref>
-Effects of industrial scale charcoal plantations on biodiversity have also attracted criticism. Chris Goodall suggests that biochar plantations could maintain a profusion of animals and plants in the forests that would be cleared by planting a mixture of fast-growing species, rather than a monoculture.<ref>Chris Goodall, Ten Technologies to Save the Planet, Green Profile, 2008, pp. 227-228</ref> But the Amazon ecologist Philip Fearnside says that a mixture does "not substantially change the impact of very large-scale plantations from the standpoint of biodiversity".<ref>Philip M. Fearnside, “[http://www.wrm.org.uy/plantations/material/pulping.html Tropical Silvicultural Plantations as a Means of Sequestering Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide]”, 1993, quoted in Ricardo Carrere and Larry Lohmann, Pulping the South: Industrial Tree Plantations in the World Paper Economy, Zed Books, 1996</ref>
+Effects of industrial scale charcoal plantations on biodiversity have also attracted criticism. Chris Goodall suggests that biochar plantations could maintain a profusion of animals and plants in the forests that would be cleared by planting a mixture of fast-growing species, rather than a monoculture.<ref>Chris Goodall, Ten Technologies to Save the Planet, Green Profile, 2008, pp. 227-228</ref> But the Amazon ecologist Philip Fearnside says that a mixture does "not substantially change the impact of very large-scale plantations from the standpoint of biodiversity".<ref>Philip M. Fearnside, "Tropical Silvicultural Plantations as a Means of Sequestering Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide", mimeo, Manaus, 29 June 1993.</ref>
 ==Resources==

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 An article for Links, an Australian journal, says that including industrially produced charcoal in carbon trading schemes would have disastrous effects on food security in the developing world: “An assured world market for biochar would turn the substance into an internationally traded commodity. Biochar is non-perishable and easily transported; give it a further boost by allotting it carbon credits, and producing it for export would in all likelihood yield better profits in developing world settings than growing food crops.”<ref>Renfrey Clarke, “[http://links.org.au/node/1060 Biochar: An answer to global warming or a menace?]” Links, 21 May 2009</ref>
-Effects of industrial scale charcoal plantations on biodiversity have also attracted criticism. Chris Goodall suggests that biochar plantations could maintain a profusion of animals and plants in the forests that would be cleared by planting a mixture of fast-growing species, rather than a monoculture.<ref>Chris Goodall, Ten Technologies to Save the Planet, Green Profile, 2008, pp. 227-228</ref> But the Amazon ecologist Philip Fearnside says that a mixture does "not substantially change the impact of very large-scale plantations from the standpoint of biodiversity".<ref>Philip M. Fearnside, “[http://www.wrm.org.uy/plantations/material/pulping.html Tropical Silvicultural Plantations as a Means of Sequestering Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide]”, 1993, quoted in Ricardo Carrere and Larry Lohmann, Pulping the South: Industrial Tree Plantations in the World Paper Economy, World Rainforest Movement</ref>
+Effects of industrial scale charcoal plantations on biodiversity have also attracted criticism. Chris Goodall suggests that biochar plantations could maintain a profusion of animals and plants in the forests that would be cleared by planting a mixture of fast-growing species, rather than a monoculture.<ref>Chris Goodall, Ten Technologies to Save the Planet, Green Profile, 2008, pp. 227-228</ref> But the Amazon ecologist Philip Fearnside says that a mixture does "not substantially change the impact of very large-scale plantations from the standpoint of biodiversity".<ref>Philip M. Fearnside, “[http://www.wrm.org.uy/plantations/material/pulping.html Tropical Silvicultural Plantations as a Means of Sequestering Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide]”, 1993, quoted in Ricardo Carrere and Larry Lohmann, Pulping the South: Industrial Tree Plantations in the World Paper Economy, Zed Books, 1996</ref>
 ==Resources==

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 Biofuelwatch agrees, saying that just as there are “no large quantities of wastes and residues lying around unclaimed” for use as feedstock, nor are there “vast expanses of ‘marginal and idle’ lands.”<ref>Almuth Ernsting and Rachel Smolker, “[http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/docs/biocharbriefing.pdf Biochar for Climate Change Mitigation: Fact or Fiction?]”, Biofuelwatch, February 2009, p. 8</ref>  Biofuelwatch warns that such terminology dangerously excludes land uses that are not seen as contributing to global financial markets even though they are crucial to the livelihoods of small farmers and rural peoples.<ref>Almuth Ernsting and Rachel Smolker, “[http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/docs/biocharbriefing.pdf Biochar for Climate Change Mitigation: Fact or Fiction?]”, Biofuelwatch, February 2009, p. 8</ref>
-An article for Links, an Australian journal, says that including industrially produced charcoal in carbon trading schemes would have disastrous effects on food security in the developing world: “An assured world market for biochar would turn the substance into an internationally traded commodity. Biochar is non-perishable and easily transported; give it a further boost by allotting it carbon credits, and producing it for export would in all likelihood yield better profits in developing world settings than growing food crops.”
+An article for Links, an Australian journal, says that including industrially produced charcoal in carbon trading schemes would have disastrous effects on food security in the developing world: “An assured world market for biochar would turn the substance into an internationally traded commodity. Biochar is non-perishable and easily transported; give it a further boost by allotting it carbon credits, and producing it for export would in all likelihood yield better profits in developing world settings than growing food crops.”<ref>Renfrey Clarke, “[http://links.org.au/node/1060 Biochar: An answer to global warming or a menace?]” Links, 21 May 2009</ref>
 Effects of industrial scale charcoal plantations on biodiversity have also attracted criticism. Chris Goodall suggests that biochar plantations could maintain a profusion of animals and plants in the forests that would be cleared by planting a mixture of fast-growing species, rather than a monoculture.  But Monbiot cites the Amazon ecologist Philip Fearnside’s view that a mixture does "not substantially change the impact of very large-scale plantations from the standpoint of biodiversity".

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 Read suggests that new charcoal plantations be created on "land on which the occupants are not engaged in economic activity". Read and Carbonscape call such lands “degraded”. Monbiot is skeptical, saying that this term means “land used by subsistence farmers, pastoralists, hunters and gatherers and anyone else who isn't producing commodities for the mass market: poorly defended people whose rights and title can be disregarded.”<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref>
-Biofuelwatch agrees, saying that just as there are “no large quantities of wastes and residues lying around unclaimed” for use as feedstock, nor are there “vast expanses of ‘marginal and idle’ lands.”  Biofuelwatch warns that such terminology dangerously excludes land uses that are not seen as contributing to global financial markets even though they are crucial to the livelihoods of small farmers and rural peoples.
+Biofuelwatch agrees, saying that just as there are “no large quantities of wastes and residues lying around unclaimed” for use as feedstock, nor are there “vast expanses of ‘marginal and idle’ lands.”<ref>Almuth Ernsting and Rachel Smolker, “[http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/docs/biocharbriefing.pdf Biochar for Climate Change Mitigation: Fact or Fiction?]”, Biofuelwatch, February 2009, p. 8</ref>  Biofuelwatch warns that such terminology dangerously excludes land uses that are not seen as contributing to global financial markets even though they are crucial to the livelihoods of small farmers and rural peoples.<ref>Almuth Ernsting and Rachel Smolker, “[http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/docs/biocharbriefing.pdf Biochar for Climate Change Mitigation: Fact or Fiction?]”, Biofuelwatch, February 2009, p. 8</ref>
 An article for Links, an Australian journal, says that including industrially produced charcoal in carbon trading schemes would have disastrous effects on food security in the developing world: “An assured world market for biochar would turn the substance into an internationally traded commodity. Biochar is non-perishable and easily transported; give it a further boost by allotting it carbon credits, and producing it for export would in all likelihood yield better profits in developing world settings than growing food crops.”

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 Such plans are seriously being put forward. Carbonscape, a company that hopes to be among the first to commercialise charcoal production, talks of planting 930m hectares for charcoal. The energy lecturer and biochar proponent Peter Read proposes new biomass plantations of trees and sugar covering 1.4bn hectares.<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref> The problem is, the world’s total cropland only comes to 1.36 billion hectares. If Read’s plan were followed, Monbiot writes, “we would either have to replace all the world's crops with biomass plantations, causing instant global famine, or double the cropped area, trashing most of the remaining natural habitats.”<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref>
-Read was one of the promoters of first-generation liquid biofuels, which played a major role in the rise in the price of food in 2008, causing food shortages worldwide. Monbiot, who sees biochar as the next disastrous techno-fix in the pipeline, asks, “Have these people learned nothing?”
+Read was one of the promoters of first-generation liquid biofuels, which played a major role in the rise in the price of food in 2008, causing food shortages worldwide. Monbiot, who sees biochar as the next disastrous techno-fix in the pipeline, asks, “Have these people learned nothing?”<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref>
-Read suggests that new charcoal plantations be created on "land on which the occupants are not engaged in economic activity". Read and Carbonscape call such lands “degraded”. Monbiot is skeptical, saying that this term means “land used by subsistence farmers, pastoralists, hunters and gatherers and anyone else who isn't producing commodities for the mass market: poorly defended people whose rights and title can be disregarded.”
+Read suggests that new charcoal plantations be created on "land on which the occupants are not engaged in economic activity". Read and Carbonscape call such lands “degraded”. Monbiot is skeptical, saying that this term means “land used by subsistence farmers, pastoralists, hunters and gatherers and anyone else who isn't producing commodities for the mass market: poorly defended people whose rights and title can be disregarded.”<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref>
 Biofuelwatch agrees, saying that just as there are “no large quantities of wastes and residues lying around unclaimed” for use as feedstock, nor are there “vast expanses of ‘marginal and idle’ lands.”  Biofuelwatch warns that such terminology dangerously excludes land uses that are not seen as contributing to global financial markets even though they are crucial to the livelihoods of small farmers and rural peoples.

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 One of the most influential critics of charcoal has been the journalist George Monbiot. He writes scathingly of Chris Goodall’s book Ten Technologies to Save the Planet, which champions large-scale charcoal production as one of those ten technologies: “[Goodall] abandons his usual scepticism and proposes we turn 200m hectares of ‘forests, savannah and croplands’ into biochar plantations. Thus we would increase carbon uptake by grubbing up ‘wooded areas containing slow-growing trees’ (that is, natural forest) and planting ‘faster growing species’.” Monbiot asks, “This is environmentalism?”<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref>
-Such plans are seriously being put forward. Carbonscape, a company that hopes to be among the first to commercialise charcoal production, talks of planting 930m hectares for charcoal. The energy lecturer and biochar proponent Peter Read proposes new biomass plantations of trees and sugar covering 1.4bn hectares.  The problem is, the world’s total cropland only comes to 1.36 billion hectares. If Read’s plan were followed, Monbiot writes, “we would either have to replace all the world's crops with biomass plantations, causing instant global famine, or double the cropped area, trashing most of the remaining natural habitats.”
+Such plans are seriously being put forward. Carbonscape, a company that hopes to be among the first to commercialise charcoal production, talks of planting 930m hectares for charcoal. The energy lecturer and biochar proponent Peter Read proposes new biomass plantations of trees and sugar covering 1.4bn hectares.<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref> The problem is, the world’s total cropland only comes to 1.36 billion hectares. If Read’s plan were followed, Monbiot writes, “we would either have to replace all the world's crops with biomass plantations, causing instant global famine, or double the cropped area, trashing most of the remaining natural habitats.”<ref>George Monbiot, “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/george-monbiot-climate-change-biochar Woodchips with everything. It's the Atkins plan of the low-carbon world],” The Guardian, 24 March 2009</ref>
 Read was one of the promoters of first-generation liquid biofuels, which played a major role in the rise in the price of food in 2008, causing food shortages worldwide. Monbiot, who sees biochar as the next disastrous techno-fix in the pipeline, asks, “Have these people learned nothing?”