Economics of biochar/pyrolysis

Add a Comment

Comment by Lawrence Carson on August 20, 2009 at 9:16am

I am very ... very interested in gaining access to "ANY" business model proposed to date on bio char use in agricultural settings. What are the variable production costs ... and what are the Variable Nutrient Utilization Yield metrics? Or ... if a farmer uses bio char in his crops ... what is the Dollar yield differential (or plant production differential) with all else being the same? (crop A with and crop B without biochar)

Anyone that knows of anyone that may be able to partially address these questions ... and would send me who I might contact ... would be deeply appreciated.
L Carson
Boise, ID - USA

Comment by Leon Young on March 13, 2009 at 1:47pm

Michael, you raise a very important topic. There has already been significant discussion about the current structure of the CPRS negating any positive effects of individual actions. But perhaps the bigger issue is that the structure of the CPRS negates any positive effects carried out by parties outside of the CPRS. Unless I am misunderstanding something, this means not just individuals, but industry sectors that aren't, at least initially, included in the CPRS.

A case in point is Primary Industry. Farmers have a vital role to play in increasing levels of soil carbon. Biochar technology is an example of something that could be implemented that is a winner on so many levels. Putting carbon back into the soil not only reduces atmospheric carbon levels but increases soil quality and farm productivity. And it can be done using agricultural bi-product. Why isn't there more R&D going into this?

Well for the very reason you point out, the CPRS as it currently stands won't offer sufficient financial rewards for the various parties. By leaving primary industry out of the CPRS for 3 years, there is limited incentive for the industry to get involved in any low carbon technologies now. This will limit research not only into biochar, but also into areas such as lowering methane emissions from livestock and the most simple solution of them all, particularly for marginal farms, planting more trees. Farmers must be wondering, are we better off to wait for 3 years before we start to move, to ensure that we are rewarded for our positive actions? This flows on into the technology sector and its ability to attract R&D and commercialisation funds.

Now I'm not suggesting for a moment that we bring primary industry and other industries directly into the CPRS early. This is too difficult for everyone. But how about a mechanism that properly rewards improvements outside of the CPRS, and doesn't just pass on the benefit of those improvements to the companies within the CPRS?

It seems to me we have a very simple structural flaw in the CPRS that needs rectifying. Given all the talent and experience we have amongst our network members, surely someone can suggest a simple mechanism to solve this issue?