ACT NOW OR WAIT FOR A MIRACLE?
Climate change poses a major challenge to our society. The German per capita CO2 emissions are at an average of 9.6tCO2/a. The worldwide emissions target is between 2.0tCO2/a per capita in 2050. Quite horrifying considering that a holiday flight from Hamburg to Majorca (Spain) already causes emissions of 1.226kgCO2 for one person.
Some are still looking for "the" technical solution that solves this problem for us without having to change our habits. This might be the first problem. Nevertheless different concepts exists to deal with the problem. Just to name a few that have gotten the most attenteion recently. Shading of the atmosphere with giant satellite-like solar sails that are circulating in space around the earth, in order to reduce the solar radiation on our planet and thus reduce the Greenhouse effect. Or air filters, which filter out the CO2 and then enclose 2000m below the ground or the seabed. This is already known wrom industrial CCS systems at coal power plants.
Carbon sequestration through industrial CCS or CO2 air filtration considers the risks associated with safe and permanent storage to be a significant drawback.
CO2 sequestration critics argue that compression can increase heavy metal pollution in aquifers. Furthermore, according to a study carried out at Stanford University, the compression of carbon dioxide has a high likelihood of weak earthquakes. A further disadvantage of this technology is that significant amounts of additional CO2 emissions are generated for capture, transport and compression of CO2. Critics fear that leaks can even increase the CO2 content of the air significantly.
At the same time, decentralized intervention systems already exist, which enable us to significantly reduce our CO2 emissions and athmospheric CO2. Although the effect of individual investments is marginal, the overall potential for impact is enormous.
The energy transition (Energiewende) in Germany, even if it has almost been forgotten, has already shown how much impact a decentralized energy supply based on municipalities and private operators can have. Nonetheless, it is doubtful whether the energy transition had a lasting impact on global CO2 emissions, as the objectives did not go beyond national targets.
THE EMISSION TRANSITION
The complexity of the issue can not be discussed further here, but it should be emphasized that municipalities, farmers, foresters, wastewater treatment plant operators, energy contractors and much more can act now with the combination of existing systems and intervention measures. This has not only a positive impact on greenhouse gas emissions but also on the economic situation of the operators.
The implementation of many decentralized combined measures to reduce CO2 emissions worldwide has the effect of an "Emissions Transition" as a whole.
These measures include the following:
Reduce energy consumption / energy efficiency measures
Regenerative energies (generate and consume)
Compensate CO2 emissions (refforestation)
Biological CCS *
In a BIOMACON machine, heat is generated from biomass. A large proportion of the carbon is decoupled before combustion and therefore can not form CO2. About 1/3 of the total energy is removed from the system with the carbon. In contrast, in the case of biological CO2 sequestration, the loss
*BIOMACON - Biological CCS
of energy associated with the decoupling of carbon is cited as the major drawback by critics.
The use of carbon (biochar) is versatile. Due to its high porosity, this raw material is in demand for water and air treatment as well as for improving soil fertility. Under normal conditions, the carbon is stable for more than 1000 years.
In the case of biological sequestration, logistics takes place via the existing infrastructure.
Only the carbon is transported. One kilogram of carbon binds 3.6 kg of CO2