About hydrochar: a recap
Twenty-five-plus-one newsletters in, it's time to take a look back and add a bit of structure to our writings so far.
About hydrochar is switching to a biweekly schedule so we can launch the German newsletter for the act4carbon initiative we started recently, with the goal of synchronizing the English and German editions.
This is a good opportunity to recap and summarize our previous editions, twenty-five so far plus an introduction on what “About hydrochar” is all about, split into the technology, the economics, and the politics of carbon.
We started out with a very brief primer on what hydrochar and hydrothermal carbonization are about, and why we like them so much.
Resources, processes, and uses
One of the first, still most important questions we asked (and answered) was why tackle carbon rather than carbon dioxide? One big reason is the dizzying array of things we can do with hydrochar, like turning flowers into charcoal or carbon-negative Christmas trees.
We looked at the spectrum of possibilities that takes us from biomass to hydrochar and beyond.
We talked about inputs, like what to do with plastic waste, the whole cycle in from biomass to hydrochar and beyond. We talked about a variety of outputs like about phosphorus, about hydrogen, and about biogas. And we talked about end uses like remoorestation: recreating peatlands with hydrochar.
Another question we asked (and answered) was about biochar, hydrochar, or both?
The economics of carbon
Showing that hydrochar is an attractive ecological proposition is only the starting point. A key question we had to ask (and answer) was Is hydrochar economically feasible? For this, we drew up the hydrochar value cycle and showed how stakeholders can benefit from innovation in a future Internet of Carbon.
We used the Christmas tree example to calculate some basic economics of char-based carbon capture, how carbon markets account for thick air and how we can establish markets to safeguard carbon integrity.
The politics of carbon
Inevitably, beyond the ecology and economics, we also had to address the politics of carbon to cleanly separate climate action from actionism, and cognitive dissonance lest we end up with vanity projects that are as feasible as a cement-filled airframe.
The COP 26 conference got us to think about how to go from Glasgow to Delhi to Sharm El-Sheikh, and the impending war about what a bad time it is to play with fire.
And finally, we announced our own plans to move from thinking to acting about carbon.
The German newsletter will pick up and expand on many of those topics, and while we reduce the frequency of the English newsletter, we still look forward to capturing the exciting new developments on the hydrochar front, and our own attempts to navigate and promote them.