Here's the link.

Pro fossil energy policies (both sides of Gov)->More approvals of fossil expansions and new fossil projects->more fossil mining eg.coal mines, offshore gas and land-based fracking->more domestic use of fossil (though some is imported) and fossil exports (world's third largest fossil exporter)->more fossil combustion domestically and overseas->CO2 increase in climate system->increased climate change/global heating->environmental change and extreme weather patterns->eg. Damage or destruction of naturally occurring freshwater sources (rainfall, lakes, glaciers, rivers, streams, groundwater, wetlands and more)->water insecurity eg.potable water for drinking, sanitation (leading to more water-borne and other disease), growing systems and more...

but there is a new 5 point strategy offered by the 'Global Commission on the Economics of Water'. (1)

What can be done in Oz?

Why not pull the 'water trigger' that still could be pulled on a number of current and future fossil projects? Alternatively, the ol' 'Ancient sunlight lever' (blogged previously) could be pulled which could build a moratorium on new fossil fuel project expansions and mines and no more Gov subsidies for existing or new projects. With a Federal 'Just Green Transition' plan, jobs can be found in the renewable energy sector and where reskilling/training is needed for ex fossil workers, it should be free, for the future energy industry/'future of energy'.

Why be distracted from the Global 'Climate Emergency'?

'Water Wars' can happen anywhere! In fact, we've got our own local water wars happening at Beetaloo Basin in the NT (2) where there's escalating fracking development and the Doongmabulla Springs in QLD (3) where there's the Carmichael coal mine that's poisoning the Springs and draining the water. There's also the Murray-Darling basin, which has been fought over since Federation (a favourite topic of mine at Flinders University). Water is not just a precious resource for survival but is deemed Sacred by many Indigenous peoples for probably as long as human existence. More recently, by Non-Indigenous farmers, which includes my family for 7 generations in Victoria and more than 300 years in Ireland. Though, there was land clearing that happened but that's a whole new can of worms.

Desertification expansion is predicted with global average temperature increases above 1.5 degrees with a small likelihood of increasing to around 4 degrees Celsius and 'stabilising' which would be a disaster for all living species.

I'm on a 'Sustainable adaptation' mission to harvest water via 'Carbon negative' Biochar technology from the atmosphere (Atmospheric Water Harvesting), polluted or brackish water or even from seawater. Biochar has some remarkable properties in addition to permanent Carbon Removal that makes it a highly suitable candidate for these applications including a high (variable) surface area that is hydrophilic with a very high (also variable) Water Holding Capacity and robust solar thermal/absorber properties for steam generation, water pipe heating etc. I suggest trawling the Internet, including frontiersin.org and researchgate.net/search and mdpi.com (and more) to update your knowledge on this broad topic.

Maybe you could design and build something and share it with the world?

Decentralised and distributed floating/stationary green methanol production hubs for offshore maritime vessel fuel refilling. Why methanol? Methanol has the potential to be a 'C neutral' fuel used in fuel cells to power electric engines.

How could the methanol production process be powered?
- floating wind, wave and solar offshore energy production

https://noviocean.energy/technology/
- powering and integrated with a floating/stationary platform for

• 'Direct Ocean Capture' (DOC) of CO2 (MIT)

• direct seawater electrolysis for green H2 (various electrode tech/systems available)

• methanol formation combining the CO2 and H2->CH3OH

Alternatively, there could be a direct solar-powered process producing methanol directly from seawater

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/er.4627

How could it work?

- maritime vessel refuelling offshore, possibly in harbours eg.floating rafts or en route along a shipping lane at ?abandoned oil rigs or artificial islands with probably more options too!

NOTES

Probably better than the kelp biomass pellet/TLUD idea previously blogged.

Could open up more shipping routes.

Could use smaller freight ships with less range.

'Fill her up with green methanol?'

If you can refuel planes in the sky, why not ships at sea?

This idea, though half-baked but I believe conceptually gold, could solve many logistics problems.

Maybe anything could be moved anywhere while being globalisation agnostic. But ideally, problems could be solved with In Situ Resource/Renewables Utilisation but in many cases a combination of global logistics and ISRU would be needed.

Regarding biochar kiln logistics, for eg., what is the most efficient way/route to export 'Green steel' eg. Corten from South Australia into Bolivia via Northern Chile?

In the case of corten, at the source, the corten could be produced from greener mining eg.machinery electrification, and green steel production eg.Green Hydrogen magnetite reduction, along the trade route, the fuel used is 'green methanol', at the destination, a fabricator makes a kiln (local jobs), eg., a Flame Cap 'Algorithm' Panel Kiln, and the biochar is produced in the kiln In Situ/on location where the waste biomass is located (minimal biochar logistics Carbon footprint).

OR POSSIBLY EVEN BETTER

Another application of the noviocean tech could be for maritime vessel (eg.electric powered catamaran with SSBs) battery charging in harbours or even further out, integrated with floating offshore wind energy platform tech, using again, a combination of wind, solar and wave energy but for temporary vessel docking and charging. For eg., anyone fancy an electric catamaran ride around Australia? Or even for public transport or tourism links along smaller distances, not necessarily just between capital cities. A network of the floating renewable energy hubs/recharge points could be built around the country's coastline - a lot of investment would be needed but if it worked - Awesome!! And that's just Australia...please get in touch if you're interested.

For now, that's the best I got.

“Biochar is a form of biomass that has been thermally decomposed in an oxygen-limited environment. Its potential to enhance crop yields, bolster plant disease resistance, detoxify soil, and sequester carbon is well documented.”(1) And that’s just for farmers...

I started researching biochar in 2009 at Byron Bay in NSW, Australia while studying a Diploma in Permaculture which I completed in 2010. What fascinated me the most about it was it’s almost ‘magical’ properties – even at that early stage of world biochar research, there seemed to be unlimited potential with an exponentially growing list of applications eg. water filtration, growing systems, hard infrastructure, Carbon fibre, PV cells, solid state batteries, thermal storage etc. The list is still growing. But – having trained in medical and environmental science in a former life, over the following years I tried to science out these ‘magical’ properties and demystify this Carbon-based and ‘Carbon negative’ material of the future which can help combat climate change.

What makes biochar special? As it turns out, there are many chemical and physical properties in variable combinations of importance depending on the biochar. But one specific property caught my attention – surface area. There seemed to be an improvement of biochar efficacy eg.adsorption, electron transfer etc. in a number of biochar materials chemistry research papers I have read over the years when the surface area of a specific biochar is higher than it’s competitors in the study - but not always.

Firstly, to be clear, the surface area of a piece of biochar is irregular and forms a ‘3D hierachical biochar matrix’ down to the nanoscale level. There are micropores (less than 2nm), mesopores (2nm to 50nm) and macropores (greater than 50nm) across the surface which greatly contribute to the overall surface area. This allows for great adsorptive capacities and also allows small dimension molecules, such as gases and solvents, to be absorbed(2). Although numbers greatly vary, the overall surface area of 1 gram of biochar could be anything from 300m2 upwards. In a kelp battery study(3), an activated Carbon electrode (which could be fabricated from biochar feedstock with subsequent activation) was built with 4425 m2 per gram surface area. Incredible (though I couldn’t find the specific species of ‘brown macroalgae’ in the paper). Fast growing and Carbon sequestering hemp and bamboo are also promising candidates. The advantage for soil applications is the enormous variety of microbes and fungi that can find shelter and mine resources in the pores. The surface is also hydrophilic or ‘water loving’. In fact, some biochar can adsorb more than 10 times it’s weight in water – but there is a a fuzzy logic around ‘Water Holding Capacity’ (WHC), which is affected by different soil types/hydraulics and surface area. The general increase of WHC with biochar is great for growing systems as this water is conveniently slow released – essentially, a primitive form of irrigation, though there is also the issue of ‘plant available water’ which is too complex to explain in this article. Then there’s dye removal, heavy metal removal, pesticide and herbicide removal, toxin removal and more – many chemicals love to bond on to the surface chemistry of the biochar. There are many different binding/bonding sites on the surface. The nature of these binding sites also varies between biochars. It partly depends on the chemical characteristics of the soil that biomass is grown which sucks up minerals during the plant’s life and after pyrolysis (breakdown and volatilisation of the biomass under heat, which can take place in limited or no oxygen), those minerals are locked into the ‘3D hierarchical biochar matrix’ of the surface and many provide unique binding sites. The number of these binding sites will also vary between pieces of biochar. So, it seems there are a few variables in play here: surface area, type of binding sites and the number of binding sites. Every piece of biochar is unique!

So, if surface area is so beneficial, how can it be increased? The most simple way is to burn the biomass with a low moisture content (MC) <15% in a stove or kiln that is energy efficient so the biomass burns at a high ‘Highest Temperature Treatment’ (HTT) eg. 750 degrees or even hotter (in the case of controllable pyrolysis temperatures in some continuous biochar kilns) though there are other variables too. But, there is a trade-off here – the higher the temperature of the stove or kiln, the lower the ‘mass yield’ (the yield of biochar mass after a burn). So, as a biochar maker, also known as a ‘Charista’ you need to make a choice – higher surface area V higher mass yield? How can you choose, well, it depends on the application! For eg., air and water filtration work more effectively with higher surface areas (indeed, there are many ‘activated Carbons’ that exploit this property). Most growing systems that I’ve researched and invented or adapted operate well with a trade-off between surface area and mass yield using mainly Kon-Tiki biochar kilns (using ‘flame cap’ operating software) and Top-Lit UpDraft (TLUD) stoves for biochar production(4). I’m now developing a new kiln called the ‘Flame Cap ‘Algorithm’ Panel Kiln’ with expandable volume, minimal feedstock processing and easy logistics. If abundance of biomass is not an issue, then go for a higher surface area by drying out your biomass as much as possible below 15% MC but the mass yield will be lower. This should cover many applications – I don’t remember ever reading a statement or conclusion that listed high surface area of biochar as a disadvantage for a given application.

In conclusion, although there may be many new terms introduced in this article, I hope I have enticed you to do more research about biochar – especially it’s high surface area property. Biochar has proven durability in the field in the past with ‘Terra Preta’ (Dark Earth) and a massive Carbon removal potential with a 100 million years ‘half life’ if it meets the 'Inertinite Benchmark of Random Reflectance' >2% (5) . Crystallisation of phytoliths/plant stones/plant opals/PhytOCs could be a major factor here for permanence too. Biochar applications are growing exponentially year by year. I think it’s difficult to screw up Civilisation with biochar if it's feedstock is using biomass waste that would have otherwise released Carbon emissions. Biochar Civilisation could advance with ‘sustainable adaptation’ to climate change using 'Carbon removal' as it's key. I say, research, design, build, test, develop and commercialise as many biochar making technologies and applications as possible and help save ‘Planet A’!

REFERENCES

1. Joseph, S. and Taylor, P., ‘A farmer’s guide to the production, use, and application of biochar’, 2024, ANZBIG, p.12

2. Lehmann, J & Joseph, S, ‘Biochar for Environmental Management: Science, Technology and Implementation’(2nd Edition), 2015, p.95 (note: 3rd edition is now available)

3. Zeng, J, Wei, L and Guo, X, ‘Bio-inspired high-performance solid-state supercapacitors with the electrolyte, separator, binder and electrodes entirely from kelp’, 2017, Journal of Materials Chemistry A, p.1

4. www.permachar.net

5. Sanei, H, Rudra, A, et al, 'Assessing biochar’s permanence: An inertinite benchmark', 2024, International Journal of Coal Geology, p.1

Just had a period of reflection about where biochar could go in the future. Here are some of my points of interest...

• Remove Carbon from the atmosphere converting biomass waste to biochar with, eg., Kon-Tiki 'Essential' (KTE), Flame Cap 'Algorithm' Panel Kiln (FCAPK), Navigator Stove TLUD series etc.
• 'In Situ Biochar Utilisation in a Cascade of Uses' (ISBUCU) eg. Air filtration->Water filtration->Sanitation->Growing systems (Biochar produced on site used in a cascade of uses with minimal logistics C footprint moving around biochar)
• Save money with less inputs for the same or higher yield eg. Growing systems (less water, fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides), construction, such as 'hempcharcrete' preformed panels etc.
• Cool the Planet and make money with 'Carbon Dioxide Removal' (CDR) credits (or different acronyms depending on the 'Carbon Removal Marketplace' (CRM) platform of choice)
• Feelin' great knowing that you're helping 'Save the Planet' (and your conscience)
• Avoid 'Carbon tunnel vision' with practically unlimited economic applications and integrations aka:
• Integrate the applications for 'Regenerative Integrated Circular Bioregions' (RICB)

What stove and kiln tech could be used for ISBUCU and RICB?  
    - The small/ISBUCU scale could use the TLUD stoves for biochar  
    - The small scale to medium scale could use the KTEs (a flame cap cone kiln) or other ideas, such as the 'Ring of Fire' (a flame cap tube kiln)  
    - The medium scale could use the yet-to-be-built Flame Cap 'Algorithm' Panel Kiln (with expandable volume and minimal feedstock processing)  
    - The large/RICB scale could use continuous pyrolysis kilns eg.rotary or conveyer, with cogeneration for process heat (feedstock drying, space heating etc.) and heat to power (ORCs, Stirling engines, TEGs etc.)

RICB

A network of RICBs within National boundaries could be built as an objective for a just green transition to more closely integrate ecology and some, but not all, physical economy. Basically - a system within a system, or rather, holarchies within holarchy, like running a second horse for an insurance policy against global inflation and recession (possibly caused by a range of factors including climate change, war, pandemic, cyber attacks, general AI sentience, quantum computing (Shor's algorithm) etc.). I predict the system would have greater economic complexity/diversity, stability and sustainability than the present physical economy, with a combination of Traditional approaches eg. First Nation's 'Care for Country' (which includes a spiritual dimension) and contemporary 'Environmental Management' approaches, with some overlap, for water management and conservation to increase climate resilience and preparation for climate-related disasters (and whatever else). Regenerative agriculture, agroforestry, forestry, horticulture, permaculture and other industries/stakeholders could play into it too. A prototype of a bioregion was built in South Australia, known as the AMLR NRM board, but was shut down in SA on 1/7/2020. A map of bioregions could be used as a basis for the system found here:
https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/land/nrs/science/ibra
but ultimately every existing system or 'overlay' will crossover and interact between RICB boundaries. I consider each RICB as a multi-functional cluster that would be both competitive and collaborative with other RICBs in the network.  A flat management hierarchy with representatives from every RICB in communication could be implemented. The tricky bit is how this system could integrate with the Federation and local Gov in Oz and what resources could be allocated to achieve it's goals.

Bioregional Integrations

Scalable appropriate technology ideas, can flow from the small to the large and the large eg.bags of biochar from Council green waste, sewage and crop processing waste eg.hemp; food and medicine (grown in biochar), building materials eg.hempcharcrete, bamboo etc. to supplement the small if it can't be produced/not efficient to produce at the household scale. Circularity of biochar could include using crop waste to produce biochar to grow more crops with more crop waste converted to more biochar... - regenerative motion around the circle! How many regenerative circular cascades of uses of biochar can you imagine? Some cascades for biochar will ultimately end in permanent and linear C sinks eg.buildings, paths, roads etc. - but not all.

Steel

For every logistics problem there is a solution. If it moves, it uses energy and probably, at this point in time in Oz, with a C footprint. Steel, essential for stove and kiln production at this point in time anywhere, can be produced in Oz but it has to compete on the world market.

https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/iron-steel/reporter/aus

Or - could 'Green steel independence' (similar to real 'Energy independence') be achieved in Oz, given that we have more iron ore and renewable energy than we could ever use? Could be a question for a future blog.

Kiln selection

It's not just the available biomass waste/biochar quantity requirements that determine the scale of pyrolysis kilns/machines needed. It's the application - possibly in a cascade of uses, directly/indirectly (after inoculation with nutrients, minerals, microbes and fungus) applied to the fields or integrated with other systems and/or technologies.

There's also an increasing number of specialised kilns for a specific feedstock.

Advanced biochar-based materials may also require specialised kilns.

So, the pyrolysis kiln tech is now in muddy waters.

I'm now moving along the track of embedded operating software for custom stove and kiln hardware.

You are welcome to contact me on the 'Contact' page for an initial free kiln consult and we can talk shop.

That's all for now :)

I started my biochar kiln journey July 2015 with a modified version of Kelpie Wilson's pyramid kiln with 3mm mild steel and top folds. I caught the biochar bug and wanted to make more of it so I reverse engineered Hans-Peter Schmidt's and Dr Paul Taylor's 'Kon-Tiki' 1.2m kiln also in July 2015, using 3mm mild steel. I wanted a kiln with less weight that could be easily moved around so I designed and built my first flatpacked 'Flat-Tiki' V4 biochar kiln in September 2015, based on the Kon-Tiki truncated cone kiln but in a hexagon which I called 'Hybrid', as the bottom could be expanded by digging a central pit.

In July 2017, I designed and built the 'Flat Modular Biochar Kiln' after designing and using a number of other 'Flame Cap' biochar kilns. This kiln would be better, I assured myself with the ability to expand the volume and flatpack modular panels for easy logistics. After a few burns, I realised the ends were too wide and the ends and sides possibly too low. The truncation/area of earth between the side panels of the kiln was too wide too. I didn't have the money to build a new one so I went on to design and build the Oregon 'Hybrid' in August 2017, based on Kelpie Wilson's 'Oregon' kiln and  Flat-Tiki 'Carbon' in Ocober 2017 with higher sides and basically a flatpacked hexagonal truncated cone, similar to the Kon-Tiki cone kilns and compared to Flat-Tiki V4, a larger volume, thicker steel (initally 2mm mild steel with top folds that majorly warped) and a tab and slot system - an improvement over the Flat-Tiki V4. After a couple versions of 'Carbon', I worked out that I needed 3mm steel with higher minimum yield strength so I went to HW350 structural Corten/'weathering' steel. The steel worked great but the panels were too heavy for one person operation - as it was just me operating it, I gave up. A similar concept was used in Nepal where there were more people, usually in villages, to manage the panels eg. assembly and disassembly. Octagonal flatpacked Kon-Tiki cone kilns were popular due to their logistics mobility and used bolted external folds for easy assembly and durability as these are external to the fire cavity.

I went back to Kon-Tiki cone kilns - I was still trying to solve the logistics problem, so I designed a new variation of the original Kon-Tiki 1.2m kiln I designed and built in 2015 and updated the steel to 3mm HW350, put it on wheels with a tipping cradle and called it a Kon-Tiki 'Rolls', a double entendre on wheels and being a premium product like a Rolls Royce car which I thought would drive sales. I sold a couple of them but the problem was no available, large enough, cheap enough and flame retardant castor wheels. Suspension could have worked well but ultimately too much cost. There were many supply chains. The cone tipping feature was also a little unstable. The logistics problem also wasn't solved moving the kiln on and off my trailer, with ramps, which still required 2 people to move - I had to ask my neighbour to help me unload for the first time so it ended up becoming a stationary kiln - not what I had intended it to be.

I then went back to a stripped down Kon-Tiki 1.2m kiln I called the Kon-Tiki 'Essential' designed in March 2022 with Dr Paul Taylor and built in July 2022, with a view of stationary use but could be loaded onto a trailer if needed by two people. The costs were still high for manufacturing but the integrated system I designed around the KTE (see 'Kon-Tiki 'Essential' (KTE) latest system' web page) works almost perfectly for gardeners, including me. I even made the drain optional to reduce cost and went for a Galvanised heat shield that was cheaper than HW350 but was durable and light enough to do the job. It's been on the market for a couple of years but not much interest though they're still available for purchase (and work great).

In July 2024 this year, Dr. Paul Anderson, also known as 'Dr TLUD' (a pioneer of the Top-Lit UpDraft movement) contacted me. I had just finished testing a new design of Navigator TLUD stoves and burners so was excited to hear from him. He contacted me because he had found design work on my website, under the page of 'Bamboo Biochar Kiln' at permachar.net, that he classified as a 'Panel Kiln' and was interested to talk about it as he had also been doing design work and research into panel kilns earlier in the year. He also found photos of the 'Flat Modular Biochar Kiln' on the internet without a source so I pointed it out to him that it and the concept had been documented (though light on detail) on my website 7 years ago. This got the conversation started.

We got talking about the benefits of what I now called 'Flame Cap Panel Kilns', in agreement with his nomenclature for the purpose of marketing and design communication. He had uncovered the main application for panel kilns which I hadn't made the connection to - on field biochar production (which I had previously given up on with the Kon-Tiki cone kilns until I was inspired by the 'Plant Village' Prosopis woody weed to biochar project in Kenya earlier in the year for the X-Prize 'Carbon Removal' contest). Then the penny dropped - the physical scalability/expandability potential of a panel kiln (with one or many units of custom lengths and volumes) is huge which could be very appropriate for large windrows or piles of field biomass waste. This was enough to get me hooked again on expandable, flatpacked and modular 'Flame Cap Panel kilns' so, with Dr TLUD, designed a kiln together called the 'Algorithm' flame cap panel kiln. It was basically a 'Bamboo Biochar Kiln' but built from 3 standard (HW350, with minimum yield strength of 350MPa) sheets, for a basic test unit also with optional length expansion and possible truncation for more volume - the panels were larger and roughly 4 foot/1.2 metre panels which could be stacked on a standard pallet (1165x1165 in Australia), for shipping new kilns and with or without a pallet for moving the kilns between jobs/sites eg., the panels would also easily fit on a a 6' by 6' or 8' trailer or ute - perfect for the Barossa Valley wine region (where I'm based) and other wine region logistics in Australia, and possibly overseas in many other wine regions.

*Future possibilities*
But the dream doesn't stop there. We're talking about many different biomass feedstock (waste) types from different plant-based industries could be used in the 'Algorithm' (and other panel kilns made from what Dr TLUD calls 'Obtainium' - 'whatever steel you can get' though there are some safety issues with this for certain alloys, eg.Zincalume in Australia, which can only be heated to 200 degrees C before releasing toxic emissions, Lead (Pb) based paint (uncommon), galv Zinc (Zn) welding 'Metal Fume Fever' which can be managed with good ventilation and a respirator etc., with less feedstock processing than a Kon-Tiki cone/flatpacked cone kiln due to it's expandable length (perfect for long bamboo culms and limb wood), and easier logistics. Emissions evaluated in the article 'Emissions and Char Quality of Flame-Curtain "Kon Tiki" Kilns for Farmer-Scale Charcoal/Biochar Production' (Cornelissen, G et al, 2016) shows that flame cap/'flame curtain' operation produce 'relatively low emissions'. In other words, a farmer/gardener could have all the benefits of a flame cap/'flame curtain' panel kiln with relatively low emissions compared to some other kiln types (helped if the biomass has a moisture content (MC) of less than 15%), though I would like to get emissions testing done for the 'Algorithm' kiln when I can afford to do so just to be certain given this idea could go viral like the Kon-Tiki kilns did.

Some of the biomass (preferably waste) feedstock types could include bamboo (around the world), forestry/agroforestry waste (around the world), woody weeds eg.Prosopis (Namibia, Kenya and elsewhere), olive trees (Adelaide Hills, Australia) etc.; straw eg.rice (India, Thailand and elsewhere), wheat, sorghum etc.; hemp stems (around the world), vine prunings and vine wood (wine regions), coffee plant prunings (coffee regions), orchard prunings (many places) and more!
 
So, the next steps are building the 'Algorithm' panel kiln test unit, testing it, developing it and commercialising it (many business model options) for the Australian market.
Anyone interested in getting involved in an R&D cluster for the 'Algorithm' in Australia (or anywhere that can access the same steel) please get in touch so we can compare the results with a standard test unit, refining the design and maybe achieve something worth sharing with the world, possibly commercially with an open source and decentralised approach to manufacturing.

I'm a writer and applied scientist.

Natural gas is a C emission delivery technology that directly contributes to climate change which is a National security risk. A question begs asking:
 It is in Australia's National interest to promote and develop alternative renewable energy sources that don't emit C emissions into the atmosphere which warm the Planet and ocean surface temperature causing coral bleaching, temperature stratification and also eventually gets sucked up by the ocean, the major C sink on the Planet and acidify it further destroying the marine web of life?

6 forseeable options with the E coast natural gas crisis
- natural gas reserve (owned by the Gov)
- fossil C export tax

-a rethink of 'Energy Independence', eg. the old argument for fossil subsidies, attune to US$10.5 trillion last year around the world last year (according to the IMF if you can find the figure), is based on the need to grow domestic fossil energy production for energy independence BUT in Australia we export most of it so it's a dead argument - unless you're talking about renewable energy produced and consumed domestically. Renewable energy 'hybrid' business models with domestic consumption and exports, such as the Sun Cable Project and Twiggy's Green Hydrogen (which he's scaling back mainly due to a plummet of Iron Ore prices) are valid approaches to 'almost' renewable energy demand domestically and overseas demand...when I say 'almost' there's promised solar power from Sun Cable to the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct (read: unnatural methane fracking operation) in the Beetaloo Basin plus transmission losses along the cable(s) plus a C logistics footprint for Green Hydrogen shifted around Oz and exports too. Maybe In Situ Renewables Utilisation (ISRU), when it's possible, is the winner for 'Energy Independence'?
- electrification and biomass to biochar TLUD campaign

- no natural gas disconnection fees (price gouging)
- natural gas industry dogma is called out for what it is...methane is not a transition fuel...it's an old and obsolete fossil energy source that won't go away anytime soon unless public policy turns on it's head

BUT here we have a problem. No major political party will launch a 'Just Green Transition' for a consistent renewable energy agenda for harvesting wild energies that are everywhere and stored with battery storage using green chemistry for grid firming (as opposed to inappropriate baseload power eg.nuclear)

The problem is science literacy. It's easy to be surrounded by political propaganda and disinformation but reality bites - although the Hon Peter Dutton believes in nuclear fission energy, it's out of date (unless you're talking about submarines and some spacecraft) tech and too many potholes. I'm tuning out of the mass media. Do we really need to be talking about this until the next election? Waste of everyone's time. Delay and more delay with no renewable energy target. Renewables win on cost, budget blow outs and are shovel ready. The only thing that will change with solar is increases in efficiency, which may end up being a tandem perovskite/Silicon cell with a special coating configuration (37% efficiency has been achieved) but needs a green chemistry and simple fabrication, possibly roll to roll. Battery chemistry is also being updated on almost a daily basis - but the concept of the battery is proven in the field for renewable energy storage and will probably be solid state in the future which could use Sodium harvested from desalination brine to produce Na-air SSBs with long duration and energy density quickly improving incrementally. We need batteries for grid firming. Wind is evolving too. Biomass to biochar is Carbon negative with heat capture to power possible. Running out of time for more action in the best direction we can possibly take it.

Here we go again - only different this time...the 'Desert Rose' 4WD - basically, an updated  'Troopie' for diesel-free driving in 'The Outback'
- Oz electric engine
    - efficient

    - modular (so you can pull it apart and put it back together and replace 3D printed parts if needed)

    - lightweight

    - small form factor

    - durable
    - Oz metal powders for 3D printing
    - ?Oz electronics
    - easily maintained with some training
- massless/structural C fibre battery (using hemp Biochar feedstock) https://sinonus.com/#Solution with C based 2D/3D perovskite flexible solar PV cells overlaid
- Oz structural steel for the exoskeleton
- separate circuit for comms
- similar form factor to a 'Troopie' but less top heavy
- compatible with a solar perovskite blanket for additional (and faster) PV charging while stationary
- Biochar filled rubber tyres
- hemp filler for panel insulation
- roof racks (no changes)
- front coil or leaf and rear leaf suspension (no changes)

Alternatively, maybe there's an electromodding sweet spot for an old electronics-free Land Rover 4WD but it might not come cheap...

https://www.jauntmotors.com/series

A large fossil Carbon 'Export tax' for 'Greentech' manufacturing

• more wealth kept in Australia from our fossil resource (rather than transferring wealth to regions or Countries with Carbon import taxes eg. EU and more to come)
• a reboot of Oz manufacturing (in decline since 2007 according to ASPI) for the climate, renewable energy and housing emergencies
• a more sustainable, resilient and future proofed economy for War and Peace
• a reduced business case for the fossil mining export model which will also shore up domestic supply (short of a National reserve for coal or natural gas)
• more finance for Greentech startups, manufacturing apprenticeships, Industry 4.0 machinery (which we could possibly manufacture in the future), possible wage subsidies for manufacturing operations
• more finance for materials research, development and commercialisation that can feed into a range of industries
• • priority plant industries with multiple economic uses, low or no freshwater growing requirements, low or no agricultural inputs, fast growing, fast and high CO2 sequestration such as hemp, macroalgae (kelp), microalgae and bamboo for 'Carbon neutral' and 'Carbon negative' (biochar based) building materials and many other applications
  • Carbon/biochar based materials and use of Oz minerals eg.doped biochar, for a range of Greentech applications eg.solar PV panels, batteries, water treatment, Hydrogen storage, Carbon fibre (transport, massless/structural batteries) etc.
  • With more funding for chemical engineering at Oz Universities, learning issues like these could be answered:
  • • What would be the best metal eg.Mn to dope (?'high Silicon' bamboo) biochar for a Metal-Organic Framework (MOF) to store and release Hydrogen at room temperature and pressure?
    • What would be the best ?quantum C based 'new material' to simultaneously convert sunlight to electricity and store it? Basically, a massless/structural solar panel and battery all rolled into one material.
  • If the above two questions could be answered, with more funding for mechanical and electrical engineering at Oz Universities, a learning issue like this could be asked
  • • What electrical engines could be built for:
    • • Hydrogen fuel cells?
      • The 'new material'?
  • I'm at the biochar hardware backend. Who wants to move this forward?

Climate change is a time war. It's main opponent is the fossil industry 'extinction machine' but still pretty handy in some applications where there are no affordable green alternatives during the 'Just green transition' ATM. This can change! So, how much time left do we have to build a 'Fossil Free Civilization'? What could it look like? How much will it cost? Who will pay for it?

Here's some discussion points

      -fossil fuel is the main source of C pollution warming the Earth's climate system leading to the 6th Great      Mass Extinction event
    - most Countries are dependent on fossil as their main energy source
    - more Countries, mainly developing ones, are getting hooked on a fossil future which Australia is helping (We're the world's third largest fossil exporter). We need to help these Countries, including our own, to leapfrog fossil addiction and build renewable energy solutions

    - a climate Exodus is expected. A billion climate refugees for every 1 degree Celsius increase of average global atmospheric warming since 1850-1900. Are we ready to play our part?

    - https://www.unicef.org/wash/water-scarcity

How much do we value our future groundwater resource? The expanded water trigger is now in doubt with recently proposed watered down environmental laws...
    - renewable energy sources are everywhere
    - many renewable energy technologies are mature
    - many more renewable energy technologies are in the pipeline
    - many of these technologies will fail commercially
    - Gov subsidies are best spent on startups and not spent propping up existing fossil or renewable energy companies that would otherwise have been commercially uncompetitive. However, I'm not opposed to PPP's with renewable energy companies providing grid energy products

     - liquid fossil fuels and green fuels for transport should not be Gov subsidized or taxed. Let the market decide for a level playing field for logistics which is disruptive but could heal the divisions. Who knows, maybe better electrified alternatives will be found?

- domestic fossil fuel production shouldn't be subsidised...if the fossil Corporations need our money, they should be out of the game
    - large tax increases on domestic fossil fuel production could subsidise manufacturing for and building of green housing (an economic CPU), with many materials built from biochar feedstock

  - value adding the 'critical' mineral and plant (hemp, bamboo, macroalgae (kelp), microalgae and acacias) industries could be a manufacturing and economic winner, especially for green housing but also for food and nutrition products

    - A CO2 import and export industry proposed by AEP with ALP interest is the most ridiculous and unsustainable idea I have ever heard (CCS doesn't work, CO2 can be converted to or added to other products and materials, CO2 aquifer storage acidifies groundwater, logistics of moving CO2 around the world has a high C footprint)
    - time is of the essence to Research, Design, Build, Test, Develop, Commercialise renewable tech
    - Australia can be an energy thought leader and manufacturing model with supportive policy and effective incentives and disincentives

    - Green energy supply is only half the problem. The other half is energy demand implying that energy efficiency should also take a prominent role as well in the future of energy policy for pragmatic action. But, there are many excellent DIY options on the ground independent of policy, such as an energy efficient and unpowered 'Carbon negative' TLUD stove eg.Navigator stove 'Backpacker' or Kon-Tiki kiln eg.KTE that both produce biochar -> a 'critical' material and feedstock for other C based materials
    - trade imbalance is here aka we import more than we export
    - economic complexity/diversity is immature
    - The Trans-Pacific Partnership will increase imports and increase the chance of Gov litigation (ISDS clauses) if we block imports and affect Corporate bottom lines BUT there could be some advantages if we fire up manufacturing BUT it would need to be top tier because the Oz cost of labour can't compete with most of Asia
    - the space industry needs a lot more moula if we want to take that top tier advantage but sustainable solutions need to be built from the grassroots and up too
    - the fun stuff...the apptech and greentech that has, is and could be deployed

There's definitely options which may be inconvenient for some parties. What more can I say? The smartphone revolution has increased transparency across the board. Anyone worth their salt knows Carbon neutrality is political fantasy (though initally galvanised some climate action after Paris) given how much C has been released into the atmosphere by three consecutive Industrial Revolutions. C removal is now becoming the main agenda with new CRM operations popping up all around the world. Maybe Industry 4.0 can get it right for a 'fossil free Civilisation' but there's a lot more to it than just industry. Every energy transaction counts.

In 1989, H.T.Odum, an American ecologist, described humans as playing a central role on the Earth and that the "human is the biosphere's programmatic and pragmatic information processor for maximum performance". 

Go figure...