We envision a circular usage of Hemp, utilizing all components of the plant to reach an outstanding land use efficiency.
Hemp is a superior food & feed crop for multipurpose circular usage that can significantly aid the transition of agriculture.
However, we can also use any residue feedstock that is available in your region to start generating CO₂-Certificates right now!
Industrial Hemp brings numerous Co-Benefits!
Carbonize your agricultural waste material to create environmental and monetary value.
Understand the bigger picture of our working objectives and dive deeper into the intersection of Hemp and Carbon Dioxide Removal.
Make sure to scroll through our services and frequently asked questions, so that you have a clear understanding of our work.
Every project starts with an overview of your location and economic circumstances so that we can better grasp the potential of working together.
The facts call for an inevitable transition.
According to the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C, "the deployment of CDR to counterbalance hard-to-abate emissions is unavoidable if net-zero CO₂ or greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions are to be achieved". In other words, we are out of budget and all efforts to reduce or avoid emissions will not be enough. We need to incorporate net-negative-emissions activities into our economy to remove, depending on the scenario we will face in the future, up to 21 gigatons of CO₂ per year by 2050. This poses an enormous challenge which can only be mastered collectively.
As the emerging carbon market struggles to find uniformed definitions, the boundaries between the two concepts are often blurry and misunderstood. However, they are clearly to be distinguished. Offsets most commonly refer to emissions reductions or avoidance. Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) principles allow to only sell the net-negative emissions and generally undergo more strict quality measures to ensure the highest integrity:
Permanence: How long will the CO₂ be safely removed from the atmosphere?
Additionality: Does the CDR activity cause new climate benefits, or would the carbon removal have happened anyway?
Carbon leakage: Are emissions shifted elsewhere because of the CDR activity?
Negativity: How emission-intensive is the CDR process relative to its carbon removal potential?
Verifiability: How is the CO₂ removal monitored and verified?
Co-benefits/risks: What are the consequences for ecosystems, biodiversity, food security, etc.?
Usually, in developed countries only industrial size equipment will be feasible and requires upfront investment into machinery and operational setup, which starts at a few hundred thousand EUR and can easily go up to several million EUR for sophisticated carbon removal parks.
Biochar kilns, on the other hand, are eligible for developing countries that need rural development and the upfront investment can be as low as only a few thousand EUR to get going.
Either way, we assist with scouting adequate project finance for any type of project.
This strongly depends on the complexity and level of sophistication of the project. If the circumstances are favouring, a low-tech project takes a minimum of 3 months time to plan and execute. Building a high-tech project from the ground will take at least 18 months until project kick-off.
The peculiarity about Industrial Hemp is its resource-use-efficiency and the environmental friendliness. Utilizing the maximum potential of the plant will yield food or feed, natural fibres and the Hurd as biochar feedstock. Hemp requires comparably fewer fertilisers, no pesticides, is drought resistant, can cleanse the soil of pollutants, increase soil organic carbon, and can easily mature to a height of 4 meters in only 90 days. The seed have a well-balanced Omega-3 to Omega-6 unsaturated fatty acids profile and protein content of around 22%, making it a viable plant-based protein source that can be farmed in various climatic zones. The fibre, depending on quality, finds various applications such as for building material or textiles. Utilizing the Hurd for biochar will allow circular application and further improve the soil, adding benefits such as water-holding capacity.
Yes, and no. We are aware of the debate of biochar versus building material and believe that the discussion is senseless, because we need both as much as possible! There are some methodological and quality parameter differences between the carbon removal methods of biochar and building material, which determine varying prices per ton of CO₂ removed. Besides the profit structure, whether the available stalk material better suits a biochar, or a building material project, depends on many more variables. Most importantly, the economic and social circumstances of the project location. In some cases, it may provide much more benefit to a rural community to produce biochar from leftover stalk. In other cases, for example, on a larger scale, it could significantly aid the decarbonization of construction in industrial countries. The biochar carbon removal methodologies, measurement, reporting, verification, and demand market is currently more developed than for building material. However, we also work on a solution to push hemp carbon removal based on building materials, so feel free to reach out!