[Terrapreta] Farm Produced Biochar

[Sean K. Barry]

Hi Tom,

You said this ...

> Compare this with high speed field collection and packaging into uniform
> bales with low average moisture content; processing in a stationary device
> where you have automated fuel and char handling and control of the process;
> you can capture the gaseous effluents like nitrogen; and have a concentrated
> dense char  product that can be injected in the field in whatever
> concentration you need. If I'm running the plant I'll take the stationary
> process any day.

I agree.  But why can't this process be done at field side?  Where is the economic advantage to transporting the biomass to a plant and the charcoal back from the plant?  Why can't a plant of this type be built on a truck skid (or skids) and made to work?  Is the economy of scale too large?

SKB
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tom Miles<mailto:tmiles at trmiles.com> 
  To: 'Gerald Van Koeverden'<mailto:vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca> 
  Cc: 'terra preta'<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> 
  Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 8:34 PM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Farm Produced Biochar


  Gerrit,

  The field presents some formidable challenges even for direct combustion as
  we discovered building mobile field sanitizers. Our largest machines were 35
  ft wide by 35 ft long (10.7 m x 10.7 m). They   travelled at about 1.5 mph
  (2.4 km/hr) which was determined by the time that it takes to convert a damp
  solid to a dry solid, solid to gas, and burn the gas, then burnout the char.
  We used the straw itself as fuel and used no auxiliary fuel. We consumed
  about 12 tons/hr of straw stubble at 2 t/acre (4.5 mt/ha). Travel time over
  a single spot was about 10-12 seconds. Due to the moisture in the ground and
  the insulating properties of the soil the ground temperature was typically
  not more than 200 F (93C) even though we consumed all the straw and burned
  it completely at 1500-1800F (815-980C). At 6 acres/hr it took 17 hours to
  sanitize a 100 acre field. The small machines covered 3 acres per hour. Each
  machine required a tractor to pull it and a separate tractor pulling a tank
  of water for fire control. There is a wide variation in field conditions
  even when you have removed the excess straw. You have occupied two people,
  and two machines to process 12 tons of straw per hour. And you have the
  weather.  

  Now think of doing the same work picking up the straw from with an 8 ft (2.5
  m) swath or a 35 ft row (10.7 m). To partially burn the straw and char it
  you will need heavier equipment by possibly three times what we used due to
  the air control, refractory insulation, etc. And you will need to re-inject
  the biochar across a 35 ft path unless the injection is a secondary
  operation. It is likely that you would reinject the 2 t/a (4.5 mt/ha) in
  concentrated rows as they did in Australia in the Oil Mallee project so it
  probably would be a separate operation.

  Compare this with high speed field collection and packaging into uniform
  bales with low average moisture content; processing in a stationary device
  where you have automated fuel and char handling and control of the process;
  you can capture the gaseous effluents like nitrogen; and have a concentrated
  dense char  product that can be injected in the field in whatever
  concentration you need. If I'm running the plant I'll take the stationary
  process any day.

  The value of the biochar will drive what can be done on the farm. We have
  not established that value yet and that should be our priority. For the time
  being we can assume that the biochar comes from heaven. We must ask how much
  do we use on what crops and with what expected results?

  Tom                 


     

    
  > -----Original Message-----
  > From: Gerald Van Koeverden [mailto:vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca]
  > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 3:53 PM
  > To: Tom Miles
  > Cc: 'terra preta'
  > Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Farm Produced Biochar
  > 
  > Just a wild idea...this sounds crazy...in fact the whole idea is
  > ridiculous...
  > 
  > I keep thinking about the difference between a mobile pyrolysis unit
  > vs. a fixed one in terms of making char out of field residues.
  > Actually, both require field biomass, eg. corn stover, to be baled
  > and brought to a point, and then later picked up again and re-
  > distributed on the field.  It would be much neater, if we could
  > justify a simple charring unit solely for char production, but only
  > if there is a flow through process such that one could drive through
  > the field towing this unit, continually processing crop residues as
  > one is driving, and spreading the char as it goes....Now that would
  > be a real "mobile" charring unit!
  > 
  > But I would have no idea how to make this actually work!  Even if it
  > is possible, it probably be much too expensive of an idea!
  > 
  > Just dreaming,
  > Gerrit


  _______________________________________________
  Terrapreta mailing list
  Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/>
  http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org<http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/>
  http://info.bioenergylists.org<http://info.bioenergylists.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20070817/2a1e8d80/attachment.html