[Terrapreta] Sustained Biochar

[Kevin Chisholm]

Dear Sean

May I suggest the following viewpoint?

Terra Preta is in its early infancy. Making Terra Preta by primitive 
means will only permit processing of a tiny fraction of the suggested 23 
billion tonnes per year of biomass. In order to process a significant 
fraction of teh 23 billion tonnes/yr, "advanced means" will be employed. 
Thus, the small amount of GHG's produced in connection with "primitive 
Terra Preta production" are not a problem.

That make sense?

Best wishes,

Kevin

Sean K. Barry wrote:
> Hi Jeff, Kevin, et al.
>  
> Burning or charring small amounts of biomass, per say, will not change 
> GHG amounts much, nor effect the already in progress global climate, 
> hardly at all.  However, the scope of making Terra Preta from enough 
> charcoal to effect a change in GHG amounts, or even more importantly, to 
> reverse the trend of growth in the amounts of GHG to a reduction, is 
> just enormous.  It's absolutely mind boggling to think of charring 23 
> billion tons of biomass every year to keep up with our current worldwide 
> output of carbon into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels?!
>  
> Now, in reality, making charcoal "by any means", for the purposes of 
> doing TP research will NOT be a problem in the present.  In the future, 
> when we need to make 23 billion tons a year of charcoal, that is also 
> when we must address the GHG emissions and pollutants coming from the 
> production of charcoal.
>  
> If we attempt to use make Terra Preta soils and charcoal, on this kind 
> of worldwide scale, as an attempted "global climate mitigation 
> strategy", then whatever biomass-to-charcoal reactors are used, they 
> cannot simultaneously produce the enormous amount of charcoal we would 
> need and add exponentially to an already exponentially growing GHG 
> problem.  That I think is something most would agree with.
>  
> The focus of the discussion too, in this thread, is on a proposed 
> "global climate mitigation aspect of Terra Preta".  Some in the 
> discussion now, are maybe more focused with the agricultural benefits 
> aspect of Terra Preta.  Both are at a research level.  There are NO 
> clearly defined practices developed from working scientific theories 
> about TP yet.  None, for either making charcoal, a certain way, or for 
> using charcoal in soil to get the agricultrual benefits of TP soil.   It 
> is worthwhile for everyone to stay "open-minded" about all which we do 
> discuss here and to join in on discussions when you are interested or 
> focused on that aspect of TP.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> SKB
>  
> 
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Jeff Davis <mailto:jeff0124 at velocity.net>
>     *To:* Kevin Chisholm <mailto:kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
>     *Cc:* Sean K. Barry <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com> ; Miles Tom
>     <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, August 29, 2007 4:14 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Sustained Biochar
> 
>     Kevin wrote:
>      > Certainly, charring with full use of the retort or pyrolysis gases is
>      > best, but I would presently appear to me that any form of char
>      > production for Terra Preta is better than allowing the biomass to
>      > decompose naturally, from the standpoint of GHG impact.
> 
>     Daer All,
> 
>     Primitive man has been burning and making charcoal for thousands of
>     years
>     without global warming, so to say. Only in the last one hundred
>     years has
>     man become highly educated enough to destroy the environment and knows
>     enough to blame it on old practices.
> 
> 
>     Just an interesting point,
> 
> 
>     Jeff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     -- 
>     Jeff Davis
> 
>     Some where 20 miles south of Lake Erie, USA
>