[Terrapreta] torrefaction vs. Carbonization --------- Char Hydrophobic / Hydrophilic characters

[Edward Someus]

TECHNICAL NOTICE ===== Char Hydrophobic / Hydrophilic characters 
 
It is depending on process conditions. Usually the low efficient thermal
processes are leaving high % organic residuals (hydrophobic tars) behind, 
which makes them unsuitable for TP. Most chars are for energy (where tar
residuals are positively utilized) , not only because it is higher priced,
but these hydrophobic chars are not suitable for soil application, not to
talk about the tar residuals high toxicity for soil life. 
 
My char I am producing is hydrophilic as my innovative carbonization thermal
process has been specifically developed for soil adaptation application.  
 
 

Sincerely yours: Edward Someus (environmental engineer)
Terra Humana Clean Tech Ltd. (ISO 9001/ISO 14001)
3R Environmental Technologies Ltd. 
ADDRESS: H-1222 Budapest, Szechenyi 59, Hungary
TEL handy:  +(36-20) 201 7557
TEL / FAX:   +(36-1) 424 0224
TEL SKYPE phone via computer:  Edward Someus
3R TERRACARBON:   http://www.terrenum.net 
3R CLEANCOAL ENERGY: http://www.nvirocleantech.com 
 
-------Original Message-------
 
From: Sean K. Barry
Date: 2007.12.09. 6:22:14
To: Nikolaus Foidl;  Gerald Van Koeverden
Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] torrefaction vs. carbonization
 
Hi Gerrit,
 
Charcoal is hydorphobic.  Charcoal is inert and does not alone absorb
nutrients.
 
Regards,
 
SKB
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Gerald Van Koeverden 
To: Nikolaus Foidl 
Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org 
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 4:20 PM
Subject: [Terrapreta] torrefaction vs. carbonization


Nick,


I had to look up what torrefaction was:


"Torrefaction is mild pre-treatment of any biomass (including bamboo) at a
temperature between
200 and 250° C. During torrefaction the properties of bamboo undergo changes
 wherein the end
product has much better fuel quality compared to biomass for combustion
application. The
decomposition reactions during this process results in bamboo becoming
completely dry and
loose its tenacious structure, also the hygroscopic nature of the biomass is
changed to
hydrophobic material. Besides this, the process increases the calorific
value of the end product.
The actual weight loss in this period would be about 20 to 25 % whereas 90 %
of the energy of
the parent dry material is preserved in the torrefied matter. The combustion
process of this matter
has less problematic volatiles and hence the process is closer to that of
charcoal. It can therefore
be used as an alternate to charcoal in many applications. It also makes the
material immune to
attack by fungi. Hence long term storage without degradation is possible."


Based on 15 minutes of research, it doesn't look promising.  It would seem
that this super-drying of wood makes it hydrophobic...and if it stays that
dry in the soil, it would be difficult for nutrients to move through a soil
solution into it.  Moreover, it doesn't sound like it is conducive for a 
fungal' bridge between itself as a microhabit for microrganisms with the
soil;  in char mixed with composting material, the char actually becomes a
microhabit for fungus...
However, this is only speculation.


How closely have you examined the torrefied wood you have found in the soil?
 Does it 'house' microrganisms?  Has it absorbed soil nutrients?  Or is it
merely an inert material taking up space?


gerrit






On 8-Dec-07, at 2:21 PM, Nikolaus Foidl wrote:


Dear all!


My charcoal costs at a charring efficiency of 42 % is around 35 US$ per ton
Charcoal. Now after analyzing 15 year old soil where huge amounts of forest
where simply burned and charred. Now excavating I find huge amounts of only
torrefied wood pieces which as well did not degrade, like the charcoal
chunks.
Now looking at this and if torrefied wood would do the same as is charcoal,
why not save a huge amount of additional CO2 and just torrefy the stuff and
mill it and then burry it? Cost per ton would drop to half, CO2 taken out of
the atmosphere rise by 50 to 70 %.
Just an idea but maybe worth to be discussed.
Best regards Nikolaus






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

_______________________________________________
Terrapreta mailing list
Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071209/120f9347/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1458 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071209/120f9347/attachment.jpe