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

[Sean K. Barry]

Hi Edward,

I've read what you said here and it brings me to ask a question.  The original makers of Terra Preta soil in the Amazon did not have the kind of tools that you have to make charcoal.  Clearly, they (all of them) could not have come up with the same "innovative carbonization thermal process" that you have developed.  So, the question I have for you is ... "How could they have may charcoal suitable for TP and what process did they use?"  They are the only ones who actually did succeed (provably so) in making Terra Preta soils work.  And another question I have for you ... Are you absolutely sure that the residual tars left on conventional low temperature charcoal are toxic to all living things; toxic to all animals, plants, and/or all soil microorganisms?  

Regards,

SKB
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Edward Someus<mailto:edward at terrenum.net> 
  To: Nikolaus Foidl<mailto:nfoidl at desa.com.bo> ; Gerald Van Koeverden<mailto:vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca> ; Sean K. Barry<mailto:sean.barry at juno.com> 
  Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> 
  Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 11:42 PM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] torrefaction vs. Carbonization --------- Char Hydrophobic / Hydrophilic characters


        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<http://www.nvirocleantech.com/> 
        <http://www.vertustechnologies.com/>
        -------Original Message-------

        From: Sean K. Barry<mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>
        Date: 2007.12.09. 6:22:14
        To: Nikolaus Foidl<mailto:nfoidl at desa.com.bo>;  Gerald Van Koeverden<mailto:vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca>
        Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto: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<mailto:vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca> 
        To: Nikolaus Foidl<mailto:nfoidl at desa.com.bo> 
        Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto: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<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/>

        _______________________________________________
        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/20071209/027bff51/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/20071209/027bff51/attachment.jpe