[Terrapreta] Field and Nursery Trials
Jim Joyner
jimstoytn at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 25 12:09:21 EST 2007
Thanks Sean. I'll certainly keep that in mind.
In my 35 years of farming and gardening, nothing has excited me so about growing (and I've tried a lot of snake oil!). Even now, with as little as I know about Terra Preta, I'm telling every one I know to read about TP, that it is the coming real thing.
Jim
----- Original Message ----
From: Sean K. Barry <sean.barry at juno.com>
To: Jim Joyner <jimstoytn at yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 9:16:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Field and Nursery Trials
v\:* {
}
o\:* {
}
w\:* {
}
.shape {
}
<!--
_filtered {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
_filtered {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman", "serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{font-family:"Calibri", "sans-serif";color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{font-size:10.0pt;}
_filtered {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{}
-->
Hi Jim,
Thanks for this post. It sounds to me like you have some valuable
experience, very creative and promising ideas (SARE grants), and some abiding
interest in making Terra Preta work for you. I hope you may find ways to
get projects started and if ever I could help, please let me know how?
Regards,
SKB
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom Miles
To: 'Jim Joyner' ; terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 12:49
PM
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] FIeld and
Nursery Trials
Jim,
You
may not have received Richard's reply to you before you replied.
He said, "Our charcoal dosage was to bring
total carbon (OM + added charcoal ) to something less than 10%. We determined
this to be a maximum dose and not a dose for large scale application." He'll
provide the first year report to the list when it is complete. The plots have
been replanted with no additional charcoal and the test is ongoing for the
next 1-3 years.
If you go back through the field trials by the various
Cornell and U Beyreuth researchers you'll find that most applications land in
the 1-10 mt/ha range. U Beyreuth found that most of the Amazonian soils
were 3C% or less. 10% is considered a maximum. See Julie Majors poster on arid
soils in Columbia etc. Most of these are linked on the TP site. They are all
listed and linked on the Cornell and EPRIDA sites.
The question remains of how much charcoal is required in a
particular soil in combination with other nutrients for a marginal gain of a
specific agronomic value such as yield, fertilizer reduction,
inoculation/healthy, etc. General formulas may apply as a baseline but if
there is value in terra preta agronomists will test the variations for
centuries to come.
We look forward to seeing what you finally decide to put in
the ground.
Tom
From:
terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org
[mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Jim
Joyner
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 10:04 AM
To:
terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] FIeld and
Nursery Trials
Tom, Let's see, 30 gallons (assuming 231 cu inches per
gallon) is about 4 cu ft or 52 pounds for 85 sq feet, which is about 13 tons
an acre. Be interesting to know how they arrived at that rate. It still looks
like there response was positive.
Sean, I guess I don't understand why
(Cornell) aimed at yield on nitrogen fixing beans. They didn't explain. Maybe
if one doesn't have a history of soil responses, that is the best one can do.
I too would start with legumes just to try to build up nitrogen, to see what
effect there would be on nitrogen or how much net nitrogen I could generate.
But I think it is the following crops that really count.
If we can get
agriculture to the point we only have to replace the nutrients in the food
we've taken out, that is a very efficient agriculture. The delusion we
live with in modern agriculture is that NPK is all it takes to grow food, that
we are not mining other things out of the soil.
In my experience I've
applied as much as 200 tons of compost per acre, not so much for nutrient but
to try to get the carbon and CEC up so it would hold the nutrient. And, it
will, for a while. But then over the years (even with no-till) the carbon in
the soil will literally burns off so that no matter how much nutrient I put in
the soil, it is wasted because the soil can't hold it. It just washes away.
This has been the bane of the organic farmer particularly in the
south.
If, due to charcoal's crystalline structure (or some other
magical quality), it persists, the whole game of agriculture has changed. I'm
guessing, of course, but it might well be something like the paradigm shift as
occurred after WWII with chemical farming.
But I digress.
I
suspect, with proper amount of nutrients, one could grow in pure charcoal --
don't know why anyone would want to, but it could be done. My guess is that
the maximum quantity per acre has more to do with economics than the
soil or even the crop.
I find it interesting that terra preta
can be meters deep. Plants do move elements around in the soil. By having a
loosed subsoil without pans, roots will take carbon down year after year, but
I doubt that accounts for the pictures of the black soil so deep. (It's just
hard to think about a 2 thousand year time horizon.)
Meters deep
charcoal clearly would not be economical. It would not be harmful, and even
though there would be some benefits in having biochar so deep, those benefits
could be accomplished better and cheaper in other ways. For example, in Guam,
after a super typhoon, we buried palm trees in land that was replanted with
fruit trees. In Missouri we buried saw dust up to a depth of 6 feet (in the
sub soil) before planting grapes. Both worked great for giving the plants a
store of moisture and showed clear benefits over planting without. And the
biomass can take decades or longer to go away.
I think, generally, it
would be better to put charcoal in the soil in one shot rather many. First,
the expense of doing it, not including the charcoal, is significant. Second,
often such tillage or plowing is two steps forward and one back as there can
be a loss of erosion control and the loss of soil structure itself.
BTW, has anyone considered the SARE (Sustainable Agriculture Research
and Education) program? They give out completive grants every year for both
research and education. Their grants can be in the hundreds of thousands $ and
for multi-year projects. They even have up to $10,000 grower and graduate
student grants for demonstrations and just good ideas.
The thing about
terra preta research, it wouldn't seem that any one would be threatened. Until
they became trendy we had a terrible time getting funding for anything
"organic" because some private university funders (read chemical companies)
did everything they could to stop them. But , it seems TP has something for
everyone. I mean, even if it lowered the per acre use of chemicals for
conventional farmers, it would still probably make agriculture as a whole,
grow. It might even make up for the loss of the obscene subsidies large
American farmers get (at least I hope they lose
them).
Jim
Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside
Yahoo! Mail. See
how.
_______________________________________________
Terrapreta
mailing
list
Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071125/7058f9d7/attachment.html
More information about the Terrapreta
mailing list