[Terrapreta] Terrapreta Digest, Vol 9, Issue 6

Christoph Steiner Christoph.Steiner at uni-bayreuth.de
Wed Oct 3 09:13:06 EDT 2007
Previous message: [Terrapreta] Dynamotive to invest $105 million
Next message: [Terrapreta] subscription
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
After a long silence I would like to make a contribution to the discussion:

1)	Methane emissions from traditional charcoal kilns:
This is an important topic.
Burning or composting does cause CO2, CH2 and N2O emissions too. In order
to evaluate the avoided emissions due to charcoal production we need to
consider the alternative uses or &#8220;nonuse&#8221; of biomass as well.
Pro-Natura International has developed a continuous process of pyrolysis
vegetable waste transforming them into charcoal. The process burns the
methane produced as its driving source of energy. This project is a
Small-scale CDM-project and they estimated avoided CH4 emissions per ton
of charcoal at 0.67 tCO2-equivalents (not methane!) replacing the
traditional techniques. One ton of charcoal is approximately 3 tons of
CO2. If this assumption is right the production of charcoal in traditional
kilns would still produce a refractory carbon stock. A non fuel use of
this carbon (agricultural use) would create a sink. I suppose that
composting, mulching or burning of crop residues would cause more
greenhouse gas emissions in the long term.

2)	Charcoal alone does not create a &#8220;Terra Preta&#8221;
This is absolutely right in the &#8220;Terra Preta&#8221; case study.
Worldwide we can find other soils enriched with pyrogenic carbon.
Phosphorus and calcium availability is very limited in the Amazonian
environment. This is not the case in Terra Preta. Some other soils on the
globe contain (naturally or human induced) a lot of phosphorus but are
depleted in soil organic matter (SOM). It is important to value SOM apart
from its possible nutrient contents. SOM maintains good physical, chemical
and biological conditions.

3)	Immobilization of nitrogen &#8211; C/N ratio.
As fresh organic matter (not charcoal) is decomposed, the microbes use 75%
of the carbon for energy and 25% of the carbon is used to form their new
tissue. They require 1kg of N for every 8 kg of carbon as the C/N ratio of
microbes is 8/1. Therefore a C/N ratio of ~ 30 promotes rapid
decomposition of SOM. A wider C/N ratio favors immobilization of available
N. The opposite occurs if the C/N ratio < 30 (C/N ratios: Corn stalks
60/1, cow manure 20/1, Pine Needles 60-100/1, Wood 600/1).
Immobilization does not mean that the N is gone! A declining microbial
biomass releases the N again. It is important to distinguish between
available and total nutrient contents. Immobilization can cause N
deficiencies. In some soils the losses of N due to leaching are very
rapid. In this case the application of mineral N fertilizers is not very
efficient. Microorganisms can represent a large pool of nutrients
especially on less fertile sites. Microorganisms can act as sinks, during
immobilization and sources, during mineralization. Immobilization may
prevent N losses into sub-surface horizons or gaseous losses into the
atmosphere.
But Important: It is questionable how far charcoal-C can be utilized by
microbes and thus favoring N immobilization (if the charcoal C can not be
utilized it does not contribute to the 30/1 ratio or 8/1 microbial tissue
ratio. E. g. a plastic pot does contain lots of carbon but does not
contribute to immobilization as long the plastic is not consumed by the
microbial population). The recalcitrant nature of charcoal and
low-nutrient contents (depending on the type of charcoal, peanut hull
charcoal is very rich in nutrients) makes charcoal itself unlikely to be a
balanced fertilizer, but is important to support a healthy biological
activity.

> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:30:21 -0500
> From: "Sean K. Barry" <sean.barry at juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in
> soil To: "Terrapreta" <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>,	"Jon C. Frank"
> <jon.frank at aglabs.com>
> Message-ID: <AABDSF6FNA7QJCG2 at smtpout01.vgs.untd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Hi Jon,
>
>
> I know that observation and experimentation are the keys to advancing any
> scientific hypothesis into a scientific theory.  We have two independent
> observations of this same phenomenon, Jon!  One from your farmer friend
> and another by Larry Williams view on what he saw in his beets.  I think
> this is great news!  This could make for a really useful scientific
> investigation.  The consensus observation is that charcoal amendments
> alone to soil seems to reduce nitrogen in the soil.
>
> Were these observations of actual measured soil nitrogen losses or are
> they observations of the effect of nitrogen deficiency in the plants,
> i.e. did Larry think the beets looked like they did not get enough
> nitrogen or did he see a measured drop in soil nitrogen content?  It
> might be useful to make a nutrient assay of some sort on the soils to
> determine what the soil nitrogen levels are now.  If there were any
> un-amended (with charcoal) soil controls, then they could also be
> measured for a nitrogen concentration baseline.  Is it possible that what
> has occurred is that the charcoal amendments have made the nitrogen less
> available to the plants (but it is still in the soil)?
>
> Your hypothesis, if I read you correctly, is that the soils are now
> nitrogen deficient and this is due to a loss of the equilibrium or
> natural balance between nitrogen and carbon concentrations in the soil,
> caused by the carbon increase that came with the charcoal?  Would you be
> willing to ask any of the soil scientists at your AgLabs if they could
> propose any possible mechanisms for this?  Maybe it could be a testable
> suggestion?  Maybe we could devise an experiment or a test, which we
> could ask your farmer friend and/or Larry Williams to perform or let
> someone perform on their fields?
>
> I think that for the development of any theory about how or why charcoal
> amendments reduce nitrogen levels or available nitrogen, then it would
> need to come by way of an experimental validation of such a proposed
> mechanism, with results that would be predictable, and repeated at least
> once, the same result from the same test, in two different fields.  The
> proposed mechanism would imply some expected results.  Can we see the
> cause leading to the effect?
>
> I could see, certainly, that if measured nitrogen is now deficient in a
> fields' soils, which had been solely amended with charcoal, that adding
> nitrogen (from any source) would increase the nitrogen concentrations, at
> least temporarily.  If your hypothesis is correct, then would you think
> that the restored nitrogen concentrations would remain restored?  Maybe
> the charcoal causes the nitrogen deficiency and it would remove more
> nitrogen over time if more nitrogen were to be added?
>
> My point is, that consensus "observations" are really just a great
> starting point for determining what is occurring here.  What follows is
> really the meat of scientific work.  From these observations, can we see
> the cause leading to the effect?  If we can, then we are developing a
> theory for what is occurring.  If any hypothesis is correct, then some
> experimental results should be predictable and these will validate the
> cause leading to the effect premise.
>
> We cannot act on mere "observations" and call it a theory, until we can
> expound from those "observations" to predict some expected experimental
> results, and then show repeatable, well-documented, reoccurrence of those
> experiments and results.
>
> Before I repeat myself again...
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jon C. Frank<mailto:jon.frank at aglabs.com>
> To: Terrapreta<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 5:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> The reason I mentioned nitrogen deficiency is because that is what the
> farmer observed and told us when he used charcoal.  We can learn a lot
> form people who observe nature.
>
> How can charcoal lead to an N deficiency?  Not 100% on that but I suspect
> the soil is always trying to come to an equilibrium point in regards to
> Carbon vs. Nitrogen and by adding more carbon the soil needs more
> nitrogen to reach the equilibrium point.  Just my theory.  No Sean I
> won't waste my time trying to validate or invalidate the theory.
>
> To validate all you need to do is look for a nitrogen deficiency.
> Further validation may come from analyzing tissue for nitrogen.  The
> easiest way to do that is to use a field meter such as:
> http://www.specmeters.com/Chlorophyll_Meters/Minolta_SPAD_502_Meter.html<
> http://www.specmeters.com/Chlorophyll_Meters/Minolta_SPAD_502_Meter.html>
>
>
> To prevent this N deficiency put on more nitrogen when using charcoal.
> Not a politically correct answer but it is a great answer when you are a
> consultant and people depend on you to make help them get a good crop.
>
> Jon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean K. Barry [mailto:sean.barry at juno.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 11:49 AM
> To: Terrapreta; Jon C. Frank
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Hi Jon,
>
>
> How could charcoal lead to a nitrogen shortage (in soil is where I
> presume you are speaking of)?  Can you suggest any ways to validate this?
> Can you suggest any ways to prevent this?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jon C. Frank<mailto:jon.frank at aglabs.com>
> To: Terrapreta<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 11:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Just adding charcoal may lead to a nitrogen shortage.
>
>
> Jon
> www.aglabs.com<http://www.aglabs.com/>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org<mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergy
> lists.org> [mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org]On Behalf Of
> Sean K. Barry
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 10:12 AM
> To: Robert Flanagan; Kevin Chisholm
> Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Hi Kevin, Robert,
>
>
> Good questions, Kevin!  Right on point as I see it.  I would maybe add
> one more request, Robert.  4. Could we see if adding just charcoal made
> from the stover on a plot continues to show soil with "... a profound
> effect on plant development with no other soil fertility program".  You
> must be careful that only charcoal made from the wastes on the plot is
> used.  Adding more rice hull charcoal, for instance, would add some
> fertilizing nutrients that were taken from the soil that the rice grew
> in.  Adding new rice hull charcoal would not show the benefits of
> charcoal alone in the soil.
>
> As I see it, the contention in recent discussions has been that charcoal
> made from the plant crop wastes alone (corn stover) on an agricultural
> field, when applied to that field (alone, up to 10 or 50 repeated times)
> is all that is required to increase or maintain the soil fertility.  My
> reading is that this is NOT TRUE.  I do not see that the nutrient content
> can be maintained, as each harvest of the corn cobs will deplete the
> nutrients and the charred stover will add nothing new beyond what was
> there when the crop sprouted.
>
> Adding anything else would not reveal the value of charcoal in the soil.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20071002/a84d5dd5/at
> tachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 21:35:39 -0400
> From: "David Yarrow" <dyarrow at nycap.rr.com>
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in
> soil To: <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Message-ID: <003b01c8055d$b624c6a0$02331d18 at turtle>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> yes, a biological ecosystem will seek a carbon-nitrogen equilibrium.
> both C & N are used in biological architecture and energy exchange, most
> fundamentally to create amino acids, and thence proteins, enzymes, DNA.
>
> dumping cooked, sterile char on any ecosystem will throw the C/N ratio
> way over to C.  a microbial and molecular scramble results as nature
> moves the intruded mass of C toward an equilibrium with N and the rest.
>
> in particular, most of the N that the char soaks up is digested,
> assimilated and organized into microbial protoplasm of bacteria and fungi
> that take up residence in the char micropores.  much of this is N in its
> highest forms -- amino acids, proteins, enzymes, hormones, membranes, DNA
> -- living cellular biomass, not inert rotting organic matter.   the first
> year or two after new char is added to soil, a lot of mineral N will
> disappear into organic N built into biomolecules in living cellular
> protoplasm.
>
> even if we add N to the char -- either by making char from manure, or
> blending N in after char is cooked --  a lag will still occur before N is
> fully available.  the inertias and cycles of feeding, growth,
> replication, distribution, and diversification mean it takes time -- a
> few months -- for biology to digest and re-organize all the chemistry
> left (and added) after the fire of pyrolysis dies.  not only to grow a
> critical biomass of microbes, but to develop the complex independent
> diversified stable community required for single cells to suvive.
>
> we can cut the time for this assimilation and redistribution to occur by
> inoculating and incubating the char before it is broadcast into soil.
>
> one critical goal of this microbiology is to encourage N-fixing bacteria
> to blossom in this burgeoning microbial community.  the more microbes
> there are sequestering N out of air into soil, the faster protein
> synthesis can occur.  it is clear certain trace elements -- especially
> cobalt & molybdenum -- are often the limiting factor in the proliferation
> of N-fixing bacteria and their specialized enzymes.
>
> i recommend sea minerals, seawater, seaweed, sea vegetables and sea salt
> as ideal full spectrum mineral & trace element sources.  good for your
> blood, good for your body, good for your soil.
>
> my two cents.
>
> David Yarrow
> "If yer not forest, yer against us."
> Turtle EyeLand Sanctuary
> 44 Gilligan Road, East Greenbush, NY 12061
> dyarrow at nycap.rr.com www.championtrees.org
www.OnondagaLakePeaceFestival.org
>  www.citizenre.com/dyarrow/ www.farmandfood.org www.SeaAgri.com
>
> "Happiness can be found even in the darkest of times,
> if one only remembers to turn on the light." -Albus Dumbledore
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jon C. Frank
> To: Terrapreta
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 6:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> The reason I mentioned nitrogen deficiency is because that is what the
> farmer observed and told us when he used charcoal.  We can learn a lot
> form people who observe nature.
>
> How can charcoal lead to an N deficiency?  Not 100% on that but I suspect
> the soil is always trying to come to an equilibrium point in regards to
> Carbon vs. Nitrogen and by adding more carbon the soil needs more
> nitrogen to reach the equilibrium point.  Just my theory.  No Sean I
> won't waste my time trying to validate or invalidate the theory.
>
> To validate all you need to do is look for a nitrogen deficiency.
> Further validation may come from analyzing tissue for nitrogen.  The
> easiest way to do that is to use a field meter such as:
> http://www.specmeters.com/Chlorophyll_Meters/Minolta_SPAD_502_Meter.html
>
>
> To prevent this N deficiency put on more nitrogen when using charcoal.
> Not a politically correct answer but it is a great answer when you are a
> consultant and people depend on you to make help them get a good crop.
>
> Jon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean K. Barry [mailto:sean.barry at juno.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 11:49 AM
> To: Terrapreta; Jon C. Frank
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Hi Jon,
>
>
> How could charcoal lead to a nitrogen shortage (in soil is where I
> presume you are speaking of)?  Can you suggest any ways to validate this?
> Can you suggest any ways to prevent this?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jon C. Frank
> To: Terrapreta
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 11:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Just adding charcoal may lead to a nitrogen shortage.
>
>
> Jon
> www.aglabs.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org
> [mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org]On Behalf Of Sean K. Barry
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 10:12 AM
> To: Robert Flanagan; Kevin Chisholm
> Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Hi Kevin, Robert,
>
>
> Good questions, Kevin!  Right on point as I see it.  I would maybe add
> one more request, Robert.  4. Could we see if adding just charcoal made
> from the stover on a plot continues to show soil with "... a profound
> effect on plant development with no other soil fertility program".  You
> must be careful that only charcoal made from the wastes on the plot is
> used.  Adding more rice hull charcoal, for instance, would add some
> fertilizing nutrients that were taken from the soil that the rice grew
> in.  Adding new rice hull charcoal would not show the benefits of
> charcoal alone in the soil.
>
> As I see it, the contention in recent discussions has been that charcoal
> made from the plant crop wastes alone (corn stover) on an agricultural
> field, when applied to that field (alone, up to 10 or 50 repeated times)
> is all that is required to increase or maintain the soil fertility.  My
> reading is that this is NOT TRUE.  I do not see that the nutrient content
> can be maintained, as each harvest of the corn cobs will deplete the
> nutrients and the charred stover will add nothing new beyond what was
> there when the crop sprouted.
>
> Adding anything else would not reveal the value of charcoal in the soil.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20071002/d9c4e7cc/at
> tachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> Hi Sean,
>
>
> No-one is asking you to ?believe more? into this or that, so I don't see
> the need to prove and reinforce the obtuse aspect of academia with so
> many dismissive quote marks. Infinitely more scientific, precisely, to
> ask David in simple phrasing ?what he means by it? (thus helping him to
> develop it) instead of slamming the door onto someone's intuitions just
> because you've never thought, heard, read, etc of anything like it and it
> does not fit within your own perceptions. "Flux field anatomy" may not be
> academically recognized, but it makes very much sense when you start
> thinking in terms of magnetism. This directly leads to biodynamics
> agriculture - hence not a religion but a new-born science, so give it a
> chance, will you. Else you don't stand one chance of interesting this guy
> with his field full of charcoal, and most other people in fact, into
> coming here and do experiments for your mere academic satisfaction. Thank
> you.
>
>
> I ?believe? that these people here
> http://www.livingwaterflowforms.com/livingwater.htm<http://www.livingwate
> rflowforms.com/livingwater.htm> and here
> http://www.stroemungsinstitut.de/prospect.htm<http://www.stroemungsinstit
> ut.de/prospect.htm> (among numerous others) have quite a bit to say about
> what David means. The first one used to have a much more interesting
> section on the research side, unfortunately it's not there anymore. It
> has to do with vibrational nrg, ?an emerging field in medicine, physics,
> and agriculture?
> (http://www.nationalwatercenter.org/vibrational_water.htm<http://www.nati
> onalwatercenter.org/vibrational_water.htm>) and similar notions. It would
> not surprise me at all that these notions be found relevant one way
> or/and another with how biochar interacts with its environment. In fact I
> count on it! :-)
>
> Thank you David for your inspiring stories. Don't stop.
>
>
> Francoise P
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live
> Hotmail<http://www.newhotmail.co.uk/>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20071002/b9a821a4/at
> tachment-0001.html -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/gif
> Size: 1338 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url :
> /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071002/b9a821a4/at
> tachment-0001.gif
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 21:05:58 -0500
> From: "Sean K. Barry" <sean.barry at juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in
> soil To: "David Yarrow" <dyarrow at nycap.rr.com>,
> <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Message-ID: <AABDSF8JHAL2TVL2 at smtpout06.vgs.untd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Hi David,
>
>
> There is lots in what you just said that makes some sense to me right
> away; like, adding charcoal to soil (and hence more carbon) throws off
> the C/N balance.  That lightening bolt came to me probably as it came to
> you.
>
> The charcoal soaks up the nitrogen?  Now that one ... that's interesting
> and not so obvious to me.  How does it do that?  Does the charcoal bind
> up the nitrogen into nitrogen bearing molecules?  Is it the carbon part
> of the charcoal or the VM part that soaks it up?  What are the resulting
> nitrogen bearing compounds?  Are these deep inside the charcoal or on the
> surface?  Are they available to plants (it seems not)?
>
> Oh, this is kind of a paradox I am in here, but I need to ask?  Can I ask
> you questions?  Or, should I just read your stories and presume that you
> know the truth in most ways that I cannot even possibly divine by asking
> my na?ve questions?
>
> I need to go now and deal with (your buddy) Francoise's web site
> references, okay?
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Yarrow<mailto:dyarrow at nycap.rr.com>
> To: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> yes, a biological ecosystem will seek a carbon-nitrogen equilibrium.
> both C & N are used in biological architecture and energy exchange, most
> fundamentally to create amino acids, and thence proteins, enzymes, DNA.
>
> dumping cooked, sterile char on any ecosystem will throw the C/N ratio
> way over to C.  a microbial and molecular scramble results as nature
> moves the intruded mass of C toward an equilibrium with N and the rest.
>
> in particular, most of the N that the char soaks up is digested,
> assimilated and organized into microbial protoplasm of bacteria and fungi
> that take up residence in the char micropores.  much of this is N in its
> highest forms -- amino acids, proteins, enzymes, hormones, membranes, DNA
> -- living cellular biomass, not inert rotting organic matter.   the first
> year or two after new char is added to soil, a lot of mineral N will
> disappear into organic N built into biomolecules in living cellular
> protoplasm.
>
> even if we add N to the char -- either by making char from manure, or
> blending N in after char is cooked --  a lag will still occur before N is
> fully available.  the inertias and cycles of feeding, growth,
> replication, distribution, and diversification mean it takes time -- a
> few months -- for biology to digest and re-organize all the chemistry
> left (and added) after the fire of pyrolysis dies.  not only to grow a
> critical biomass of microbes, but to develop the complex independent
> diversified stable community required for single cells to suvive.
>
> we can cut the time for this assimilation and redistribution to occur by
> inoculating and incubating the char before it is broadcast into soil.
>
> one critical goal of this microbiology is to encourage N-fixing bacteria
> to blossom in this burgeoning microbial community.  the more microbes
> there are sequestering N out of air into soil, the faster protein
> synthesis can occur.  it is clear certain trace elements -- especially
> cobalt & molybdenum -- are often the limiting factor in the proliferation
> of N-fixing bacteria and their specialized enzymes.
>
> i recommend sea minerals, seawater, seaweed, sea vegetables and sea salt
> as ideal full spectrum mineral & trace element sources.  good for your
> blood, good for your body, good for your soil.
>
> my two cents.
>
> David Yarrow
> "If yer not forest, yer against us."
> Turtle EyeLand Sanctuary
> 44 Gilligan Road, East Greenbush, NY 12061
> dyarrow at nycap.rr.com<mailto:dyarrow at nycap.rr.com>
> www.championtrees.org<http://www.championtrees.org/>
> www.OnondagaLakePeaceFestival.org<http://www.onondagalakepeacefestival.org
> />
> www.citizenre.com/dyarrow/<http://www.citizenre.com/dyarrow/>
> www.farmandfood.org<http://www.farmandfood.org/>
> www.SeaAgri.com<http://www.seaagri.com/>
>
>
> "Happiness can be found even in the darkest of times,
> if one only remembers to turn on the light." -Albus Dumbledore
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jon C. Frank<mailto:jon.frank at aglabs.com>
> To: Terrapreta<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 6:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> The reason I mentioned nitrogen deficiency is because that is what the
> farmer observed and told us when he used charcoal.  We can learn a lot
> form people who observe nature.
>
> How can charcoal lead to an N deficiency?  Not 100% on that but I suspect
> the soil is always trying to come to an equilibrium point in regards to
> Carbon vs. Nitrogen and by adding more carbon the soil needs more
> nitrogen to reach the equilibrium point.  Just my theory.  No Sean I
> won't waste my time trying to validate or invalidate the theory.
>
> To validate all you need to do is look for a nitrogen deficiency.
> Further validation may come from analyzing tissue for nitrogen.  The
> easiest way to do that is to use a field meter such as:
> http://www.specmeters.com/Chlorophyll_Meters/Minolta_SPAD_502_Meter.html<
> http://www.specmeters.com/Chlorophyll_Meters/Minolta_SPAD_502_Meter.html>
>
>
> To prevent this N deficiency put on more nitrogen when using charcoal.
> Not a politically correct answer but it is a great answer when you are a
> consultant and people depend on you to make help them get a good crop.
>
> Jon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean K. Barry [mailto:sean.barry at juno.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 11:49 AM
> To: Terrapreta; Jon C. Frank
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Hi Jon,
>
>
> How could charcoal lead to a nitrogen shortage (in soil is where I
> presume you are speaking of)?  Can you suggest any ways to validate this?
> Can you suggest any ways to prevent this?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jon C. Frank<mailto:jon.frank at aglabs.com>
> To: Terrapreta<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 11:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Just adding charcoal may lead to a nitrogen shortage.
>
>
> Jon
> www.aglabs.com<http://www.aglabs.com/>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org<mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergy
> lists.org> [mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org]On Behalf Of
> Sean K. Barry
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 10:12 AM
> To: Robert Flanagan; Kevin Chisholm
> Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Terra Preta - not just about charcoal in soil
>
>
>
> Hi Kevin, Robert,
>
>
> Good questions, Kevin!  Right on point as I see it.  I would maybe add
> one more request, Robert.  4. Could we see if adding just charcoal made
> from the stover on a plot continues to show soil with "... a profound
> effect on plant development with no other soil fertility program".  You
> must be careful that only charcoal made from the wastes on the plot is
> used.  Adding more rice hull charcoal, for instance, would add some
> fertilizing nutrients that were taken from the soil that the rice grew
> in.  Adding new rice hull charcoal would not show the benefits of
> charcoal alone in the soil.
>
> As I see it, the contention in recent discussions has been that charcoal
> made from the plant crop wastes alone (corn stover) on an agricultural
> field, when applied to that field (alone, up to 10 or 50 repeated times)
> is all that is required to increase or maintain the soil fertility.  My
> reading is that this is NOT TRUE.  I do not see that the nutrient content
> can be maintained, as each harvest of the corn cobs will deplete the
> nutrients and the charred stover will add nothing new beyond what was
> there when the crop sprouted.
>
> Adding anything else would not reveal the value of charcoal in the soil.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> SKB
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20071002/9bf5c649/at
> tachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 22:32:48 -0400
> From: "David Yarrow" <dyarrow at nycap.rr.com>
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] flux field anatomy, vibrational nrg
> To: <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> Message-ID: <008401c80565$b0e088c0$02331d18 at turtle>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>
> there comes a time in life when we realize the greatest forces that shape
> our universe are the most subtle, not the biggest, brightest, loudest,.or
> powerful.
>
> so subtle are these creative and formative forces, our technological
> sensors are just becoming aware of them, able to measure them.  like
> detecting pico elements in tissues at parts per trillion.  or detecting
> micro-magnetic flux and microhenries.  can our telescopes yet detect a
> single beam of ancient starlight?
>
> fortunately, human brain and neurosystem is millions of times more
> sensitive than any scientific instrument.  if we can just find where our
> ancestors lost their original instructions for system setup and
> operations manual.......  and maybe some debugging software.......  and a
> training program.....
>
> i realized decades ago man is not the most intelligent life on earth.
> and modern america is not the greatest civilization to appear on earth.
> the most intelligent life is all the life on earth.  and we are just
> returning gain, full circle to full awareness able to understand the
> multi-dimensional nature of the universe.  the ancient chinese and
> egyptians inherited cultures much more sophisticated and wise than the
> current about-to-be-failure called industrial.....
>
> i like the meaningful irony that it's a lost indigenous civilization that
> gave us terra preta culture.  early indications are these ancient
> societiesall understood the land's flux field anatomy.  in the BBC "el
> dorado" documentary, it refers to the straight line "roads" found in the
> western amazon.  certainly the kogi in sierra mountains of venezuela
> north of the amazon knew about the magnetic matrix and flux
> channels........
>
> but all such wild speculatiom aside, i think robert klein is onto
> something imagining an indigenous in-the-field operation to char
> cornstalks.  my imagining sees them tossing thinnings, prunings, mowings,
> and other cuttings into these cornstalk piles.
>
> David Yarrow
> "If yer not forest, yer against us."
> Turtle EyeLand Sanctuary
> 44 Gilligan Road, East Greenbush, NY 12061
> dyarrow at nycap.rr.com www.championtrees.org
www.OnondagaLakePeaceFestival.org
>  www.citizenre.com/dyarrow/ www.farmandfood.org www.SeaAgri.com
>
> "Happiness can be found even in the darkest of times,
> if one only remembers to turn on the light." -Albus Dumbledore
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: francoise precy
> To: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 9:20 PM
> Subject: [Terrapreta] flux field anatomy, vibrational nrg
>
>
>
> Hi Sean,
>
>
> No-one is asking you to ?believe more? into this or that, so I don't see
> the need to prove and reinforce the obtuse aspect of academia with so
> many dismissive quote marks. Infinitely more scientific, precisely, to
> ask David in simple phrasing ?what he means by it? (thus helping him to
> develop it) instead of slamming the door onto someone's intuitions just
> because you've never thought, heard, read, etc of anything like it and it
> does not fit within your own perceptions. "Flux field anatomy" may not be
> academically recognized, but it makes very much sense when you start
> thinking in terms of magnetism. This directly leads to biodynamics
> agriculture - hence not a religion but a new-born science, so give it a
> chance, will you. Else you don't stand one chance of interesting this guy
> with his field full of charcoal, and most other people in fact, into
> coming here and do experiments for your mere academic satisfaction. Thank
> you.
>
>
> I ?believe? that these people here
> http://www.livingwaterflowforms.com/livingwater.htm and here
> http://www.stroemungsinstitut.de/prospect.htm (among numerous others)
> have quite a bit to say about what David means. The first one used to
> have a much more interesting section on the research side, unfortunately
> it's not there anymore. It has to do with vibrational nrg, ?an emerging
> field in medicine, physics, and agriculture?
> (http://www.nationalwatercenter.org/vibrational_water.htm) and similar
> notions. It would not surprise me at all that these notions be found
> relevant one way or/and another with how biochar interacts with its
> environment. In fact I count on it! :-)
>
> Thank you David for your inspiring stories. Don't stop.
>
>
> Francoise P
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20071002/04da2b86/at
> tachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 22:34:52 EDT
> From: Shengar at aol.com
> Subject: [Terrapreta] Dynamotive to invest $105 million
> To: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> Message-ID: <d29.138a3315.343459cc at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
> _Dynamotive  to invest $105 million to develop second-generation biofuel
> and electricity  complexes for rural Argentina _
> (http://biopact.com/2007/10/dynamotive-to-invest-105-million-to.html)
>
>
>
> _http://biopact.com/2007/10/dynamotive-to-invest-105-million-to.html_
> (http://biopact.com/2007/10/dynamotive-to-invest-105-million-to.html)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************** See what's new at
> http://www.aol.com
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071002/0f0ca2dc/at
> tachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 04:58:57 +0200
> From: "ch braun" <brauncch at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Charcoal Specification Development
> To: "code suidae" <codesuidae at gmail.com>
> Cc: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> Message-ID:
> <2ed473cf0710021958rd032c7awd7a69ffaf598d152 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Dear Dave,
>
>
> Thanks a lot for your explanations, it's much clearer now!  And I have
> not much to add or to question, actually. I like the paralllelism between
> charcoal and  cultivation trials. By the way:
>
>> It didn't seem useful to parallel the PyrolysisMethod-PyrolysisEvent
>>
> relationship on the cultivation side. Maybe I'm wrong about that? Would a
> generic 'method' of cultivation experiment make sense? It would help to
> standardize testing, but I'm not sure if it would end up being used in the
> same way unless it were pretty general, like 'small pots' 'large pots',
> '25 sqft plot', etc.
>
>
> To my point of view this could be useful to add a SoilAmendmentMethod...
> especially if we suggest some "standard protocols" later on, that aim at
> allowing different users to test some specific aspects.
>
> Well  for the other open questions you ask, it's hard for me to judge
> what is best, because I have now just started making some charcoal trials
> myself and I think these questions need to be answered by people who have
> really some serious experience in the field and can better determine the
> best level of details which should be reached.
>
>> I'm trying not to go overboard on complexity, but I don't want to set
>>
> it up in such a way that it doesn't represent what people might use it
> for. Generally I end up going overboard anyway :D Well, it's probably hard
> to find a better example of the typical trade-off that exists between
> expressiveness and complexity than such kind of specification! Again, it
> would probably be quite helpful if other experienced testers could give
> their opinion about that!
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Christelle
>
>
>
> On 10/2/07, code suidae <codesuidae at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 10/2/07, ch braun <brauncch at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My main concern is actually about the "Material" part. What are
>>> exactly
>> the
>>> relationships between this class, "Soil" and "Charcoal" ? What should
>>> go under "Attribute" and "MaterialKind" ? Could you give some examples
>>> so
>> that
>>> it becomes clearer ?
>>
>> A MaterialKind item describes a general kind of stuff. For example,
>> Oak, Rice Hull, Charcoal, Compost, Fertilizer, Soil (unamended) and
>> Soil (amended). A Material is a specific instance of a kind of
>> material. For example, Oak from Dave's woodlot, Charcoal from Dave's TLUD
>> stove #3, Loess soil from Dave's garden, or Loess soil from Dave's
>> cultivation trial #2.
>>
>> Both Soil and Charcoal are Materials and so have the same attributes
>> as Material as well as the additional attributes linking them to
>> CultivationTrial and CharcoalTrial. A CharcoalTrial uses a Material as
>> a feedstock.
>>
>> A Material would usually be 'providedBy' the same user running the
>> trial, but not necessarily. If I wanted to test a PyrolysisMethod with a
>> known feedstock I might get some rice hull from someone who had already
>> defined it and done trials with it. Thus I could work with a know
>> material so that I'd be able to compare my results to others with fewer
>> unknowns.
>>
>> A CharcoalTrial produces a Charcoal item, which is a Material.
>>
>>
>> A CultivationTrial is similar to a CharcoalTrial in that it takes
>> inputs and produces an outputs. The inputs are all Materials, which can
>> be just about anything, soil, charcoal, minerals, etc. When starting a
>> trial you would create new items to describe the initial soil and all
>> the stuff you plan to put into it (of course you would preferentially
>> use existing items if they were accurate). At the end of a trial you
>> have a soil, which is a Material. If you wanted to you could use this
>> Material as the starting soil for another
>> CultiviationTrial, with or with out amendments.
>>
>>
>> Here are some questions I have.
>>
>>
>> CharcoalTrial only allows for one kind of feedstock Material right
>> now, but I imagine someone is going to want to use blended feedstock.
>> Should we allow multiple feedstock materials?
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure how closely we should track crop yields from a
>> CultivationTrial. Is it enough to simply note how much there was, or
>> should we include provisions for more detailed nutritional and physical
>> analysis? Is it enough to put this information in the experiment log
>> where others can find it, or are enough people going to report enough
>> comparable details that adding fields of them would be worthwhile?
>>
>> For simplicity I only linked one Plant to the CultivationTrial. This
>> does not allow trials where multiple crops grow in the same test plot
>> (for example, a plot containing the Three Sisters, corn, pole beans
>> and squash). That could be problematic, but I wanted to see what ya'll
>> thought. Should I have a Plant entity describing kinds of plants 'Corn',
>> 'Beans', 'Squash' and then a Crop entity that can link to one
>> or more Plants? Most crops would simply be one Plant and maybe a note
>> about the variety, but a few could be multi-plant crops.
>>
>> If you used the soil left at the end of one CultivationTrial as the
>> input to another, a significant amount of time might elapse between the
>> two trials. During this time soil characteristics might change.
>> Currently only one set of analysis data can be associated with a
>> material and it is assumed to be unchanging over time. Should a Material
>> have a list of analysis events so that we can note who did the analysis,
>> when and where?
>>
>> Dave K
>> --
>> "Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know." -
>> M. King Hubbert
>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20071003/28c74787/at
> tachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
>
>
>
> End of Terrapreta Digest, Vol 9, Issue 6
> ****************************************
>
>
Previous message: [Terrapreta] Dynamotive to invest $105 million
Next message: [Terrapreta] subscription
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Terrapreta mailing list