[Terrapreta] Charcoal Specification

[Ron Larson]

Christelle  -  See few more notes below.   You're fast!
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: ch braun 
  To: Ron Larson 
  Cc: Tom Miles ; Sean K. Barry ; Terrapreta ; brauncch at gmail.com 
  Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 2:13 AM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Charcoal Specification


  Hello,

  Thanks a lot for your useful comments! 
  So here we are:

  1. CHARCOAL SPECS

  http://bionecho.org/terrapreta/charcoalspec.txt
  I have updated it, taking into account Ron's comments. I also started to add the unities of measurement, but for some parameters I'm not sure which is the best one: 
  - heating rate  [RWL:  How about total production time - and maybe reference to some data base of "standard" methods.]
  - charcoal yield  [RWL:  Percent, %]
  - thinning    [RWL:  If this was for seeds in a pot, you could use plants per pot, initial/final]
  - calorific value  -  [RWL:  If this is charcoal, the standard is MJ/kg  (about 30)]
  - for the compositions in general, C, H content...  [RWL:  Percent, %]
  - same question for H2O, O2 sorption...  [RWL:  Maybe %??]
  - same question for the remaining parameters in A.Biochar properties -> Physical properties -> Charcoal physical properties! Btw, are there here superfluous parameters?  [RWL:  Yup - Maybe we could cut this down to 4-5 different types - more or less based on the highest temperature reached, with space for special notification.  For instance, some manufacturers (Eprida) supply charcoal with added fertilizer.]
  - a measurement reference is also sometimes missing I guess, as soon as a mass is provided ( e.g. "initial charcoal dry mass (mg)"...relative to what?)   [RWL:  Maybe could be per liter.  For large areas, we want kg/sqm or tonnes/hectare]
  - should we express the productivity / economical value in general? How ?  [RWL:  I believe this is our main unknown.  I like delta$/hectare.  Those doing small tests in pots can be encouraged to scale up using plants/hectare.   Also we need a row for "Productivity multiplier"  (dimensionless)]
  - Ron what do you mean by "spreading width"? Is it different from the size of the field where the experiment takes place?  [RWL:  We need Tom Miles to comment here.  He has reported on a technique now used for putting fertilizer only where it will do the most good.  I recall numbers like a 6" (15 cm) width swath located maybe 4" (10 cm) down.  Tom?]

  2. REVIEWING PROCESS    [RWL:  I haven't reviewed this closely, but suggest we need the names of reviewers also.  ]

  I like the idea of a 2-steps reviewing. My proposition for the process:

  0. Online form completion. The submission has the status "UNCHECKED". 
  1. Initial automatic syntax parsing (check if all mandatory fields have been completed, if the values are in the permitted ranges...). If it's ok, submission receives the status "WELLFORMED". 
  2. Submission sent to XV members of the group "VERIFIERS".
  3. As soon as YV verifiers give their approval, the submission status becomes "ACCEPTABLE". It is then sent to XR members of the group "REVIEWERS". 
  4. As soon as YR reviewers give their approval, the submission status becomes "ACCEPTED".

  Following questions have now to be answered:

  1. Who are the VERIFIERS ?   
  2. Who are the REVIEWERS ?
  3. Values of XV, YV, XR, YR ?
  4. How are the XR members selected ? (random?)
  5. At which stage should the submission appear in the DB ? (i.e. with which status?) The current status should then clearly appear online. 
  6. Which restrictions for the automatic parsing ? So what is required for UNCHECKED->WELLFORMED ?

  Sincerely yours,
  Christelle 

    [RWL:  At first, we will have to work with volunteers and randomness.  Mostly, I'll bet we will have people wanting to use the data base for TP-promotion purposes - with the best reviews on the data at the top or bottom of the results spectrum.   

      Christelle - thanks for your efforts here.
      
  RWL]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20070906/7396fce5/attachment.html