[Terrapreta] Biochar Packing Strategies

[joe ferguson]

I read RK's post as a scenario that might explain how the Amazonians 
could have carried out their C production.  It seems to be a reasonable 
possibility as to an explanation of their process.  I seriously doubt 
they were too constrained by concerns about methane or volatiles.  I 
found it to be an interesting conjecture.

I don't believe your ad hominem attacks are particularly constructive.  
They seem to say more about you than your targets.

Joe

Sean K. Barry wrote:
> Dear 'terrapreta' list members,
>  
> Robert Klein has posted (again) his assertion that corn stalks were 
> used as the primary feedstock by the ancient Amazon people to make the 
> original Terra Preta soils.  This is entirely conjecture.  For anyone 
> to say "... as proven by pollen analysis" is just baloney.
> There was certainly lots of other potential biomass in the Amazon 
> rainforest.  The existence of corn pollen there *now* says nothing 
> about the feedstock used circa 2500 to 500 years ago.  Making a point 
> out of saying it was corn really doesn't even matter.
>  
> Robert then extrapolates this to claim to say that all we need to do 
> is just start piling up corn stalks in "packed" mounds on fields, 
> light them afire with hot coals dropped through the top of the 
> pile, and start making charcoal as fast as we can.  He has some idea 
> that the root ball and soil disks at the bottom of the stalks can just 
> be yanked out of the ground and piled up, dirt clods to the outside, 
> enclosing the stalks inside a dirt mound.
>  
> Open air burning in a dirt pile, with no flames is absolutely the 
> worst way to make charcoal from any biomass.  Without flame, the pile 
> will conservatively exhaust 3% of the carbon from the biomass as 
> Methane-CH4 gas.  Robert does not listen to this.  I think, this is 
> because he is unwilling to acknowledge the chemistry of pyrolysis, 
> and/or the problem with Methane-CH4 as a potent green house gas in the 
> Earth's atmosphere.
>  
> Releasing 3% Methane-CH4 during biochar production will definitely be 
> more of a detriment to the atmosphere, than the benefit if even all of 
> the rest of the biomass carbon was left in the charcoal.  That would 
> not occur, either, because a dirt wall kiln will still allow in enough 
> air that much of the biomass carbon will burn completely into CO2.  
> Smoldering, it will release copious amounts of toxic gases like Carbon 
> Monoxide - CO and Methane-CH4.  It could easily disable or even kill 
> anyone standing to close.
>  
> The worst part of Robert's postings is that he does not listen, read, 
> or try to learn anything.  He ignores what I an others have said about 
> Methane-CH4.  He'd rather spout off about how everyone agrees with his 
> grand plan and his analysis and then go write on his blog that we here 
> on the 'terrapreta' list are ALL in agreement with him?  Well, I don't 
> agree!  Lots or people on this 'terrpreta' list don't agree with him, 
> either.  He is still saying we do on his blog.  He says so again in 
> his most recent posting ...
>  
> >In my last post,
> >
> >http://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com/2007/09/developing-biochar-protocols.html
> >
> >we arrived at the conclusion that the one key crop
> >that can make biochar production feasible for
> >agriculture is corn. It is also apparent that a
> >naturally built stack without much work will produce
> >some biochar, ...
>  
> This is total LIE!  AGAIN!  I wish he would quit doing that!
>  
> Look here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane ... It says (and this 
> is not the only source which says this):
>  
> "Methane in the Earth's atmosphere is an important greenhouse gas with 
> a global warming potential of 25 over a 100 year period. This means 
> that a 1 tonne methane emission will have 25 times the impact on 
> temperature of a 1 tonne carbon dioxide emission during the following 
> 100 years."
>  
> What Robert proposes is a seriously bad idea.  I guarantee you, that 
> if this was ever tried, the the Environmental Pollution Control Agency 
> (EPA) would immediately show up and levy some heavy fines.  It is 
> illegal in every state in the USA to knowingly release Methane-CH4 
> gas.  Lots of dirt-mound, root ball, walled in kilns will be a 
> ecological disaster, if enacted on any large scale.
> He CANNOT do this.  He should stop promoting this idea.  It is 
> senseless and would be dangerously bad for the environment.
>  
> At 'terrepreta', I think we do want to develop *clean *ways to make 
> charcoal from the biomass of agricultural waste in agricultural 
> fields.  I think this is a reasonable objective.  This plan of 
> Robert's does not accomplish that objective.  He needs to cease 
> promoting this and he should join us in developing some other viably 
> workable methods.  At the very least, Robert, you need to quit writing 
> that we all agree with you about this.
>  
> SKB
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* code suidae <mailto:codesuidae at gmail.com>
>     *To:* terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>     <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:06 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Biochar Packing Strategies
>
>     On 9/26/07, Robert Klein <arclein at yahoo.com
>     <mailto:arclein at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>     > But I think that we can all agree that a stalk of
>     > biomass with a brick attached is a great start. As
>     > good as a box of Leggo.
>
>     Interesting idea. However, in all the harvested corn fields I've ever
>     seen the part of the stalk still attached to the roots is perhaps a
>     foot long and many are broken off near ground level. I suspect that in
>     order to get material suitable for this method you would have to
>     either harvest by hand or invent something gentler than a combine.
>
>     Thinking out loud:
>     After harvesting you'd have to collect the stalks and carry them to
>     the burn location. For a 1/5th acre plot that's on the order of 6000
>     plants to move. With a couple of pounds of dirt attached to each one a
>     worker would be limited to moving perhaps 2 or 3 dozen plants at a
>     time for around 200 trips. Assuming reasonably quick workers you're
>     looking at 1 day per acre for a 5 man crew (4 gathering, 1 stacking).
>
>     Presumably this would be one-time or very rare activity which could be
>     accomplished over many years. Each year you could set aside some
>     number of acres to be harvested by hand (or special machine) to allow
>     this sort of processing. It wouldn't even be necessary to wait until
>     after harvest, you could pull them, allow them to dry, then char the
>     whole plant.
>
>     > I see two strategies. One in which a windrow is build
>     > with one side forming an earthen wall. [...] A second
>     > windrow can then be build against the first
>     > windrow on the non walled side.
>     > The second strategy is to lay out a 12X12 square [...]
>
>     I wonder if it would be practical to do a dome? It seems like the sort
>     of thing you'd really have to be out in the field working on to see
>     how the stalks behave.
>
>     Rather than packing dirt over the top of anything it seems like it
>     would be much more efficient, in terms of labor cost, to have large
>     reusable covers. You'd stack up the stalks then drop a lightweight
>     nonflammable plate on top. You could perhaps adjust vents in the cover
>     to control the burn rate.
>
>     I'm picturing companies that hire seasonal labor to do the work and
>     that move from area to area contracting with land owners as they go. A
>     crew could be kept busy for most of the growing season.
>
>     > Observe that we have minimized the labor input
>     > throughout.
>
>     Well, I don't know about that, compared to any mechanized harvesting
>     it is a huge amount of labor, but amortized over the period when the
>     char is effective it is small.
>
>     > From the perspective of sequestering carbon, we want
>     > this done twenty to fifty times. From the perspective
>     > of building a viable soil base, several times should
>     > be more than ample.
>
>     I haven't the slightest idea how much char you could expect to get
>     from an acre of corn in a year. I'd suppose that you could do the same
>     acre at least twice and maybe three times a year (no need to wait for
>     mature ears, just give it 6 weeks or so to get big enough to provide
>     the most char per season).
>
>     But 50 times? Surely at some point there is a concentration of char at
>     which agricultural performance begins to drop off or some other
>     undesirable effect comes into play? Beyond that point you'd have to
>     leave the char in a pit or disturb the topsoil to incorporate it
>     deeply.
>
>     Dave K
>     -- 
>     "Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know." -
>     M. King Hubbert
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Terrapreta mailing list
>     Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org <mailto: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/20070926/43c7c68c/attachment.html