[Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation

[lou gold]

No rocks in most of Amazonia as well.

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:18 AM, David Hirst .com <david at davidhirst.com>
wrote:

>  When I visited Bangladesh I was shocked to discover that they have almost
> no rock. The soils were all alluvial, and the hardest material generally
> available was brick.
>
> Indeed, they "deep mine" rock, going down quite a long way. Rocks also
> come by ship, and a lot of women (used to) spend their time smashing them up
> with hammers. Children would often join in.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
> *David Hirst*
>
> *From:* terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org [mailto:
> terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark Ludlow
> *Sent:* 06 April 2008 22:29
> *To:* 'Sean K. Barry'; 'Jim Joyner'; 'lou gold'
>
> *Cc:* 'Terra Preta'
> *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation
>
>
>
> One thing for certain: in Amazonia where TPs are common, there are often
> few stones of any kind. Low-fire ceramics were likely the hardest material
> available in many areas and the material most resembling rocks mechanically.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> *From:* terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org [mailto:
> terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org] *On Behalf Of *Sean K. Barry
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 06, 2008 2:12 PM
> *To:* Jim Joyner; lou gold
> *Cc:* Terra Preta
> *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation
>
>
>
> Hi Lou,
>
>
>
> I think that is a super question!  Do fired pottery shards in the soil
> play a completely different role than a bio-geo-chemical role?  Maybe the
> fired pottery shards are just harder and change the mechanical stability or
> the soil, preventing run-off?  Does the heavy rainfall wash away soil from
> around TP mounds containing shards?  Are TP soil formations in low-lying
> areas, ravines and etc., and are not washed out like other ravines?
>
>
>
> No crock-of-... I mean chamber pot of human offal hypothesis here.  It's
> just rock-like pottery shards don't let the nutrient holding charcoal wash
> away.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> SKB
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* lou gold <lou.gold at gmail.com>
>
> *To:* Jim Joyner <jimstoy at dtccom.net>
>
> *Cc:* Terra Preta <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
>
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 06, 2008 3:45 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation
>
>
>
> To All,
>
> As I follow the discussion, it seems mostly about chemistry,
>
> How about structure? Heavy rains leach and compact soils.
> How might pottery shards change this?
>
> Just wondering...
>
> lou
>
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 6:31 PM, Jim Joyner <jimstoy at dtccom.net> wrote:
>
> Greg,
>
> Adding clay to a sandy or silty soil will increase the CEC because the
> average size particle is changed -- there are more electrical charges per
> cm3. Adding char to soil *does not* increase CEC. Ask Richard, he's done
> it. So far, it is only hoped that adding char to soil will foster an
> environment that will maintain the carbon in organic matter in order to
> increase CEC.
>
> Most, if not all, of the soils where TP is found are clay. Clay is defined
> by particle size. And it is these number of particles in a given volume of
> soil that will greatly determine CEC. Carbon can also increase CEC, the
> carbon in OM, but this will go away with heat and humidity.
>
> Whatever clay found in pottery, even if it were pulverized into dust, is
> very unlikely to increase the CEC from its native level. It would have to be
> a clay with a higher CEC (you say it is not) to do so and it would require
> huge quantities. The shards are obviously not pulverized and the
> contribution to the volume of soil would still be insignificant no matter
> what it contains.
>
> As far as the other elements found in the clay in the shards, they are
> likely to be minute and would have little or no effect on CEC in any event.
> If you add a supplement of trace elements (Planters II, e.g.) to your
> garden, it may make your plants grow better, which may increase the OM in
> your soil, which may indirectly improve CEC, but it will have no immediate
> effect on a soil test for CEC nor is it likely to change what is in the
> cation base saturation (I know, I've done it).
>
> Jim
>
> Greg and April wrote:
>
> Hmmmm.....
>
>
>
> I would have to disagree.
>
>
>
>
>
> With reports that char - especially a char produced at high temperatures,
> can be used in a battery, tells us that ion exchange can/does occur.
>
>
>
> From Wiki ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta )
>
> Glaser *et al.* (1998 and 2003) and Brodowski *et al.* (2005) have proved
> that the formation of condensed aromatic structures depends on the
> manufacture of charcoal. It is the slow oxydation of charcoal that creates
> carboxylic groups; these increase the cations exchange capacity in the soil.
>
>
>
>
> It sounds like you are saying that solid material can not remain if it is
> acting as an ion exchange site.    If this is the case, I disagree.
>
>
>
> I own a Roman coin, that dates from around 200 AD - and while it is
> heavily tarnished, and one can barely make out the design on it ( actually
> only parts of the design ), one can not deny that ion exchange has been
> occurring for hundreds of years ( almost 2000 years ), and still remain an
> object that can be handled and examined.
>
>
>
> Ion exchange materials come in many different forms, some of them long
> lasting some of them are not ( depending on the conditions ).    Clay is a
> cation material ( of greater or lesser potential depending on the type ),
> and firing it to pottery does little to change that.
>
>
>
> Kaolinite ( one of the materials found in the pottery shards ) has " a low
> cation exchange capacity (1-15 meq/100g.) " - (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaolin ).    So while the exchange potential
> is low, it is still there.
>
>
>
> Other clay materials have variable amounts of cation exchange capacity -
>
>
>
> Montmorillonite, has quite a bit of exchange potential, and was known in
> Central and South America ( we know the stuff as bentonite, and use it
> because of it's great cation exchange potential ) and Potassium and iron are
> common substitutes for it.
>
>
>
>
>
> Still, I like you, would like to know the source of the clay used to make
> the pottery in the first place.
>
>
>
>
>
> Greg H.
>
>
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Jim Joyner <jimstoy at dtccom.net>
>
> *To:* Greg and April <gregandapril at earthlink.net>
>
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 06, 2008 12:50
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation
>
>
>
> Greg and April wrote:
>
> The fact that the materials in the pottery shards, like that of char, will
> also provide cation exchange, can not be totally ignored.
>
> Greg,
>
> There is no evidence that char does provide cation exchange, if it did,
> the char would disappear with the OM. In fact, there is evidence to the
> contrary, that it does not directly increase CEC. Char seems to provide some
> kind of beneficial mechanical structure to soil but is inert itself -- that
> is why it is still there.
>
> Similarly, the fact that the shard material is still there, tells us that
> it, like char, is not a component of the cation exchange and, I think, does
> not in any way electrically or chemically interact with the soil.
>
> There is one possibility: that the aquarium material of which you speak
> provides trace elements. Maybe the trace elements in the shards is
> beneficial in some small way. Plants will do better with trace elements but
> soils around the world have long been leached of trace elements; It's ag
> product is not as nutritious but it still produces and people still eat the
> product. It's hard to believe that these shards are in any way a necessary
> component of TP.
>
> I don't know the source of the clay in the pottery shards but I suspect it
> is the same clay that is in the soil, which would mean that what ever is in
> the shards is already in the soil. If they made the pottery from clay that
> was, say, from the mountains, might be a different story.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com
> http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
> http://youtube.com/my_videos_______________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080407/024cd37d/attachment-0001.html