[Terrapreta] Earthen Kilns Conjecture

[lou gold]

I tend to agree with you Sean, even though I'm not qualified as to the
details of how you would do terra preta nova. I agree that we don't have to
know the old ways except (perhaps) for new applications in the same
eco-niche. I guess what has to be known is whether it works. Interestingly
"works" in terms of increased productivity may require years of application
to understand the true nature of the benefits (if any), BUT, if carbon
sequestration in the soil is the immediate objective then all the other
stuff can play out as it may (as long as there is no damage). So give
farmers carbon credits for sequestration and get going.

I've stayed away from the speculation about felling big trees simply because
I don't believe the Indians felled them. In the Amazon primary tropical
forests I've seen the big "dominants" are widely spaced and most of the
vegetation is much smaller. I believe that it was the smaller stuff that
became char and not gigantic old trees as some seem to be imagining. Yep, it
would have been an incredible task to take them down, cut them up, char them
and grind into fine pieces. That why I believe they didn't do it.



On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Sean K. Barry <sean.barry at juno.com> wrote:

>  Hi Lou, Michael, et al,
>
> It would be interesting to fell a hardwood in the rainforest now, in a
> muddy area, with girdling and fire alone?  Just to clear an area for
> sunlight?  With no stone or metal tools?  Then light it a fire on the ground
> (how?, in parts?) and bury it?  But to what end would we do this?  To
> replicate what ancient Amazonians did?  If that is what they did?  For what
> reason would we do this?  Do you see my point?
>
> I do not think we want to consider harvesting old growth forests anyway
> now, to make charcoal to put into Terra Preta Nova soils.  No one hear
> thinks that is what needs be done and it's because the ancients did it that
> way.  I think the most logical source of biomass feedstock for
> pyrolysis/gasification into charcoal and usable energy is biomass that is
> likely to decay anyway.  Waste biomass (RFS, MSW, etc) and annual growth
> that falls and decays annually anyway from amongst both crops and other
> natural plants.  Biomass forms that grow higher tons of "fixed Carbon" per
> hectare (fC ha-1) of usable for pyrolysis feedstock are potential energy
> crops.  Charcoal application, fertilizer amendments, and sufficient watering
> into energy crop soils might have feedbacks that enhance both fC ha-1 yields
> and soil carbon sequestration rates.
>
> Forward looking models for development of Terra Preta Nova, which includes
> conversion of biomass to charcoal and harvesting usable bio-energy, need to
> consider all charcoal uses (agricultural benefits/food production
> enhancement, carbon sequestration, energy replacement, etc) and high
> charcoal production rates needed very soon for some of those uses.
> Specifically, charcoal made for charcoal-in-soil carbon sequestration will
> requires perhaps several billion tons per year (Gt yr-1) of charcoal
> production within 10-25 years, I suppose?
>
> Agriculture interest seem as if they cannot figure out a way how to use
> it?, or where, or a reason to do making and using anything near several Gt
> yr-1 of charcoal right now.  No body has the "Terra Preta de Indio" recipe
> and the farmers are all saying that "... unless it is a proven, economically
> viable, agriculturally more productive, profitable benefit product for me to
> use, than I'll never use it or do it!"  SO, there is not a market for any Gt
> yr-1 of charcoal there, right?  Now what do we do?
>
> I think the answer to, "Now what do we do?", is to start making charcoal
> for Terra Preta Nova development now, anyway.  Do it like we're going to
> turn the whole world into a Terra Preta soiled landform, a planet sized TP
> garden!  We put charcoal into soil to work now on preventing further GW and
> GCC problems later and for the agricultural benefits that we will learn
> about along the way.  We will need to do something like this eventually,
> anyway, right?  We might as well get started.  It's going to take years,
> perhaps more than a century, to even begin to push back a little against
> where the climate is headed now.
>
> There is promise, too, that left untended, GCC could move into an era of
> positive feedbacks: Methyl hydrate releases (thawed CH4) and CO2 releases
> from the oceans (plant and animal die offs), Methane gas-CH4 releases from
> permafrost wetlands in the northern former Soviet Union, northern Canada and
> Alaska, increased N2O concentrations from continued industrial fertilizer
> use, adiabatic heating due to less snow/ice cover on land and oceans, etc.
> These positive feedbacks will accelerate the warming and need to be avoided.
>
> I think we can make positive feedbacks work now to our advantage, too, in
> making "Terra Preta Nova", if we increase the scale of our operations.
> Already using MSW and agricultural residues, that decay anyway, as feedstock
> for charcoal is a positive feedback in our desired direction (removing CO2
> from the atmosphere).  It removes some CO2 now and prevents further CO2
> cycling into and out of the atmosphere for many years into the future.
> Improved soils under charcoal and bio-energy producing crops is another
> potential large feedback.  Overall increased plant growth and consequent CO2
> uptake by plants planted in Terra Preta Nova soils, could also prove to be a
> large positive feedback towards and help in lowering the CO2 concentration
> in the atmosphere at a faster rate.
>
> Let's make lots of charcoal and put it into lots of soil now!
>
> Regards,
>
> SKB
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* lou gold <lou.gold at gmail.com>
> *To:* Michael Bailes <michaelangelica at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* terra pretta group <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, April 18, 2008 2:11 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Earthen Kilns Conjecture
>
> I'm not sure of the relevance either but I want to assure you that nothing
> amazing is going on. The life and structure of a large tree is concentrated
> in the outer layers. Hollow trees are quite natural.
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Michael Bailes <
> michaelangelica at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Australian Aboriginals encouraged the burning of large gums so that a
> > hollow was made though the centre of the gum.
> > Amazingly gums survive this traeatment and live on.
> > The hollows became great nesting places for native animals and therefore
> > convenient larders for fresh food for the aborigines.
> >
> > I am not sure how this is relevant
> > But it would be interesting to set alight to a rainforest hardwood tree
> > to see if it formed ash or charcoal.
> > Michael B
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>


-- 
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080418/9774a36f/attachment.html