[Terrapreta] Earthen Kilns Conjecture

[lou gold]

I think everyone should work within the parameters of local knowledge of
their place(s).

Tropical forest is really dense.


On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 1:28 AM, Sean K. Barry <sean.barry at juno.com> wrote:

>  Hi Jim,
>
> I've never seen the canopy of the rainforest in the Amazon.  I hope to
> someday soon.  We should ask Lou about it.  He lives there.  I have seen the
> canopy in temperate forests.  You cannot get enough sunlight to grow food
> crops under a forest canopy, I didn't think.  I might be wrong about this,
> but I think its true?  Nowadays, Brazilians do not leave trees standing and
> grow crops under them.  They slash-and-burn.  We seek to change that to
> slash-and-char.  No maybe Savanna might be a better terraform to begin
> "Terra Preta Nova" development in than in a rainforest.  That is certainly
> possible, don't you think?
>
> Regards,
>
> SKB
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Jim Joyner <jimstoy at dtccom.net>
> *To:* terrapreta <terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, April 18, 2008 10:10 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Earthen Kilns Conjecture
>
> Hey Sean,
>
> Is it not possible that, on the forested "islands" or other forests, that
> Amazonians simply razed the forests by burning them completely down (don't
> have to deal with all that weight, moving, digging and burying), then added
> to the ashes char from crop waste feed stocks and maybe other OM from
> somewhere else (brought in lots of clay pots?), and then grew crops? For the
> raised areas that apparently were created by making mounds, there would have
> been no need to get the trees out of the way. They might have just brought
> in the char and other amendments.
>
> Much easier way to do it given a lack of available technology (chainsaws,
> bulldozers and the like). Just a thought.
>
> Jim
>
> Sean K. Barry 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080419/48804386/attachment-0001.html