[Terrapreta] Fossil fueled based fertilizers
Sean K. Barry
sean.barry at juno.com
Sat Jan 12 12:53:41 CST 2008
Hi Gerrit,
http://www.physics.uwo.ca/teamcana/2004/hughes_report.pdf<http://www.physics.uwo.ca/teamcana/2004/hughes_report.pdf>
^This is just a fantastic paper! That kid, Dustin Hughes, is ahead of his time. He sees in quantified terms exactly what Peter Read is talking about and what I have been beating around trying to say, too. He saw this three or four years ago, too. Charocal into soil (Terra Preta style) is a way to "mine" carbon out of the atmosphere and it will directly and can immediately effect atmospheric carbon levels to the better. If I knew how to get a hold of this kid, I'd offer him a job working for my company. He sees exactly the objectives I think need to be accomplished.
Regards,
SKB
----- Original Message -----
From: Gerald Van Koeverden<mailto:vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca>
To: Terra Preta<mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Fossil fueled based fertilizers
Dustin Hughes experiment (quoted from link in message below) to combine ammonium bicarbonate and charcoal reminds me of Eprida's pyrolysis system.
Eprida’s process has an added twist in that it uses hydrogen and carbon dioxide generated by the pyrolysis process and nitrogen from the air to produce ammonium bicarbonate, which gets incorporated into the char increasing its fertilizer value. “We are selling machines right now,” Day says. “The capacity is one ton per hour for what we consider our standard unit."
How permanent is the effect that Hughes claims for the elimination/sequestering of CO2 through the use of ammonium bicarcarbonate? Does Eprida make the same claim? Would this allow fertilizer manufacturers to claim carbon credits for producing it? How much nitrogen is there in Eprida charcoal?
"Analysis of fertilizer synthesis thermodynamics gave the total energy of formation, product chemistry and
stoichiometry. Converting CO2 into ABC, results in a gain of 265 KJ/mole in energy! Also, ABC was one of the few
fertilizers that consumed CO2 in formation (5:8, CO2 to NH4HCO3), and provides equivalent nitrogen content of
common fertilizers (except for AS, a specialty fertilizer), per mole of methane available for reaction. Given current
fertilizer use of 360 Mt/y of N equivalent on 1.4 Bha (IFIA, 1998), my calculations show that replacement with ABC
could bind up 1 Gt/y of CO2 in manufacture and eliminate a further emission of 0.27 Gt/y resulting from previous
production methods. Therefore, changing to ABC use would remove a net 1.27 Gt of CO2 from the atmosphere! As
well, an additional 81 GJ/y of energy (the equivalent to a nuclear reactor) would be generated by exothermic
synthesis; -useful for other purposes, like steam turbine operation or space heating."
Gerrit
On 1/11/08 1:38 PM, "Gerald Van Koeverden" <vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca<mailto:vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca>> wrote:
Nikolaus,
Several months ago, you described a more efficient way to utilize nitrogen by polymerizing it with formalin (see below). Have you ever considered ways to achieve the same goal by using charcoal to absorb the nitrogen - as well as other chemical fertilizers - especially phosphorous and potash?
If it can be shown that charcoal significantly increases the % of chemical fertilizers that are actually utilized by the plant, then this would open up a whole new window of commercial possibilities for charcoal/char as a nutrient carrier/storage.
I enjoyed reading this little science project from a grade 10 student using charcoal...."The third procedure was the creation of a fertilizer slow-release compound. Commonly, 40% of anthropogenic
fertilizer leaches into the atmosphere or the ocean, causing mineral salt levels and water contamination to rise
(Samson et al.,1999). Applying the fact that activated charcoal is a strong absorbent of organic materials (Kosson et
al. 1999), I compounded each fertilizer at a ratio of 1 part charcoal to 1 part nitrogen (C:N), in the presence and
absence of heat, over time." http://www.physics.uwo.ca/teamcana/2004/hughes_report.pdf<http://www.physics.uwo.ca/teamcana/2004/hughes_report.pdf>
Gerrit
On 15-Sep-07, at 12:43 PM, Nikolaus Foidl wrote:
Dear Sean!
Its Haber-Bosch not Haber Bauch. To avoid toxicity of Ammonia and Urea you
can Polymerize the stuff using 1 :1 Formalin. You get water insoluble
crystals which are then broken up by bacteria which use unease as a enzyme.
Like this you have a retarded nitrogen fertilizer with very high efficiency
and the plants get the nitrogen in little doses time after time. As you will
apply the polymer below the seeds the rhizobia are not affected because they
react only to direct water soluble nitrogen next to the seeds.The efficiency
is so high that you can lower total nitrogen by more then 50% without
affecting effective uptake quantity. Add a little Molasse and the bacteria
will love to brake up the polymer. As an additional source of carbon you
might as well add some methanol to your mixture.DCPTA enhanced plant growth
loves additional CO2.
Thanks Nikolaus
_______________________________________________
Terrapreta mailing list
Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org<mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/>
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org<http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/>
http://info.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: /attachments/20080112/5287607d/attachment.html
More information about the Terrapreta
mailing list