[Terrapreta] char organic?

[Kevin Chisholm]

Dear Michael
Michael Bailes wrote:
>
>
>
>         While, I suspect almost any soil can benefit from charcoal,
>         for organic growers, only a few of us who have special case
>         poor soils need it (like amazon farmers or farmers like me
>         with light silty, sandy soils).
>
>         Best regards
>
>         Jim
>
>         _______________________________________________
>
>
> I think this is sadly short-sighted.
> Organic farmers do add carbon to the soil in the form of organic 
> matter all the time.

When "Organic Farmers" add conventional "organic matter" to the soil, 
they are adding a material that is consumed over a relatively short time.
> Charcoal is just a special form of this .

Charcoal is very different from "organic matter". It is close to being 
an "inorganic carbon" that cannot participate in "organic reactions" 
such as interacting with soil life forms, to the extent that it is 
consumed in the process.
> Charcoal's huge advantage to the organic farmer is the increase it 
> soil microbial life is provides.

As I understand it, char can act in a catalytic manner, where it 
participates in a reaction, but is not consumed in the reaction. I would 
pose that charcoal per se does not increase soil microbial life, but 
that if conditions are right, it can assist in the increase in soil 
microbial life.

> Erich talks about "wee beastie" 'condos' and if you look at electron 
> microscope pictures of charcoal you will see what he means.

Charcoal cannot create soil life forms any more than building motels can 
increase people. However, the motel analogy, when carried to another 
level, is very appropriate... if the circumstances are right, then 
people can breed in motels, as a secure local environment.

> Charcoal provides and ideal environment for many soil organisms.

Yes, it could.
> Charcoal acts as a catalyst to the organic matter the Organic farmer 
> is already adding to his soil.

Yes, it could.
> Thus helping maintain soil microbial life and hence fertility.

Yes, it could. However, the vital question is: Was the soil initially 
deficient in microbial life and fertility? To make the point, consider 
two illustrative cases: A "Perfect Soil without char", and an "Imperfect 
Soil without char".

By definition, a "Perfect Soil without char" cannot be improved, and 
char, or any other form of additions cannot improve upon a perfect soil.

By inference, an "Imperfect Soil without char" can be improved upon.  
Char may be one addition that will improve the soil, and move it toward 
perfection. However, the features that char brings to the soil must be 
features that the soil needs.
>
> Yes, a  traditional chemical farmer will get value from charcoal, as 
> less of his fertiliser will run off into the local creek, but without 
> organic matter and soil micro-organisms much is lost.

Yes.
> The whole "terra preta" concept  fits much better with organic and bio 
> dynamic gardening than conventional farming.

Actually, one could make a case that char could be much more beneficial 
to "conventional farming" than to organic and biodynamic gardening and 
farming, in that with conventional farming, charcoal could be more 
beneficial in capturing "nutrient flushes" when readily soluble 
fertilizers are added. In organic and biodynamic gardening or farming, 
greater attention seems to be directed an maintaining desired soil 
conditions. "Proof" that organic and biodynamic gardening is "more 
perfect" than "conventional farming" can be derived from the observation 
that yields per square foot from organic and biodynamic gardening are 
generally greater than from "conventional" farming.
> How many pottery shards have you added to your fields today?

If pottery shards are added to the soil, does their microporosity and 
CEC provide adequately for the soil and lifeforms such that charcoal 
additions would either not be required, or if made, would be less 
beneficial?

I would suggest that char additions to most "imperfect soils" are likely 
to be beneficial, in that most "imperfect soils" are deficient in Cation 
Exchange Capacity. I would also suggest that char additions to "highly 
productive soils" will not be nearly as beneficial as they would be to 
low productivity soils, in that high  productivity soils have relatively 
little potential for improvement.

I would suggest that char additions are not a "cure-all" but rather, are 
a treatment to "cure some" soil deficiency conditions.

Best wishes,

Kevin
>
>
>         <http://info.bioenergylists.org>
>
>
> -- 
> Michael the Archangel
>
> "You can fix all the world's problems in a garden. . . .
> Most people don't know that"
> FROM
> http://www.blog.thesietch.org/wp-content/permaculture.swf
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org