[Terrapreta] char organic?

[Michael Bailes]

> >         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 .


with char that process will be slowed.


>
> 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.


The difference is. . .?


>
> > 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".



Please define "A Perfect Soil"?


> >
> > 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


No, a big  part of the Terra preta process is organic matter (SOM). if a
conventional farmer is not using SOM then he will not benefit as much.

There is also the water holding capacity of char- that reason alone is
enough to use it.


> > 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 don't know.
The point I was making is that Charcoal is only ONE part of the terra preta
equation.

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.


Want to test it and see? You could be right, you could be wrong.

I would suggest that char additions are not a "cure-all"


Has anyone suggested they are a "cure all"?

Warmest wishes.
> > 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080115/9e0f707e/attachment.html