[Terrapreta] Is terra preta too complex forenvironmentalorganisations?

[Dave Demyan]

As a forest ecologist and former logger dealing with the legacy of fire
suppression on the inland dry site forests that are in desperate need of
thinning I too would urge caution in promoting TP as a panacea.  

 

While it has the potential to improve agricultural practices, there are too
many unknowns concerning its use and effects.  Archeological evidence
indicates that it was used successfully in the Amazon basin.  However we
don't know how it was manufactured or applied and what other agricultural
practices were used.  

 

It appears that most other terrestrial ecosystems have a char component, as
fire is a common ecosystem element and cellulose burns.  However the amount
of char produced by a fire event, either wildfire or controlled burning,
doesn't approach the levels suggested as agricultural soil amendments.

 

The green revolution with petro fertilizers and pesticides was adopted
quickly, without adequate research.   Genetic engineered crops are following
the same model of full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes.  Our society is
now paying the price in a multitude of ways.

 

My friends in the environmental community have reserved judgment on biomass
utilization and terra preta until more solid research is completed.  I agree
with them.

 

That said, I would love to see large scale research projects conducted and
am excited about TP.  I will be using char produced, from forest thinning
slash, on portions of my sandy gravelly glacial till soils that were in
orchard for most of the 20th century.  The soil has elevated levels of
Lead/Arsenic that was used extensively, until 1947, for codling moth.  Lead
arsenate was the only effective pesticide for the moth and was promoted as
an excellent management tool.  The long term effect is much less than ideal.

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

  _____  

From: Greg and April [mailto:gregandapril at earthlink.net] 
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2008 8:35 AM
To: Laurens Rademakers; terra Preta
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Is terra preta too complex
forenvironmentalorganisations?

 

Until we know exactly how and why TP does it's magic, and can offer
documented evidence as to what it takes to properly make it - it ( TP ) is
going to be given about the same level of attention as voodoo, witchcraft
and sorcery.

 

For a really rough analogy - We are now ( with TP ) at about the same place,
where Gregor Mendel was with genetics, when he was working with sweet peas.

 

 

While TP holds plenty of promise, there is still allot we need to find out,
before it comes to the same level of ability that we currently have with
genetic studies.   

 

 What are the ramifications of using TP?    Are there times / places when TP
should not be used?    Are there dangers for using TP?    Personally I think
there might be some cases where might be ill advised to use TP.

 

Until we can answer these and other questions, even knowing about TP is not
worth much - because the knowledge we do have is still fairly limited and is
not "yet" useable by a broad range of people - just select few.

 

We need to get the study of TP at least to the same level, that a farmer /
rancher, uses genetics to improve the bloodlines of his animals - in other
words we need to get TP to a practical level first - other wise, it we could
produce another cold fusion dud that would drive ( or other wise scare )
people away rather than get them to understand and use it.

 

 

Greg H.

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Laurens <mailto:lrademakers at biopact.com>  Rademakers 

To: terra Preta <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>  

Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2008 1:02

Subject: [Terrapreta] Is terra preta too complex for
environmentalorganisations?

 

Okay, let's get real. I just did a random check of some of the large "green"
organisations that came to mind (from Greenpeace to the World Resources
Institute), to see whether their libraries and search engines turned up
anything dealing with biochar, agrichar or terra preta. Nothing. Did a
search for "carbon-negative" or "negative emissions" and a host of other
search terms. Rien du tout!

 

The news about terra preta should have reached these organisations by now.
But they seem to stick to every type of renewable energy, as long as it
doesn't have anything to do with biomass - so that includes biochar, even
though biochar could yield carbon-negative energy, which other renewables
can't.

 

What's going on? Is the concept too complex? Is it too new? Are these
organisations afraid they can't explain this to their readership/members?

 

I'm growing so impatient... Terra preta must really begin to make an impact
amongst environmental organisations, policy makers and green lobbies. But it
isn't happening.

 

I suggest we draw up a list of green organisations and send them a leaflet
in which we explain the concept and its potential in brief.

 

Anyone willing to put some time in this? I have some graphic design skills
and could make a nice brochure. If someone wants to help with the writing,
let me know...  

 

Best, Lorenzo

 

 


  _____  


_______________________________________________
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/20080614/18204bb4/attachment.html