[Terrapreta] re Cameron Smith has some questions

[Kevin Chisholm]

Dear Keith

Thanks very much for clarifying the important differences between "Soil Organic Matter" and "biochar".

It is well known that vegetation that decomposes under anaerobic conditions will yield a "black carbon." A "black earth" can be made using either this "black carbon" or biochar."

This "black carbon" is definitely not "biochar" in that it has not been "charred", i.e., it has not been subjected to a pyrolysis process where the original biomass was rendered inorganic by a "pyro process." Rather, this biomass was reduced to "black carbon" by a biological process, not a thermal process. 

What is your opinion on the relative effectiveness as a soil amendment or additive, of "black carbon" that was procuded from anaerobic biological decomposition of biomass, in contrast to "black carbon" produced as a "char" using a pyrolysis process?

Given that "black carbon" is essentially inorganic elemental carbon, with no nutritive value to biological life forms, is in incorrect to term it "Soil Organic Matter"?

Thanks very much.

Kevin
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Reid, Keith (OMAFRA) 
  To: biochar-ontario at googlegroups.com ; Jeff Berg ; Cameron Smith 
  Cc: terra pretta group ; Douglas Prest 
  Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] re Cameron Smith has some questions


  If I may, I'd like to add my perspective to the mix.  It may help to clarify the difference between soil organic matter and bio-char.

   

  Soil organic matter (humus) is made up of a mixture of complex organic compounds, including hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen and other elements in forms that are either retained in the soil (stable organic forms) or cycled through the various soil biota.  Bio-char, in contrast, is nearly pure carbon, and is not readily used as a food source for soil organisms.  This is where the relative stability of char in the soil comes into play.  The Terra preta soils in the Amazon rainforest are unique because they contain a significant portion of carbon, in the form of char, where organic matter is very quickly used up and leached away in most soils.  The value of the char is not, if you like, the carbon itself, but the fact that it provides the physical and chemical conditions to be a habitat for a thriving soil biota, and acts to hold on to nutrients that would otherwise wash away.  

   

  The opportunities for bio-char in temperate soils are probably greatest in the area of carbon sequestration, because it does hold the carbon in a relatively stable form.  It is unknown, so far, if it will provide the same productivity boost to plants growing in the char amended soil that occurs in the highly degraded soils of the rain forest.  We should probably be looking on bio-char as a companion to conventional practices for increasing soil organic matter, rather than as a replacement.

   

  Keith Reid

  Soil Fertility Specialist

   

  Phone:  519 271-9269

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: biochar-ontario at googlegroups.com [mailto:biochar-ontario at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd Helferty
  Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 1:53 AM
  To: 'Jeff Berg'; 'Cameron Smith'
  Cc: 'Bruce Darrell'; 'Douglas Prest'; biochar-ontario at googlegroups.com; 'terra pretta group'
  Subject: RE: re Cameron Smith has some questions

   

  Jeff, Cameron,

   

    Sorry for the late reply, but I just wanted to come back to this message.

    I'm going to forward this to a new grouping of people in Ontario who have come together to talk 'Biochar'.  We are calling ourselves "Biochar-Ontario".

  I am also copying the folks on the TerraPreta BioEnergy List for discussion there. (I can forward you a compendium of their responses at a later date if you would like.)

   

    My own response would be as follows:

   

  You say that "Taking carbon out of circulation may not be a good idea."  This statement actually astounds me. Humans are adding over eight billion tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere every year from the burning of fossil fuels (natural gas, coal and oil)!  (3.67 tonnes of carbon dioxide is equivalent to 1 tonne of solid carbon.)

  This is why the Global atmosphere is warming, polar ice caps are melting, and we are at such a critical point with respect to the biological equilibrium that keeps us all alive.

   

  You correctly point out that all living things are part of the carbon cycle and that carbon is continually turned over during the natural progression through birth, growth, death, decomposition and re-birth. It is always in a state of flux, moving between plants, animals, soils, microbial biomass, the atmosphere, rivers and oceans. Some of the carbon atoms in our bodies at this moment have in the past been constituents of the plants, animals and soils present on earth many millions of years ago. People are around 18% carbon, wood around 50% and the organic matter component of soils are around 58% carbon.

  Importantly, the processes that build new topsoil require that more carbon be stored in soil than is lost to the atmosphere!

  In a healthy ecosystem, vibrant, living soils are one of the most important and dynamic parts of the carbon cycle. The carbon compounds added to soil (usually naturally, as exudates from active plant roots and the decomposition of plant and animal residues), are the 'fuel' for all of the biological processes that improve soil structure, which in turn increases oxygen and moisture retention and creates better conditions for more life.  Deliberately adding additional carbon to soils is intended to leverage this natural process.


  82% of the carbon in the terrestrial biosphere is already in the soil -- not in the living biomass above the soil.  For instance, healthy grasslands may contain over 100 times more carbon in the soil than on it.

  The world's soils hold three times as much carbon as the atmosphere and over four times as much carbon as all of the vegetation combined. Soil therefore represents the largest carbon sink over which we have control.

   

  Up to 80% of the carbon has already been lost from the topsoil in many farmed soils, often as a direct result of the loss of the soil itself. Even today, most farming businesses continue to lose soil carbon - their most valuable asset!

  As a result, landholders invest a great deal of time and effort in forcing 'dead' soils to be productive ~ using ever increasing quantities of natural and chemical "fertilizers".

   

  Soils under healthy perennial pasture may contain up to 350 tonnes of carbon per hectare and sustain high levels of microbial activity. Conversely, there is very little organic carbon left to lose from the surface horizons of many farmed soils.

   

  Increasing soil carbon levels will result in improved soil structure, lower bulk density, greater porosity, higher infiltration rates, more effective use of rainfall, enhanced water quality, higher cation exchange capacity, greater sequestration of nitrogen and sulphur, enhanced availability of phosphorus and trace elements, reduced costs, reduced inputs, improved biodiversity and increased productivity.


  These positive outcomes are all linked to what should be the core business of EVERY farm business - the sequestration of atmospheric carbon!

   

  For every 2.7 tonnes of carbon that can be sequestered into soil, this represents 10 tonnes of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere.  Humans would have to bury over 2 Billion tons of Biochar every year to make up for what we are adding to the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels.  We won't be able to do it alone.

   

  Our intention is to put the Biochar back into the soils and use the Biochar as a type of 'catalyst' to assist and accelerate nature's own processes to create ever more life so that nature herself can do the job of sequestering all of that excess atmospheric carbon for us.

   

  Biochar doesn't just "fix nitrogen".  Biochar can potentially benefits the soil horizon by:

      * Enhancing plant growth
      * Suppressing methane emission
      * Reducing nitrous oxide emission (by up to 50%)
           -- Nitrous Oxide is a major greenhouse gas. The atmospheric concentration of nitrous oxide has grown by about 15% since the mid-1700's. It has 310 times more impact on global warming per mass unit of carbon dioxide (CO2).
      * Reducing fertilizer requirements (by at least 10% in already depleted soils)
      * Reducing the leaching of nutrients
      * Lowering soil acidity
      * Lowering aluminium toxicity
      * Increasing soil aggregation due to increased fungal hyphae
      * Improving soil water handling characteristics
      * Increasing soil levels of available Ca, Mg, P, and K (calcium, magnesium, phosphorus and potassium -- all of which are essential for plant growth)
      * Increasing soil microbial respiration
      * Increasing soil microbial biomass
      * Stimulating symbiotic nitrogen fixation in legumes
      * Increasing arbuscular mycorrhyzal fungi
      * Increasing cation exchange capacity

   

    And, most importantly, for storing carbon in a long term stable sink.

   

  But it won't be just Biochar alone that will be able to do this.  It will require substantial changes in a multitude of human 'systems' -- including the restoration of vast expanses of agricultural lands that have now been so degraded as to be nearly unusable without their chemical inputs. (This can be done through the use of organic methods of farming, i.e. Permaculture, without having to sacrifice the production of food ~ although food production would become more labour intensive and thus more expensive.  But we are seeing the latter anyway, especially with the rising prices of oil & natural gas.)

  Basically, it will require that we (humanity) work to re-establish and re-establish (re-naturalize) what we have effectively depleted; the most important resource we have: the natural ecosystems of this Earth.

   

  As Jeff has so correctly pointed out, Biochar is "The Mother of All Wedges".

   

      Lloyd Helferty, Engineering Technologist

      Thornhill, ON

      905-707-8754

      647-886-8754

   

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: Jeff Berg [mailto:jeffberg at rogers.com] 
  Sent: June 17, 2008 9:07 PM
  To: Bruce Darrell; Douglas Prest; Lloyd Helferty
  Cc: Cameron Smith
  Subject: re Cameron Smith has some questions 
  Importance: High

    Gentleman I present to you Mr. Cameron Smith, Mr. Smith meet what I call the burgeoning biochar brain trust.

     

    Lloyd Helferty: GPO Research and Innovation Candidate and an energy technologist.

    Douglas Prest: (if I remember correctly) Is a professionally trained engineer and working with Lloyd on a business model for biochar.  

    Bruce Darrel: Is a trained architect and FEASTA researcher where he has worked with Richard Douthewaite for the last couple of years.

     

    Cameron as most of you will probably already know is a writer and thinker of some renown, writes articles for the Toronto Star, and is a man who has been on the right side of the ecological ledger for many decades now.  

     

    Gentlemen below you will find a few questions by Senor Cameron on biochar. (Or what I like to call 'The Mother of All Wedges":-)

     

    ton confrere,

     

    J.F. Berg
    www.postcarbontoronto.org
    www.pledgeTOgreen.ca 
       

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

    From: Cameron Smith 

    To: Jeff Berg 

    Cc: Wayne Roberts ; Tyler Hamilton ; Adria Vasil 

    Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 12:56 PM

    Subject: Re: Biochar/Gassification Experimentation Kit

     

    Jeff,  

     

    Thanks for sending me this material on the experimenter's kit.

     

    I have a concern that I haven't yet been able to resolve. As I read it, biochar is like coke. It takes carbon out of circulation for a long period of time. I've been searching, so far without success, for a life cycle analysis of the carbon that is being sequestered. What would it have been doing in the specific environment in question if it had been dealt with in other ways? For instance, the compost you get from biodigesters can be returned to the soil in ways that allow carbon to ensure the availability of minerals and nutrients. As we know, carbon operates in a zillion way to create a healthy soil, and good and abundant food comes only from healthy soils. I keep seeing assertions that biochar is a good fertilizer, because it fixes nitrogen. But carbon's role in ecosystems goes way beyond that.

     

    Globally, we've lost 20 per cent of topsoil within the past 50 years. I don't have an equivalent figure for soil degradation, but it also is a major concern. Taking carbon out of circulation may not be a good idea. I keep running into technological proposals all the time where there hasn't been a thorough examination of ecological effects, and so I keep trying to go back to basic ecological principles. 

     

    Can you help with this?

     

    Cameron

     

    On 11-Jun-08, at 1:27 AM, Jeff Berg wrote:





     


    Gasification Experimenter's Kit 

    Jeremy Faludi
    May 29, 2008 10:27 PM

     

    Want to make your own carbon-negative fuel at home? You may soon be able to. We wrote last fall about gasification and biochar being a way to burn agricultural waste or other organic matter in a special way that (theoretically) sequesters more carbon in the resulting charcoal than it emits into the atmosphere while burning... 


  --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Biochar Ontario" group. 
  To post to this group, send email to biochar-ontario at googlegroups.com 
  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to biochar-ontario-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com 
  For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/biochar-ontario?hl=en 
  -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  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/20080628/f406ca84/attachment.html