[Terrapreta] Press release: limitations on charcoal as a carbonsink

[Sean K. Barry]

Hi Ron,

This just doesn't make any sense, even with a 50/50 (weight/weight?) mixture of charcoal (90-95% pure carbon) and humus (maybe 40% carbon, tops).  If you put 50 kg of charcoal and 50 kg of humus into the soil and the new microbes expire all of the original carbon that was in the humus, then there would STILL be more carbon left in the soil than when you started.  The microbes do themselves contain some carbon, probably like the humus @~40%.  Maybe if Wardle was thinking clearly about this he would have measured the soil carbon content of the original soil before application of the charcoal or charcoal/humus mixtures, and then measured the soil carbon content after the two years or the ten years.
Wardle ignored microbe carbon content.  Wardle ignored the carbon content in plant growth.  a 50/50 mixture of charcoal and humus buried inside a nylon bag is not an ecosystem.

I have been a member of AAAS and subscribed to the journal of SCIENCE for more than 15 years myself.  I generally respect the journals articles.  But, I never suspend critical thinking about anything, even if it is stated in the Journal of SCIENCE or it it was written by someone with some extra letters attached after their name.  We can't just do that.

Regards,

SKB

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ron Larson<mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net> 
  To: Laurens Rademakers<mailto:lrademakers at biopact.com> ; terra pretta group<mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> 
  Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 12:23 PM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Press release: limitations on charcoal as a carbonsink


  Terra Preta list members

  1.  Thanks to Laurens for bringing this to our attention.
  2.  Being a subscriber to Science, I thought it might be helpful to add a bit after reading it on-line before most of us could see it in paper form.
  3.  At numerous sites, the authors buried (back in humus [no mineral soil] to same (humus) locations at 10-12 cm depth) small nylon bags containing 1 gram of different material types - humus, char, and a 50-50 mixture.  
  4.  The results are explained below - the biochar accelerated, rather than retarded C release - which I didn't want to hear.
  5.  Maybe the results are not so bad though - as there was probably (??) no above ground growth to measure.  These tests done in old (??) forests. 
  6.  We on this list are not proposing to use 50-50 mixtures.
  7.  We are not proposing placement in humus - but rather in mineral soils - where presumably the extra bacteria and fungus can help release the needed nutrients.
  8.  There was a positive side on nitrogen absorption (the opposite of release).
  9.  We need more solid research like this.  The authors used this sort of 50-50 mixture because they are expert on the non-linearities of what happens when different types of leaves decompose when together vs separately.
  10.  The press release is more negative on TP/biochar than the article.  Near the middle the article says:"  These results are consistent with charcoal particles serving as foci for adsorption of organic compounds and microbial growth and activity (4, 5), leading to enhanced decomposition rates and mass loss of associated humus. The enhanced microbial activity in the mixture bags may have led to greater mass and C loss through either greater respiration or greater leaching of soluble compounds (9)."
  11.  I am very impressed that this well-respected Swedish forestry research group started these studies so long ago - and hope we can hear more from other such groups.  The news is not as bad as I feared before reading the article. 
  12.  I like the last sentence in the news release: "The effect of biochar on the loss of carbon already in the soil needs to be better understood before it can be effectively applied as a tool to mitigate human-induced increases in carbon-based greenhouse gases. "  No disagreement there.

  Ron

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Laurens Rademakers<mailto:lrademakers at biopact.com> 
    To: terra pretta group<mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> 
    Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 7:19 AM
    Subject: [Terrapreta] Press release: limitations on charcoal as a carbon sink


    Here is the press release about the study that appeared in Science:

    http://www.slu.se/?ID=704&Nyheter_id=8497<http://www.slu.se/?ID=704&Nyheter_id=8497>

    =========================================================

    Limitations of charcoal as an effective carbon sink
    Fire-derived charcoal is thought to be an important carbon sink. However, a SLU paper in Science shows that charcoal promotes soil microbes and causes a large loss of soil carbon.

    There has been greatly increasing attention given to the potential of 'biochar', or charcoal made from biological tissues (e.g., wood) to serve as a long term sink of carbon in the soil. This is because charcoal is carbon-rich and breaks down extremely slowly, persisting in soil for thousands of years. This has led to the suggestion being seriously considered by policy makers worldwide that biochar could be produced in large quantities and stored in soils. This would in turn increase ecosystem carbon sequestration, and thereby counteract human induced increases in carbon-based greenhouse gases and help combat global warming. 
    However, a new study by Professors David Wardle, Marie-Charlotte Nilsson and Olle Zackrisson at SLU, the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, in Umeå, scheduled to appear in this Friday's issue of the prestigious journal Science, suggests that these supposed benefits of biochar may be somewhat overstated. In their study, charcoal was prepared and mixed with forest soil, and left in the soil in each of three contrasting forest stands in northern Sweden for ten years. 

    They found that when charcoal was mixed into humus, there was a substantial increase in soil microorganisms (bacteria and fungi). These microbes carry out decomposition of organic matter (carbon) in the soil, and consistent with this, they found that charcoal caused greatly increased losses of native soil organic matter, and soil carbon, for each of the three forest stands. Much of this lost soil carbon would be released as carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. Therefore, while it is true that charcoal represents a long term sink of carbon because of its persistence, this effect is at least partially offset by the capacity of charcoal to greatly promote the loss of that carbon already present in the soil. 

    The study finds that the supposed benefits of biochar in increasing ecosystem carbon storage may be overstated, at least for boreal forest soils. The effect of biochar on the loss of carbon already in the soil needs to be better understood before it can be effectively applied as a tool to mitigate human-induced increases in carbon-based greenhouse gases. 

    For information: 
    Professor David Wardle, Department of forest ecology and management, SLU (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences) Umea, Sweden, telephone +46 90 786 84 71, +46 70 658 92 81. 
    E-mail: David.Wardle at svek.slu.se<mailto:David.Wardle at svek.slu.se> 

    Professor Marie-Charlotte Nilsson, Department of forest ecology and management, SLU (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences) Umea, Sweden,, telephone +46 90 786 84 40, +46 70 556 66 04. 
    E-mail: Marie-Charlotte.Nilsson at svek.slu.se<mailto:Marie-Charlotte.Nilsson at svek.slu.se> 



    Read more...
    Posted by: Sven-Olov Bylund
    Published by: Sven-Olov Bylund

    ===========================================================

    To make the idea of biochar survive, it will be important to stress that when applied in agricultural systems, the improved biomass yields as a result of biochar applications, might offset the increased emissions from the decomposition of native SOM. 

    Also, it seems like biochar will only really work in soils with low SOM contents (e.g. tropical soils).



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


    _______________________________________________
    Terrapreta mailing list
    Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
    http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
    http://terrapreta.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/20080503/ca1a2be1/attachment.html