biochar & terra preta

[c-ray]

found an interesting read here:
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/MitAdaptStratGlobChange%2011,%20403-427,%20Lehmann,%202006.pdf

[quote]Springer 2006
BIO-CHAR SEQUESTRATION IN TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS

[c-ray]

from another site:
http://www.eprida.com

Eprida offers a revolutionary new sustainable energy technology that will allow us to remove CO2 from the air by putting carbon into the topsoil where it is needed.

The process creates hydrogen rich bio-fuels and a restorative high-carbon fertilizer from biomass alone, or a combination of coal and biomass, while removing net carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

http://www.eprida.com/images/Eprida_soiltest4.jpg
The Eprida process is based on the synergy among three key insights:

First, recent discoveries have revealed an ancient soil management technique from the Amazon basin. For thousands of years before the first Europeans arrived, civilizations there had buried charcoal in tropical soils to make them productive. Those terra preta, or “black earth,” soils still remain bountiful five hundred years later. The charcoal acts like a coral reef for soil organisms and fungi, creating a rich micro ecosystem where organic carbon is bound to minerals to form rich soil.

To make charcoal, wood is heated with limited oxygen, traditionally in a slow burning heap. With modern technology low temperature charcoal can instead be made by a hybrid pyrolysis process whereby biomass such as wood chips or agricultural waste is heated in a sealed vessel. Once started, this process actually gives off heat while it drives off steam and hydrogen, which can be captured, purified and used for energy. Hydrogen can be used to make transitional fuels such as GTL biodiesel today, or used directly in a fuel cell to make electricity or power vehicles in the future. Making a combination of less energy and charcoal from biomass is the second key ECOSS breakthrough.

Just burying charcoal in the soil is beneficial. Japanese studies have found that adding up to 10% charcoal increases fertility in most soils, but adding even more charcoal won’t hurt and if nitrogen is added to the charcoal it produces an even more effective fertilizer. Most fertilizer is currently produced by using natural gas to extract nitrogen from the air to make ammonia, but this releases one molecule of CO2 for each molecule of ammonia produced. Conventional urea based fertilizers, made from this ammonia, also tend to leach out and wash off into waterways, where they become a serious pollutant causing algae bloom and ultimately dangerously acidifying the oceans.

The third breakthrough in creating the Eprida ECOSS process came with the discovery that if ammonia (NH3), carbon dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O), are all combined in the presence of charcoal they will form a solid, ammonium bicarbonate (NH4HCO3) fertilizer inside the pores of the charcoal. About 30% of the hydrogen derived from the biomass will make enough ammonia to combine with all of the charcoal from the same biomass to scrub CO2 flue gases from a power plant, converting all of the ingredients into a slow-release nitrogen fertilizer on charcoal.

The overall process can put almost all of the carbon that was removed from the air by the biomass back into the soil in a stable form, effectively removing net CO2 from the air. When used with biomass and coal, the process will scrub about 60% of the CO2 out of the flue gases from the coal, as well as all of the SOX and NOX, turning these compounds, which would otherwise contribute to acid rain if released into the air, into valuable constituents in the high-carbon fertilizer.

Once buried in the ground, the key to ECOSS carbon sequestration is the action of Arbuscular Mychoryzal Fungi. AM Fungi are found on the roots of almost all plants where they bring moisture and nutrients through tiny hair-like tubes called hyphae. The hyphae extend out from the root and can reach into tiny pores in the charcoal where dissolved nutrients and moisture are drawn by a static electric charge. The fragile hyphae exude a glue called glomalin to form a protective sheath around them. This binds together tiny particles of minerals with bits of dead organic matter that would otherwise quickly decompose and return to the air as CO2. The hyphae only live for a few weeks, but the glomalin lasts for 40 years, while aggregates made of many layers of glomalin and particles can last for hundreds of years. Aggregates give soil its tithe and account for 80% of the carbon found in soils. Increasing aggregate formation is the key to long-term carbon sequestration in soils.

[dpn]

gonna be adding some charcoal to the mix soon... thanx again for the info.

[Green Supreme]

Awesome read C-ray.Thanks for the heads up.Peace GS

[c-ray]

more research
http://www.georgiaitp.org/carbon/orals.htm

[smokinbasser]

It sounds like I need to take a hammer to some kingsford briquettes!! Very interesting read.

[c-ray]

hmm I just checked out the msds for kingsford briquettes (http://www.fsafood.com/msds/vault/001/001529.pdf) they are mostly just char dust but about 15% limestone and 8% lime.. not sure what the source of the char is though, it could very well be from industrial waste.. good idea though

another thing I read is that in the olden days (europe I think) they used to prescribe char from different trees for different soil conditions and crops

think of a tree as a big weed and wonder what type of mineral profile/soil type that a particular tree grows in, if it is cannabis we are growing then perhaps we need to look at trees that would grow natively in a specific environment that the particular type of cannabis that we are growing would do well in...

the particular trees chosen for instance should grow freely/unabated in the same environment that a cannabis plant would thrive and become weedy in, like in the midwest prairies of USA, or steppes of Russia and China for instance

these particular trees would be considered the top dogs of those regions and would host an evolved microlife colony, and the char from those trees would be most conducive to hosting similar microlife associations

in prairies from what I gather there is a natural burn and char cycle anyways, due to the dry summer environment and abundance of lightning/thunderstorms, so birch and poplar trees I am guessing would be a good choice, fast growing weed trees, and they are also N fixers so likely they and their char caverns are naturally hosts and food supplies for N fixing bacteria as well
here on the coast I would say alder is probably good, though the pH here is generally too low to support wild cannabis

[c-ray]

http://www.fao.org/docrep/X5328e/x5328e0b.htm

[c-ray]

http://www.murayoshi.com/en/practical.html
scroll down the page for gardening data

[c-ray]

more turbo linkage
from http://www.eprida.com/hydro/yahoo2004.htm

What can you do? Read up on terra preta (some of the published works
made a part of the above patent application), look at references in
the Eprida website or convince yourself by testing. Grow your favorite
plant in two pots, one with 1/3 wood charcoal (soak this in fertilizer
for several days), 1/3 sand and 1/3 available soil. Plant the other
with your normal method for potting plants. Fertilize and watch them
grow. Watch it for three seasons and note the differences. (Many have
noted their best results in the second year as microbial populations
increase) Alternately, use a microbe/fungi inoculation to speed the
response.

[c-ray]

from http://www.georgiaitp.org/carbon/PDF%20Files/Abstracts/Session1C.pdf

[QUOTE]Unlocking microbial communities in Terra Preta: nucleic acid extraction and purification as keys to characterizing biology in black carbon soils

Brendan O’Neill (ben7@cornell.edu) and Janice Thies (jet25@cornell.edu)
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University 706 Bradfield Hall, Ithaca, NY, 14853

Amazonian Dark Earths, or Terra Preta (TP) soils, are noted for both their high fertility and black carbon (BC) content. The anthropogenic addition of charred plant material, BC, has altered soil nutrient dynamics and the unique chemistry of TP likely sustains unique microbial populations which play a role in stabilizing their fertility. Using soil from four TP sites in the Brazilian Amazon, we sought to elucidate major differences in bacterial populations in these soils as compared to soil sampled from adjacent oxisols. We used a most probable number dilution extinction method to estimate the numbers of bacteria culturable in a liquid minimal medium (R2A). For each site, numbers of culturable bacteria were equivalent to or higher in all TP soils as compared to adjacent oxisols. We subsequently used a direct cell lysis protocol to extract total soil DNA using a commercial kit (Bio101

[The Cannarchist]

"but may point toward an analogous effect of BC in other ecosystems."

True dat....

[c-ray]

from: http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/charcoal/

1. Using a cold chisel prepare the drum by making five 50mm (2in) holes in one end and completely removing the other. Knock-up the cut edge of the open end to form a ledge (Note, the lid will have to placed back on this ledge and made airtight).
2. Position the drum, open end upwards, on three bricks to allow an air flow to the holes in the base.

3. Place paper, kindling and brown ends (incompletely charred butts from the last burn) into the bottom of the drum and light.

4. Once it is burning well, load branchwood at random to allow air spaces until the drum is completely full. Keep the pieces to a fairly even diameter but put any larger ones to the bottom where they will be subjected to a longer burning.

5. When the fire is hot and will clearly not go out, restrict the air access around the base by using earth placed against it, but leaving one 100mm (4in) gap. Also place the lid on top, leaving a _small_ gap at one side for smoke to exit.

6. Dense white smoke will issue during the charring process. When this visibly slows, bang the drum to settle the wood down, creating more white smoke.

7. When the smoke turns from white (mainly water being driven off) to thin blue (charcoal starting to burn) stop the burn by firstly closing off all air access to the base using more earth, and secondly by placing the lid firmly on its ledge, and making it airtight by the addition of of sods and soil as required. The burn will take between three and four hours.

8. After cooling for about 24 hours, the drum can be tipped over and the charcoal emptied out onto a sheet for grading and packing.

Source: Traditional Woodland Crafts. Raymond Tabor. Published by Batsford,London,UK ISBN 0-7134-7138-7

[c-ray]

slow pyrolysis
http://www.bestenergies.com/companies/bestpyrolysis.html

[nuggdigger]

"Did someone say Terra Preta?":hombre:


By Eric Biksa


In 1542 a Spanish Conquistador by the name of Francisco de Orellana returned to Spain to tell an audience of his trip in search for a city of gold along the Rio Negro, one of the largest rivers in the Amazonian basin in South America. Obviously, the city of gold never surfaced, but he did tell his audience that he encountered advanced civilizations; some virtual cities, that were sustained in part with agricultural crops. Later, when Spanish missionaries returned to the area, they found no indication that the civilizations claimed by Francisco de Orellana ever existed. Later more modern scientists also discredited his claims, saying that the poor soil conditions largely due to weathering (soil erosion) were not capable of producing crops, therefore unable to feed civilizations.

That was up until recently. Researchers from elevated views noticed lush bands of growth amongst native vegetation. They were apparently deliberate in patterns and seemed to be numerous in areas. Closer observation has now revealed that these strips of land were indeed deliberate, and were the product of ancient agricultural practices.

So what?

One of the interesting things about this phenomenon is that although rainforest soils would seem productive, they are actually quite inhospitable in terms of cultivating crops other than native species. This is due to a number of factors. Rainforest areas receive copious quantities of precipitation. As a result, many nutrients are leached from the soil, leaving them relatively in fertile. In conjunction with lowered amounts of SOM (Soil Organic Matter) due to rapid decomposition from warm, moist, and acidic conditions the oxisolic soil types native to the region are not all that capable of producing a variety of agricultural crops needed to sustain a growing and hungry population. Oxisolic soils are known to be the poorest producing of all the forest soils. Rather they are most often mined for there silicate, iron, or aluminum content.

However, researchers have named theses newly discovered bands of productive soil Terra Preta and Terra Mulata. Translated from Spanish, “ terra preta” means “Indian Black Earth”, while “terra mulata” translates to something more like “Indian Brown Earth”.

Terra preta soils are characterized by their high black carbon content (>9%), high phosphate levels, high cation exchange capacity (CEC), relatively mild acidity, and retention of trace metals in the soil. It also seems to retain soil organic matter (SOM) at significantly greater levels than surrounding native soils.

A key area of interest for anybody with a vested interest in agriculture (pretty much anybody who eats) and especially for growers is the sustainability of these soils. They exist in surroundings that dictate that they should be infertile. Even after over 200 years of weathering by the toughest conditions nature has to offer they continue to exist relatively unchanged. Most research suggests that terra preta soils stability stems from their relatively high concentration of black carbon in the SOM (soil organic matter) which in some cases has been as high as 35%. Incidentally, terra preta soils contain a relatively high concentration of humic acids, which may have risen in part to the weathering of the black carbon. The humic acid fraction of the soil chelates and complexes many plant nutrients, helping to prevent them from being leached or weathered from the soil. High phosphate contents and trace minerals are another factor in the equation.

Like a lot of good things in life, these soils didn’t happen on their own. The native farmers to the region practiced “slash and char” methods, rather than “slash and burn”. Current practices of clearing jungle land for agriculture incinerate native vegetation. This removes most of the organic matter available for the eco-system which is required for micro-biological stability. The resulting ashes provide, a quick and short supply of Potash, but further acidify the already acidic jungle soils rendering them even less capable of producing crops. The ancients did not allow the area to be completely burned, but left charcoal, later tilled beneath the soil surface. Villages begain to grow in these farmed areas, as did the refuse discarded by the indigenous people. However, their garbage was not made of plastic, metal, paper, and glass. It was elementally simple-kitchen scraps, pottery shards, and fibers from clothing and other materials.

This refuse contributed to the SOM levels helping reduce weathering and adding stability to the microbiology of the soil. Sort of like a big composter.

The richest terra preta soils always contain a significant content of shards from clay pottery. Clay is typically high in phosphates and many trace elements such as iron and silicate and typically has a significant CEC (cation exchange capacity). The clay pottery is also porous. A lot of indoor gardeners are already using clay pottery in their mediums: LECCA stones a.k.a. “grow rocks”.

The fact that these soils still exist today and are capable of producing crops is worthy of attention and further research. In fact, some locals in these areas sell the soil for potting plants. They have found that as longs as they leave the lower soil profile, the soil is capable of reproducing itself! Quite remarkable; a soil that grows in more ways than one.

As hydroponic and biological growing methods and products continue to develop, it seems that the old adage “there is nothing new under the sun” comes into play. We have probably already forgotten more than we can learn. So perhaps much of the growing future will have us turning our heads towards the past.

[c-ray]

from http://www.agnet.org/library/eb/430/
and
http://web.archive.org/web/20051109010245/http://www.agnet.org/library/article/eb430.html

[QUOTE]MICROBIAL FERTILIZERS IN JAPAN

Michinori Nishio National Institute of Agro-Environmental Sciences Kannondai 3-1-1, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305 Japan

1996-10-01

This Bulletin discusses microbial products in Japan, where they are used on many farms, particularly by organic farmers who hope that these products will improve nutrient uptake by plants and the quality of their products. It discusses the use of charcoal and rhizobia to stimulate nutrient uptake, and the use of arbuscular mycorrizal fungi (AMF) to help establish vegetation on barren land. The range of commercial AMF products available in Japan is briefly described, and their use and effectiveness in Japanese agriculture.


ABSTRACT


INTRODUCTION

In 1961, Japan enacted the "Fundamental Law of Agriculture", which encouraged farmers to selectively produce vegetables, fruits, forage crops and livestock as well as rice, instead of staple foods such as wheat, barley and corn. The aim of the law was to raise farmers' incomes in response to the rapid growth of the Japanese economy. Consumption of vegetables, fruits, milk, eggs and meats increased with economic growth. Farmers adopted the strategy of increasing crop yields by applying large amounts of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. During the 1960s and 1970s, the yield of many crops per unit area increased dramatically as the result of intensive use of chemical inputs and various soil amendments.

At present, however, the yield of many crops in Japan has reached a plateau. Moreover, the negative effects of heavy applications of chemical inputs are becoming apparent, in terms of both production and the environment, especially in the case of vegetables. Physiological disturbance of plant metabolism is common, due to the accumulation of excess plant nutrients in the soil. The spread of soil-borne diseases is a threat to vegetable production, especially where monoculture is prevailing. Pollution of underground and surface water by nitrates is sometimes reported from vegetable producing areas. Quality deterioration, in terms of a decrease in the content of vitamins and sugars, is becoming a subject of concern. All these factors are giving farmers an interest in the function and utilization of soil microorganisms, as a way of repairing the damage from the overuse of chemical inputs.

Many farmers in Japan are showing a strong interest in the utilization of microorganisms to help:

* Stimulate plant nutrient uptake;
* Provide biological control of soil-borne diseases;
* Hasten the decomposition of straw and other organic wastes;
* Improve soil structure; and
* Promote the production of physio-logically active substances in the rhizosphere or in organic matter.

The main incentive for farmers to use microorganisms seems to be that they hope to increase the yield or quality of their crops at a relatively low cost, without a large investment of money and labor. Although many microbial materials are sold commercially, most of them are not microbiologically defined, i.e. the microorganisms contained in the products are not identified, and the microbial composition is not fixed. Many of these commercial products are advertised as if they could solve any problem a farmer is likely to encounter. Because most extension advisors lack any knowledge of microbial products, confusion and trouble frequently occur.

In this report I would like to describe the present situation of microbial technologies in Japan, focusing on the practical use of various products and their potential.


UTILIZATION OF ARBUSCULAR MYCORRHIZAL FUNGI

More than 50% of upland and grassland soils in Japan are volcanic ash soils (Andosols), which transform phosphate into unavailable forms by chemical bonding with aluminum ions. Phosphate availability is therefore one of the strongest limiting factors on Japanese upland and grassland farms. At present, this problem is being overcome by a heavy basal dressing of a mixture of superphosphate and fused phosphate. Although these heavy applications have contributed to a remarkable increase in yields of many crops, many vegetable fields have accumulated phosphate at levels which inhibit plant growth. On the other hand, most grasslands are still deficient in phosphate, because enough chemical phosphate is being applied only when they are reclaimed. Therefore, there are two types of Andosols in Japan; one contains a sufficient amount of phosphate, and one does not. In both cases, there have been attempts to use arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) or vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (VAM) for soil amelioration.


Utilization of Indigenous AMF by the Application of Charcoal

The idea that the application of charcoal stimulates indigenous AMF in soil and thus promotes plant growth is relatively well-known in Japan, although the actual application of charcoal is limited due to its high cost. The concept originated in the work of M. Ogawa, a former soil microbiologist in the Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute in Tsukuba. He and his colleagues applied charcoal around the roots of pine trees growing by the seashore, and found that Japanese truffles became plentiful. He also tested the application of charcoal to soybean with a small quantity of applied fertilizer, and demonstrated the stimulation of plant growth and nodule formation (Ogawa 1983). His findings with regard to legumes were taken up for further study by the National Grassland Research Institute (Nishio and Okano 1991).
Stimulation of Alfalfa Growth by Charcoal Application

Table 1 shows the results obtained with alfalfa in pot experiments. The soil used was a volcanic ash soil with very low phosphate availability. Although alfalfa growth was very poor without applied fertilizer, it was improved by the application of small amounts of fertilizer, and even more by the application of charcoal with the fertilizer.

Four sets of pots were prepared. Each set received the same amount of fertilizer (2 g N, 4.4 g P and 8.3 g K/m2). Set [F] received only fertilizer. The others received fertilizer and also rhizobia [F+R], 1,000g/m of charcoal [F+C], and rhizobia plus charcoal [F+R+C]. The charcoal used was a commercial product made of bark from several kinds of deciduous broad-leaved trees. Particle composition was >2mm, 24%; 1-2mm, 18%, and <1mm; 58%.

Compared to the sets which received fertilizer alone, or fertilizer plus rhizobia, the charcoal application stimulated plant growth by 1.7 - 1.8 times [F+C] and 1.4 - 1.8 times [F+R+C], measured at 38 days after sowing. At this stage the stimulatory effect of rhizobia on plant growth was not marked, because the plants had met most of their requirements by absorbing the applied nitrogen fertilizer, and nodule development was still at an early stage. At 58 days, when the nitrate added had been completely exhausted, plants not inoculated with rhizobia ([F] and [F + C]) ceased to grow, and their leaves turned yellow due to nitrogen deficiency. The soil used did not contain any indigenous rhizobia effective on alfalfa, so that roots not inoculated with R. meliloti did not show any acetylene reduction activity. At this stage, the stimulatory effect of charcoal on growth was observed only in the plants inoculated with rhizobia. The shoot weight of the [F + R + C] plants was 1.7 times greater than that of the [F + R] plants.


Stimulation of Nutrient Uptake by Charcoal Application

The amount of nutrients (N, P, K) absorbed by the shoots showed a trend similar to that of the shoot fresh weight (Table 1). The amount of N fixed by the nodules and transported to the shoots was calculated by subtracting the N content of the shoots of the plants not inoculated with rhizobia from the N content of the inoculated plants ([F+R]-[F], [F+R+C] - [F+C]). The addition of charcoal increased this amount of N 2.8-4.0 times, and the ARA by 6.2 times (Table 2). Added charcoal also increased the nodule weight by 2.3 times.

Fig. 1 shows the relationship between the increment of P and N associated with rhizobial inoculation in comparison with the non-inoculated alfalfa ([F+R] - [F] and [+R+C] - [F+C]). A significant correlation was observed between the increments of P and N, suggesting that the stimulation of nitrogen fixation by charcoal addition may be due to the stimulation of P uptake.
Relationship between Charcoal Application and AMP

The relative values of the shoot fresh weight and the degree of AMF infection were determined on the basis of the values of [F+R]. A significant correlation was observed between the shoot weight and AMF infection (Fig. 2).

When the soil was sterilized by chloropicrin, alfalfa growth was greatly reduced, even with the application of the same amount of fertilizer shown in Table 1. The stimulatory effect of charcoal on plant growth also diminished. On the other hand, vigorous plant growth and the stimulatory effects of charcoal addition were clearly observed when the sterilized soil was mixed with a large amount of native soil (Fig. 3). This clearly indicates that the stimulatory effect of added charcoal may appear only when a certain level of indigenous AMF are present.


MECHANISM WHEREBY CHARCOAL STIMULATES THE GROWTH OF AMF

Charcoal may stimulate the growth of AMF by the following mechanism. Charcoal particles have a large number of continuous pores with a diameter of more than 100

[c-ray]

from http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/files/pt2005025.pdf

Wood vinegar is a byproduct from charcoal production. It is a liquid generated from the gas and combustion of fresh wood burning in airless condition. When the gas is cooled, it condenses into liquid. Raw wood vinegar has more than 200 chemicals, such as acetic acid, formaldehyde, ethyl-valerate, methanol, tar, etc. Wood vinegar improves soil quality, eliminates pests and controls plant growth, but is slightly toxic to fish and very toxic to plants if too much is applied. It accelerates the growth of roots, stems, tubers, leaves, flowers, and fruit.

In certain cases, it may hold back plant growth if the wood vinegar is applied at different volumes. A study shows that after applying wood vinegar in an orchard, fruit trees produce increased amounts of fruit. Wood vinegar is safe to living matters in the food chain, especially, insects that help pollinate plants.

Wood vinegar is made from burning fresh wood in a charcoal kiln, made from a 200-liter oil drum and 120-cm tall concrete chimney with a 4-inch diameter.

The kiln contains 63-83 kg of fresh wood. Wood good for vinegar must have a heartwood.

Food and Fertilizer Technology Center (FFTC)
5F, 14 Wenchow St., Taipei 106, Taiwan ROC
Tel.: (886 2) 2362 6239 Fax: (886 2) 2362 0478
E-mail: fftc@agnet.org Website: www.fftc.agnet.org

Agricultural Chemistry Group, Agricultural Production
Sciences Research and Development Office
Department of Agriculture, Thailand
Paholyothin Road, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900, Thailand
Tel. 66-2579-3579 Fax. 66-2940-5736
E-mail : panpimon@doa.go.th

Fig. 1. Pile wood in the kiln.
Fig. 2. (a) Put tile at the top of the chimney. (b) The steam is condensed into liquid. (c) Collect the vinegar drops from the bamboo or plastic pipe.


Process

1. Cure wood that has heartwood and bark for 5-15 days.
2. Pile wood in the kiln (Fig. 1). Close the kiln and cover every hole with clay. Burn it at 120-430C.
3. After 1 hour, put a tile at the top of the chimney (Fig. 2). If brown or dark brown drops appear on the tile, allow smoke to flow through a bamboo pipe so that the hot steam may be condensed into liquid.
4. Place a vessel to collect the vinegar drops from the bamboo pipe.
5. If wood is burned for 12-15 hours in a 200-liter oil drum kiln, it should produce 2-7 liters of wood vinegar. At this stage, it is called raw wood vinegar.
6. Leave the raw wood vinegar for 3 months to become silted. The vinegar will turn yellow like vegetable oil. After which, it will turn light brown and the tar will become silted. The top content will be a light, clear oil. Remove the tar and light oil, as Fig. 3. The wood vinegar well as the dark brown translucent oil and the remainder will be sour vinegar (Fig. 3).


Application

Blend with water in a ratio of 1:50 (1 liter wood vinegar and 50 liters water), or up to a ratio of 1:800 (1 liter wood vinegar and 800 liters water). Spray it over plant shoots.

Wood vinegar, like hormones, will be absorbed into twigs, trunks, or leaves. Plants will be stronger, and leaves will be greener and resistant to pests and diseases.


Benefits

1. Farmers can produce wood vinegar from branches trimmed from trees.
2. Wood vinegar is safe to human beings, animals, plants, and environment.
3. Wood vinegar helps plants to grow better and stronger, and be resistant to pests and diseases.
4. Crop produce is high quality and safe.
5. Low cost of production attributed to savings from cost of chemicals.

[c-ray]

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/2007/1946410.htm

[c-ray]

some more links, read 'em and leap
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
http://www.holon.se/folke/carbon/simplechar/simplechar.shtml
http://biochar.pbwiki.com

[purplehaze2]

wow c-ray awesome find ,thats killer about the ancient people that were there thousand of years before the first europeans and that charcoal is still kicking ass, I was away for a day and I felt like I missed a class.

[purplehaze2]

I just tried to order my bincho and they have to email me back about the prices,the bincho kicks ass compared to th e fertilizer,the bincho doubled the leaf sites,this is good stuff. IM wondering if you woud just use it alone,or would you have to add anything else.I would think stand alone becuase it says it acts like a reef in the water and reefs are very sensitive to change.

[purplehaze2]

that guy is in the phillipines,the reason I say this is becuase thats a bottom of a tea-pea hut ,that the locals make.I wish I could make my own vineger I think that would give off a signal.

[guest]

Hey buddy,

Check this forum for terra preta at hypography science forums, very good resource :-)

http://hypography.com/forums/terra-preta/

[c-ray]

little video from the International Biochar Initiative (http://www.biochar-international.org)

1-hSl59ET2A

M6EPKYp5UgI

[c-ray]

another vid

5JpvhaQjyyc

m-hhtZGll0U

Gi1Fac-jrCQ

[DOZEE]

really cool. you guys almost make me wanna grow in soil...

[c-ray]

when you say 'you guys' are you talking about the worms?

[c-ray]

from http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/03/30/biochar.warming.energy/index.html
check the video here -> http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/03/30/biochar.warming.energy/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

[QUOTE]Can 'biochar' save the planet?
Tue March 31, 2009

ATHENS, Georgia (CNN) -- Over the railroad tracks, near Agriculture Drive on the University of Georgia campus, sits a unique machine that may hold one of the solutions to big environmental problems like energy, food production and even global climate change.

Biochar's high carbon content and porous nature can help soil retain water, nutrients, protect soil microbes.

"This machine right here is our baby," said UGA research engineer Brian Bibens, who is one of a handful of researchers around the world working on alternative ways to recycle carbon.

Bibens' specialty is "biochar," a highly porous charcoal made from organic waste. The raw material can be any forest, agricultural or animal waste. Some examples are woodchips, corn husks, peanut shells, even chicken manure.

Bibens feeds the waste -- called "biomass" -- into an octagonally shaped metal barrel where it is cooked under intense heat, sometimes above 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, the organic matter is cooked through a thermochemical process called "pyrolysis".

In a few hours, organic trash is transformed into charcoal-like pellets farmers can turn into fertilizer. Gasses given off during the process can be harnesed to fuel vehicles of power electric generators.

Biochar is considered by many scientists to be the "black gold" for agriculture.

Its high carbon content and porous nature can help soil retain water, nutrients, protect soil microbes and ultimately increase crop yields while acting as natural carbon sink - sequestering CO2 and locking it into the ground.

Biochar helps clean the air two ways: by preventing rotting biomass from releasing harmful CO2 into the atmosphere, and by allowing plants to safely store CO2 they pull out of the air during photosynthesis. See more about how biochar works

[Lungus]

Q. Would used activated charcoal from Can filters be suitable for terra preta?

[c-ray]

if it's made from coconut shells then definitely

[c-ray]

some interesting links:
http://ahualoa.net/ag/notes_biochar.html
http://www.hnei.hawaii.edu/bio.r3.asp
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6790317.PN.&OS=PN/6790317&RS=PN/6790317

some key info from the first link:
[QUOTE]Flash carbonization locks carbon into a stable, biologically unavailable form, so flash carbonizing agricultural wastes prevents them from releasing greenhouse gasses. Charcoal can also improve a soil

[guest]

Hey C, :)


Here is some interesting info and a good study. In place of rice hulls I'm thinking bokashi...


THE USE OF CARBONIZED RICE HULLES AS AN HORTICULTURAL SUBSTRATE
http://www.actahort.org/books/294/294_29.htm
[quote]Abstract:
Rice hulls are mentioned in the technical literature as an ingredient for potting media (POOLE & WATERS, 1977) or as an alternative substrate for soilless culture (NAMIOKA, 1977), Carbonized rice hulls have been used for several years by some commercial flower growers in Brazil as a substrate for rooting cuttings of roses and chrysanthemuns stocks. Due its good drainage and high permeability this material is specially adequated to be used as rooting medium under intermitent mist.

Rice hulls are an easy available industrial residue (about 1,01 thousand tons/year) in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. After the carbonization process rice hulls have a near neutral pH (7,5 in H2O), in low bulk density (about 220 g/l), more than 50% dry matter, a high total porosity, with a air: water ratio near 3:1 at container capacity and a low volume of water in micropores (9% water held at 100 cm water tension).

The purpose of this study was to test mixtures of carbonized rice hulls and peat ("Aguas Claras", Viam

[c-ray]

more interesting info

from http://www.carbonchar.com/plant-performance
In 2005, where our carbon based soil amendment was applied at 7 pounds per acre, the Carbon Char Group achieved a 20 % INCREASE IN CORN YIELD. In addition, what we saw below ground was a

* 17% INCREASE IN BACTERIA
* 43% INCREASE IN FUNGI
* 66% INCREASE IN FLAGELLATES
* 206 % INCREASE IN AMOEBAE
* 520% INCREASE IN MYCORRHIZAL COLONIZATION

and

from http://www.re-char.com/2009/04/08/disarming-the-biochar-wars/
Disarming the Biochar Wars
April 8, 2009

Since we posted on the growing debate over biochar, the Internet and the twitterverse have ignited into a firestorm of controversy over biochar. In general, it seems that a lack of information is pervading both sides of the debate. As a seasoned group of biochar enthusiasts, entrepreneurs and researchers, re:char presents the following items which we believe will clear up the most common misconceptions about biochar. We urge our readers to link to this article, as anti-biochar crusaders have resorted to unacceptable tactics such as spamming notable scientists like Dr. James Hansen.

Biochar=biofuel: NO. In our research, this is the #1 criticism of the biochar concept, and unfortunately it is very misguided. It stems from the criticisms of 1st-generation biofuels– namely that they use food based feedstocks, have a low or negative energy balance and are generally unsustainable. We agree that 1st-gen biofuels are highly problematic, but to equate them with biochar and pyrolysis is simply not correct.

First of all, the majority of biochar advocates promote the use of agricultural wastes as a feedstock. Ag wastes are NOT FOOD. Instead, they are products that are typically mulched, composted or simply left in-field to rot.

Second, there are many different types of pyrolysis processes and technologies that produce varying quantities of biochar, combustible gas and bio-oil. Slow pyrolysis technologies produce primarily biochar, while fast pyrolysis technologies are designed to produce bio-oil. Bio-oil is not biodiesel nor is it ethanol. It is a hydrocarbon emulsion that can act as a low grade heating oil or bunker fuel substitute. Many groups are working on technologies to refine bio-oil into high-value chemicals or transportation fuels. In general, most fast pyrolysis plants have a parasitic load between 10 and 25%. This means that only 10-25% of the energy produced is used to power the pyrolyzer, making the process highly efficient.

How can burning wood be carbon negative? This issue has come up frequently on the blogosphere as well, and again demonstrates many of the problems that come from misinformation. The skeptics are correct: combustion of wood (burning) is carbon positive. However, biochar is NOT made by burning wood. Biochar is produced via a process called pyrolysis. Pyrolysis is a carbon negative process, meaning upwards of 90% of the CO2 that would be released through combustion is captured as biochar.

Okay but what if you burn the biofuel…. I mean bio-oil? Yes, combustion of bio-oil in an engine, boiler or turbine will release CO2. However, in general these emissions are more than offset by the carbon that is sequestered in the biochar. In addition, bio-oil combustion results in remarkably low emissions of NOx and SOx. Finally, remember that bio-oil is produced from waste which would otherwise decompose completely into CO2 and methane.

Industrial Scale Biochar Production will result in deforestation: UNLIKELY. This is the argument leveled by George Monbiot which has appeared to spark the Biochar Wars. To his credit, Monbiot is correct that industrial scale biochar production could provide an incentive for land-clearing in the developing world. If biochar were accepted under the Clean Development Mechanism as a bankable carbon offset, and if the price of carbon were high enough to justify it, farmers could be incentivized to generate as much biochar as humanly possible.

However, there is a glaring problem with Monbiot’s argument. Currently, there are a handful of companies developing pyrolysis technologies, and a slightly larger handful of scientists who support biochar. Of these two handfuls, we cannot find anyone that is advocating industrial scale biochar. Why? Because everyone in the biochar community already knows it won’t work.

The scientists know that industrial scale biochar production is simply unsustainable. The entrepreneurs know that unless the price of a carbon offset were astronomically huge, there is no way large-scale biochar production would make any economic sense. The cost of transporting a low-value, low-density product like biomass over a distance greater than a couple of kilometers is herculean. This reality is part of what has damned 1st-gen biofuels. The biochar concept works with agricultural waste on the small scale, because these are products that farmers already collect and move to a centralized location for mulching and composting. On the industrial scale, the economics simply don’t work. They never have and they never will.

If, for some reason, the price of carbon did increase 100 fold, it would also allow a host of other dubious offsets to become economically viable. Given that the price of 1 tonne of CO2 currently hovers around $20-30 in Europe, we just don’t see that happening.

Biochar is not a longterm carbon storage mechanism: VISIT THE AMAZON BASIN. There, you will find an intact layer of charcoal in the soil roughly the size of France. Biochar has been shown to be stable in soils for up to 2000 years. That is an order of magnitude longer than any other carbon storage technology.

We hope this article will clear up some of the misinformation surrounding biochar. Obviously, people are weary of any new solution to climate change after the promises of biofuels, wind and solar. Still, let’s not jump to conclusions and make biochar the next betamax. As of yet, it is the only technology that has shown any promise at reducing our concentration of atmospheric CO2. If we ever want to get back below 350 ppm, let’s give biochar a chance.

[dpn]

making bio char with peter hurst.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXMUmby8PpU

how do you embed a youtube video onto your post?

[c-ray]

just hit the quote button on one of those posts and you'll see how to do it

[dpn]

sorry but i still dont get it, ive tried different suggested methods but they all failed.

i wonder if this bio char could be used to fill our carbon scrubbers?

[dpn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGurqqGTMW4&feature=player_embedded#


good video.... the chap mentions that the best material to use for your bio-char isnt wood as the structure is too dense, and states that corn stalks (a more porous material) is better. Id imagine the native amazonian's would have used the charred stalks of the harvested plants, rather than just hacking at the woody rain forest for bio char.

So, if you have plenty of ganja stalks left over and the composter wont cut the mustard, turn them into bio char.

[hypnotoad]

This is good stuff, but it seems that it's main benefit is for long term soil management. For me, that means, keeping my soil and re composting it over and over....in my apartment. the other thing about biochar that I read was about how it will initially adjust your NPK ratios (lower them). This isn't bad so much as it seems touchy stuff to work with until you dial it in.

However, one thing that does interest me is how biochar combined with higher N levels show promise for vegging perhaps?

http://e-terrapretarooftopexp.blogspot.com/

Overall, I am all for it. I think this is great stuff for farms all over the world, but may have limited success indoors. If someone disagrees, I would really like to hear your arguments for biochar and short term benefits, because I am more interested in learning than ever being right.

Thanks,
HT

[Parabola]

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/04/lost-amazon-farms/

Lost Tribes Used Clever Tricks to Turn Amazon Wasteland to Farms

[DOZEE]

wow very cool.

[c-ray]

these guys are impregnating biochar with compost tea with good results
http://www.rainbowsendbiochar.com/Product.html

[c-ray]

http://blip.tv/the-sanctuary-for-independent-media/bio-char-with-david-yarrow-5528595

[c-ray]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWuhb9cwfI

[c-ray]

the Char-B-Que

http://www.greaterdemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/iCans-in-place-loaded.jpg

http://www.greaterdemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Char-B-Que-1.pdf

[Sicarii]

that's pretty sweet, and at 4-5 bucks for a 50 lb bag thats more economical by far. thanks for the good read man

peace sicarii