Re: [biochar] Shared from Twitter: Southern states lead growth in biomass electricity generation - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

12 views
Skip to first unread message

Erich Knight

unread,
May 31, 2016, 9:23:40 PM5/31/16
to biochar, se-bi...@googlegroups.com, Soil Age
WOW........... The US has  64 TWh, (64,000 gigawatt hours), of biomass made electrons.
Wasn't that report from Japan projecting a 2030 goal for their biomass power production just 50 TWh

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/


On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

Tom,  I was expecting that gasifier chars would work well with compost.  Thinking gassier char would have no labile organics (which could be supplied by compost), high pH (offset by compost, or remediated if biochar composted with biochar), and high surface area which may mean high plant available water... 


From: "'Tom Miles' tmi...@trmiles.com [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: bio...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 9:13 PM
Subject: RE: [biochar] Shared from Twitter: Southern states lead growth in biomass electricity generation - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

 
Gasifier chars vary depending on the fuel, the type and configuration of the gasifier, the products the gasifier is making and the way the gasifier is operated.
 
The smallest gasifiers are the flame cap top lit updrafts like the Kon TIki, Cone Kilns, etc. These can make a very good, slightly oxidized, char that has recently been characterized by the Biochar Journal. The char is generally used for garden and agricultural purposes.
 
In general, small gasifiers convert about 15-17% of the fuel into char and the rest into gas. Some claim higher yields. Where the primary purpose is to make heat, not char, the char quality can vary. Having said that some products appear to be consistent enough for many applications. I don’t think we know what the range of qualities really is for biological applications, especially when the biology continues to modify the chars in use. In one test a few years ago a gasifier char outperformed pyrolysis chars as an additive to organics for composting. The composted product with the gasifier char had better qualities.
    
Gasifiers that make an engine quality gas will only produce 2-5% char. Those chars can be very high quality. They have high surface area and have been used for filtration of organic pollutants, as growing media and other applications.
 
Tom
    
 
 
From: bio...@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bio...@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 4:30 PM
To: bio...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [biochar] Shared from Twitter: Southern states lead growth in biomass electricity generation - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
 
 
Tom, what are the applications of biochar made from gasification units?  Rick
 
From: "Tom Miles Easystreet tmi...@trmiles.com [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: bio...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 6:41 AM
Subject: [biochar] Shared from Twitter: Southern states lead growth in biomass electricity generation - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
 
 

If 2-4% of biomass fuel is recovered as high carbon flyash it could help the carbon equation. High carbon flyash can make great Biochar when prepared and used appropriately. 
 
Tom
 
T R Miles Technical Consultants Inc. 
Sent from mobile. 
 


__._,_.___
Posted by: Rick Wilson <rww...@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (6)
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

.

__,_._,___

Hugh McLaughlin

unread,
Jun 1, 2016, 9:03:56 AM6/1/16
to soil...@googlegroups.com, biochar, se-bi...@googlegroups.com
Having tested 1000+ chars, I no longer expect anything - especially based on descriptors (gasifier, TLUD, retort). The description of the source only defines a probability of a quality. Testing the char is the only reliable means of starting the characterization; subsequently, most units run the same way will produce about the same char.

Testing any char once does not seem like a high bar. If it has acceptable adsorption and you can live with the ash characteristics, it probably has  place in the biochar world - assuming it does not have any overt toxicity history (always due to contamination in the feedstock - quit testing for dioxin...... )

Hugh McLaughlin


--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEO_ii_J_ovFf8jYvB%2BJvP_DzV7A5haK7sZL%3DR0mzpuiZY1OXw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Erich Knight

unread,
Jun 3, 2016, 10:59:55 PM6/3/16
to biochar, Soil Age, se-bi...@googlegroups.com, Bob Fairchild
The first time I tried PAM gels in containers, not accounting for expansion, the diamond like gel particles pushed up & over the rim of pots, but didn't push plants out. Normally I mound the growing medium in the pots and it settles an inch bellow the rim, not much settling with gels added. So after that I filled pots to an inch bellow the rim.

PAM gels are costly, and for the past 8 years I have found that char does about 1/3 of their job, reducing watering frequency, (plus so much more).
So my potting medium recipe is; 75% potting mix, 25% Char/Compost + time release NPK + Ag Gypsum + Ironite.

The Char/Compost is composed of 20% Char and 80% Compost, I also use it to mix with the back fill, (about 25% by volume), on trees, perennials & annual bedding plants.
I make my char with the Tom Reed, Conservation burn method from hard wood pruning of < 2 inch diameters.

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/


On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Paul Anderson psan...@ilstu.edu [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

Rick,

Thanks for informing me (us) about this very interesting material. 

"Competition" is good.   We now have something extra for comparative trials.  And the field results relating to water retention strengthen the case that ALSO biochar could have such benefits (need to be proven numerous times).

At the website I did not find info about:
1.  cost
2.  longevity in the soil (when does it break down?).  

Can cost be cheaper than char from a TLUD cookstove in an Indian village?  No. (But impoverished people are not likely to by buying this type of agricultural technology, so there should not be competition in that space.)

Can longevity be greater than the centuries of usefulness of char in Terra Preta?  Not likely, but of course studies need to be done.

Can the "gel" (which is sold as crystals until wetted by rain or as dry powder to make into sprays) be applied in fields more easily than biochar?  Yes.

I hope that Rick (or others) can get the company to provide info and even dialog with us here on this Biochar Listserv.   We want to learn from them, and ask them important questions.  FRIENDLY competition is much better than working separately.

Interesting that the technology has major usage in the disposible diaper business. 
A.  Should billions of diapers be recycled into fields?   make the other components biodegradable or giving "fiber" and fertile poop.
B.  We might find some support from P&G (Proctor and Gamble).  Bob Fairchild and I know a recently retired product engineer (Ron G.) who worked in the diaper sector.   (Bob, I cannot find Ron G's email address, please forward this to him, with my regards.)

Paul

Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email:  psan...@ilstu.edu
Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com
On 6/2/2016 11:56 PM, Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar] wrote:
 
Here is an example of a company that supplies crystals that turn to gel when wetted.   Potassium poly acrylate. 
This technology has proven effective at improving crop yields, particularly in loam and sandy soil. 


In addition to higher yields, increases in microbial populations are also reported. Biochar competes with this product in the market place, and the cost of biochar is a disadvantage. 

Tells me that keeping the soil wet, like biochar does, helps crop yields, and that water holding capacity is an important measure for crop-soil performance. 

Rick

From: "Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: "bio...@yahoogroups.com" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended

 
Tom thanks for pointing the IBI Classification Tool and related articles.  Very good work, IBI has certainly helped us all develop an understanding of the technology!  We need to find a way to continue to fund the work!

In the tool, under particle size class, it explains how particle size can impact plant available water, drainage and aeration.  My view is these parameters are among the most impactful properties of biochar in plant growth trials, and we might want to call these out explicitly (water holding capacity / plant available water, air filled porosity, and percolation rate, respectively.)  As a group we might want to have another pass at the tool.

Rick
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended

 
I have the same question, Hugh, what are you calling the “IBI approach”?
 
The most relevant information from IBI is probably the “IBI Biochar Classification Tool”
The tool is based on work by former IBI president Marta Camps and her paper which is chapter 8 of the second edition of   “Biochar for Environmental Management” (2015) “A Biochar Classification System and Associated Test Methods”,
Marta Camps-Arbestain, James E. Amonette, Balwant Singh, Tao Wang and Hans Peter Schmidt.  
 
“Biochar may offer direct and indirect benefits when applied to soils. These benefits are based on diverse material properties of the biochar and are manifested when added to fulfil specific soil/crop needs. The IBI Biochar Classification Tool—derived from the paper A biochar classification system and associated test methods1—classifies biochars based on a set of physicochemical properties (most of them tested for in the IBI Biochar Standards). At present, four biochar properties are classified:
  • Carbon storage value
  • Fertilizer value (P, K, S, and Mg only)
  • Liming value
  • Particle size distribution
In addition, the tool provides the fertilizer grade for six plant nutrients (N, P, K, S, Ca and Mg). Note that 1) to classify a biochar with the tool users must have laboratory-measured values of: hydrogen to organic carbon ratio (H/Corg) and organic carbon concentrations (Corg); plant-available levels of P, K, S, and Mg; calcium carbonate equivalent (% CaCO3-eq); and particle size distribution, and 2) to provide the fertilizer grade users must have information on total and plant-available levels of N, P, K, S, Ca, and Mg.”
IBI has attempted to stimulate and collect information on research and demonstration and approaches from many sources. What is labelled as “IBI” has been has been reviewed by members of the IBI scientific committee and technical advisors. Suggestions, methods, etc. for the IBI Scientific Committee are welcome. Information on methods and testing has been collected and disseminated to IBI members in white papers, in the IBI newsletter, and on the IBI website. For several years IBI staff have compiled current research in the IBI bibliography. http://www.biochar-international.org/biblio If you search on “hydraulic” it will return many references on the hydraulic conductivity of many biochars in a range of soils. New references have been reported in the member newsletter. IBI is currently seeking funding, or in-kind, help to maintain the bibliography. It is viewed  by several members as one of the most valuable services of IBI.
Some producer members, who move truckloads of biochar to regular customers, use the IBI classification system that was developed for grouping biochars by similar characteristics. They find it a convenient methods of characterizing biochars so they can decide on appropriate markets and uses, and whether to modify the properties of the char through physical (e.g. blending, screening), chemical (e.g. additives, pH balance, or heat treatment), or biological (e.g. fermentation, composting) processing to enhance properties of biochars for specific uses. Evaluating biochars by classes for properties associated with different types of applications would seem to be a “many” to “many” approach.
Making biochar to obtain desired properties is done all the time. The properties of the biochar depend on the feedstock, the design of the process equipment, and the selected operating conditions. We have some very smart people in the biochar community, with several years of experience, who regularly make biochars to suit the end use. We are still learning what can and can’t be done. In 2010 I visited Bob Wells, New England Biochar, who took me into his fields and showed me how he was growing great fruits and vegetables on sandy soil by doing things people had told him that he couldn’t do with biochars.  He and many on this list have a clear understanding of what can be done with different gasifiers chars, pyrolysis chars, and combustion chars. They understand the typical differences in properties and uses. They talk to the plants and sometimes listen to advice from the lab.
We need to be clear about the intent of classifying biochars, what are the metrics, what data has been generated, and how it should be used. We look forward to continuing the discussion.
Tom     
 
     
    
           
 
 
 
 
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 10:01 AM
To: bio...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
 
 
Hugh.  I have not created anything new.   I simply use the properties and targets established by soil scientists.  Note I am soil focused. 
 
If you send a soil or soil/biochar sample to Control Labs or Wallace labs you get this report with properties and recommendations.  And it includes germination, and can include growth, so you know if your biochar has a problem.  Its explained everything I have seen.
 
The challenge with biochar is you can't do a controlled experiment. If you put it in the soil you change many properties at the same time, so you can't really tell why you see better growth.  Improve the properties more and you see more year on year improvement.   
 
What is the IBI approach?  If you mean the IBI biochar analysis, that tells you very little about how the biochar will impact the properties of your soil.  The better approach (which Control Labs does also), is a soil analysis.  Agronomists love it.  
 
Rick
From: "Hugh McLaughlin hsmcla...@verizon.net [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: "bio...@yahoogroups.com" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:09 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
 
 
Rick especially, but the whole list,
 
The focus of the NextChar Characterization Matrix is on the characterization of the biochar as produced, and using measurable properties of that material to create metrics that can be used to identify similar and dissimilar biochars and their associated efficacy in growing and remediation systems over a range of applications and conditions. I am not trained in soil science, and certainly do not want to slam the entire discipline out of hand. The problem is the size of the feedback loop. If testing biochar in specific growing systems and at end-use scale is the only accepted measurement of biochar quality and efficacy, then we have a one to many year feedback loop to determine of quality. In addition, that approach will greatly bias the "quality" on first season results - which under emphasizes the multi-year (century-long?) benefits of biochar.
 
I recommend and request that you formalize your approach and get it out there for others to admire and evaluate. We already have the IBI approach as one benchmark, so it is unlikely any new scheme will be judged worse....
 
Hugh McLaughlin, PhD, PE
CTO - NextChar.com
 
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 12:15 AM, "Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 
 
Hugh, Of course I've heard from Milt McGiffen on your views of biochar, you are introducing new measurement techniques, and apparently believe that convention soil science does not do the job?
 
Rick 
 
From: "Hugh McLaughlin hsmcla...@verizon.net [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: "bio...@yahoogroups.com" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
 
 
I have submitted an abstract for Oregon on the "NextChar Characterization Matrix". This is my offering to the gods of dissension that rule the biochar world - it spells out what I measure and how those metrics translate into performance and value in biochar, IMHO.
 
I have another abstract where I apply the matrix to current commercial offerings - and discuss the insights. That's bound to make me a popular guy in this industry......
 
Hugh McLaughlin, PhD, PE
CTO - NextChar.com
 
PS: As we are often been reminded, Trump is "Huge" - I go by Hugh. No harm done......
 
On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 10:45 PM, "Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 
 
Hugh, I agree with you we need to agree on physical properties that determine biochar performance.  There may be many ways to get a specific set of properties.  Would be great if we could agree on what those properties are. 
 
For soils, plant available water, air filled porosity, and saturated hydraulic conductivity explains everything I have seen, subject to the material not being phytotoxic or having a high pH. 
 
Perhaps Huge could present a property set in August.  I have my own as you can imagine. (Hugh, you and I cold collaborate on this, or argue to start with!). 
 
Hugh probably has tested more biochars than anyone on earth.  I may have done more commercial-scale field trials than anyone for agricultural applications. 
 
Rick
 
From: "Hugh McLaughlin hsmcla...@verizon.net [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: "bio...@yahoogroups.com" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 1:37 PM
Subject: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
 
 
There has been a thread that prompted me to comment:
 
 
 
Having tested 1000+ chars, I no longer expect anything - especially based on descriptors (gasifier, TLUD, retort). The description of the source only defines a probability of a quality. Testing the char is the only reliable means of starting the characterization; subsequently, most units run the same way will produce about the same char.
 
Testing any char once does not seem like a high bar. If it has acceptable adsorption and you can live with the ash characteristics, it probably has  place in the biochar world - assuming it does not have any overt toxicity history (always due to contamination in the feedstock - quit testing for dioxin...... )
 
Hugh McLaughlin
 
--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEO_ii_J_ovFf8jYvB%2BJvP_DzV7A5haK7sZL%3DR0mzpuiZY1OXw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 





__._,_.___
Posted by: Paul Anderson <psan...@ilstu.edu>
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
.

__,_._,___

Thomas Goreau

unread,
Jun 3, 2016, 11:13:27 PM6/3/16
to soil...@googlegroups.com, biochar, se-bi...@googlegroups.com, Bob Fairchild
Dear Eric,

I’m not on that list, do you have more information on the composition and production of the “PAM gel”?

What does PAM mean, to me it means pulse amplitude modulation?

The question is raised below if diapers should be recycled in fields.

This is an absolute NO, NO from a public health standpoint, what if the baby has cholera or other transmissible diseases?

Also most diapers these days are not cotton, but loaded with plastics that you don’t want in your soil!

Best wishes,
Tom

Thomas J. F. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance
President, Biorock Technology Inc.
Coordinator, Soil Carbon Alliance
Coordinator, United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development Small Island Developing States Partnership in New Sustainable Technologies
37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

The Green Disc, New Technologies for a New Future: Innovative Methods for Sustainable Development

No one can change the past, everyone can change the future

Erich Knight

unread,
Jun 5, 2016, 2:02:51 AM6/5/16
to biochar, Soil Age, se-bi...@googlegroups.com
Hi Paul,
the amount of char by volume I use in my potting soil mix is about 10%, my observations of watering frequency are by no means measured in any scientific way. When I used Hydro-Gels, (PAM), my containerized flower pots could go 9-10 days before showing signs of moisture stress, (my standard mix 4-5 days).
Then when I started using a char mix; about 7-8 days.

The mechanism of action was probably a combination of both char's Water Holding Capacity, (WHC), and Water Use Efficiency, (WUE),

The best visual example of this dynamic was the time lapse video that CP made of a plant grown in a clear glass container.;  http://www.coolplanet.com/videos

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/


On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Stephen Joseph joey.s...@gmail.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

Hi Rick 

Biochar can compete especially if you mix 20% wheat straw biochar 5% bentonite clay with 75%NPK as Prof Pans group in China has shown and we have shown in Australia with potatoes and wheat.

DAP or urea in Australia is about $US500/tonne and biochar can be purchases between $100 and $300/tonne from companies making fuel charcoal.


We have published a lot of data on this both with stories in IBI newsletter and in academic journals

Regards
Stephen

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Here is an example of a company that supplies crystals that turn to gel when wetted.   Potassium poly acrylate. 
This technology has proven effective at improving crop yields, particularly in loam and sandy soil. 


In addition to higher yields, increases in microbial populations are also reported. Biochar competes with this product in the market place, and the cost of biochar is a disadvantage. 

Tells me that keeping the soil wet, like biochar does, helps crop yields, and that water holding capacity is an important measure for crop-soil performance. 

Rick

From: "Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar]" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
To: "bio...@yahoogroups.com" <bio...@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
Tom thanks for pointing the IBI Classification Tool and related articles.  Very good work, IBI has certainly helped us all develop an understanding of the technology!  We need to find a way to continue to fund the work!

In the tool, under particle size class, it explains how particle size can impact plant available water, drainage and aeration.  My view is these parameters are among the most impactful properties of biochar in plant growth trials, and we might want to call these out explicitly (water holding capacity / plant available water, air filled porosity, and percolation rate, respectively.)  As a group we might want to have another pass at the tool.

Rick
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
I have the same question, Hugh, what are you calling the “IBI approach”?
 
The most relevant information from IBI is probably the “IBI Biochar Classification Tool”
The tool is based on work by former IBI president Marta Camps and her paper which is chapter 8 of the second edition of   “Biochar for Environmental Management” (2015) “A Biochar Classification System and Associated Test Methods”,
Marta Camps-Arbestain, James E. Amonette, Balwant Singh, Tao Wang and Hans Peter Schmidt.  
 
“Biochar may offer direct and indirect benefits when applied to soils. These benefits are based on diverse material properties of the biochar and are manifested when added to fulfil specific soil/crop needs. The IBI Biochar Classification Tool—derived from the paper A biochar classification system and associated test methods1—classifies biochars based on a set of physicochemical properties (most of them tested for in the IBI Biochar Standards). At present, four biochar properties are classified:
  • Carbon storage value
  • Fertilizer value (P, K, S, and Mg only)
  • Liming value
  • Particle size distribution
In addition, the tool provides the fertilizer grade for six plant nutrients (N, P, K, S, Ca and Mg). Note that 1) to classify a biochar with the tool users must have laboratory-measured values of: hydrogen to organic carbon ratio (H/Corg) and organic carbon concentrations (Corg); plant-available levels of P, K, S, and Mg; calcium carbonate equivalent (% CaCO3-eq); and particle size distribution, and 2) to provide the fertilizer grade users must have information on total and plant-available levels of N, P, K, S, Ca, and Mg.”
IBI has attempted to stimulate and collect information on research and demonstration and approaches from many sources. What is labelled as “IBI” has been has been reviewed by members of the IBI scientific committee and technical advisors. Suggestions, methods, etc. for the IBI Scientific Committee are welcome. Information on methods and testing has been collected and disseminated to IBI members in white papers, in the IBI newsletter, and on the IBI website. For several years IBI staff have compiled current research in the IBI bibliography. http://www.biochar-international.org/biblio If you search on “hydraulic” it will return many references on the hydraulic conductivity of many biochars in a range of soils. New references have been reported in the member newsletter. IBI is currently seeking funding, or in-kind, help to maintain the bibliography. It is viewed  by several members as one of the most valuable services of IBI.
Some producer members, who move truckloads of biochar to regular customers, use the IBI classification system that was developed for grouping biochars by similar characteristics. They find it a convenient methods of characterizing biochars so they can decide on appropriate markets and uses, and whether to modify the properties of the char through physical (e.g. blending, screening), chemical (e.g. additives, pH balance, or heat treatment), or biological (e.g. fermentation, composting) processing to enhance properties of biochars for specific uses. Evaluating biochars by classes for properties associated with different types of applications would seem to be a “many” to “many” approach.
Making biochar to obtain desired properties is done all the time. The properties of the biochar depend on the feedstock, the design of the process equipment, and the selected operating conditions. We have some very smart people in the biochar community, with several years of experience, who regularly make biochars to suit the end use. We are still learning what can and can’t be done. In 2010 I visited Bob Wells, New England Biochar, who took me into his fields and showed me how he was growing great fruits and vegetables on sandy soil by doing things people had told him that he couldn’t do with biochars.  He and many on this list have a clear understanding of what can be done with different gasifiers chars, pyrolysis chars, and combustion chars. They understand the typical differences in properties and uses. They talk to the plants and sometimes listen to advice from the lab.
We need to be clear about the intent of classifying biochars, what are the metrics, what data has been generated, and how it should be used. We look forward to continuing the discussion.
Tom     
 
     
    
           
 
 
 
 
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 10:01 AM
Having tested 1000+ chars, I no longer expect anything - especially based on descriptors (gasifier, TLUD, retort). The description of the source only defines a probability of a quality. Testing the char is the only reliable means of starting the characterization; subsequently, most units run the same way will produce about the same char.
 
Testing any char once does not seem like a high bar. If it has acceptable adsorption and you can live with the ash characteristics, it probably has  place in the biochar world - assuming it does not have any overt toxicity history (always due to contamination in the feedstock - quit testing for dioxin...... )
 
Hugh McLaughlin
 
--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEO_ii_J_ovFf8jYvB%2BJvP_DzV7A5haK7sZL%3DR0mzpuiZY1OXw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 





__._,_.___
Posted by: Stephen Joseph <joey.s...@gmail.com>
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

.

__,_._,___

Erich Knight

unread,
Jun 7, 2016, 12:44:00 AM6/7/16
to biochar, Soil Age, se-bi...@googlegroups.com
Hi Barry,

Long time since you've posted,

From your study can you quantify this increased phosphorous use efficiency?

Seems for P challenged/deficient soils this would be a major selling point.


Biochar is a growth-promoting alternative to peat moss for the inoculation of corn with a pseudomonad
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13593-016-0356-z

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/


On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 7:36 PM, 'Mark Elliott Ludlow' ma...@ludlow.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

…then there’s chitosan, one of the few cationic biopolymers. Very useful as a seed coating. Amine group at C2 gives a pKa of about 6.2.

 

Mark

 

From: bio...@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bio...@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 4:14 PM
To: bio...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [biochar] Biochar Competition: Gel Technology for Improving Crop Yields [1 Attachment]

 

 

[Attachment(s) from dgr...@ihug.co.nz included below]

Stephen & Tom

re seed coating with biochar, 

  • Perhaps you may already be aware of a seaweed extract; (sodium alginate; aka algin & alginic acid  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alginic_acid )   a anionic ploysaccharide that has previously been used as a seed coating that supports fresh living soil biota inocula, ... & perhaps could be used in combination with biochar 'fines'

 

---
Don Graves
17 Wilkie Street
Motueka
ph.(03)5288918

On 07/06/2016 10:14, 'Tom Miles' tmi...@trmiles.com [biochar] wrote:

 

 

Stephen,

 

I worked with two companies locally on coating seeds with biochar or biochar-mineral blends with the objective of providing native grass seeds with initial life support when reseeding the after a forest fire. One product is still under field testing. Another was abandoned after greenhouse trials.  The potential benefits are quite evident in simple trials. We are also still at the beginning.

 

Tom  

 

From: bio...@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bio...@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2016 11:06 PM
To: biochar
Subject: Re: [biochar] Biochar Competition: Gel Technology for Improving Crop Yields

 

 

Hi Mike

 

Thanks

 

The whole are of coating seeds with a mixture of  biochr and minerals is still in its infancy with very little controlled trials. 

 

More practical experience from others would be great so send us your stories.

 

All of this will go into the manual Paul taylor and I are putting together.

 

Regards

Stephen

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:21 AM, mikethe...@aol.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

Stephen,

 

Thanks for the potato trial citation.  

 

I have gotten positive results from wetting my seed potatoes with water and then coating them with a blend of gypsum, green sand, and char powder, just prior to planting.  The gypsum, green sand (glauconite), and char powder blend is a 1:1:1 volume/volume/volume ratio.

 

Positive results are a combination of yield, storage life, and the mashed potato taste test.  

 

Mike

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

__._,_.___
Posted by: "Mark Elliott Ludlow" <ma...@ludlow.com>
Messages in this topic (84)
Check out the automatic photo album with 3 photo(s) from this topic.
IMG_1037.JPG anchorage tank hole.jpg P3302800.JPG
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
.

__,_._,___

Erich Knight

unread,
Jun 7, 2016, 11:29:07 PM6/7/16
to biochar, se-bi...@googlegroups.com, Soil Age
Hi Don,

To add to your list, (in my neighborhood of the mid Atlantic states);

An expanded shale;
STALITE PermaTill®, a rotary-kiln fired expanded slate particle.

"PermaTill", (also sold as "VoleBloc")
http://www.permatill.com/home-garden-products.php?cat=10

Horticultural Aggregate;
http://www.permatill.com/home-garden-products.php?cat=8

Roots bifurcate like heck when they hit it.

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/


On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 7:06 PM, dgr...@ihug.co.nz [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
[Attachment(s) from dgr...@ihug.co.nz included below]

Hi Rick & others, ... 

  • Thanks for your words of support Rick, ... & yes (long term) sustainability issues!!!  I agree with you that many people (& I include too many of our politicians) have very only short term planning & mostly $$$ costs & benefits in their daily & annual spreadsheets when it comes to land management, & making a return on their investments of time / money & thinking.... innovations, research & development of our most promising ideas.  
    • What is most risky?  
    • Is it our current course of behaviours & inability to adapt to changes in social, economic & ecological environments?
    • ... Or is it fear of future uncertainty? 
    • ... or our repeating historic failures?, 
    • ... & or our present reactions to fear of making mistakes or failures 
      • IS IS FIGHT, FLIGHT OR FRIGHT?   or all 3?
  • Behavioural psychology ....mmmm Yes! ...   
    • Why do so many people have FEAR?
    • What do they / we fear the most? 
    • Is it not wanting to be "first" or leading the way for others to see when things may go very right or (dread to think of it) wrrrrr wrong! 
    • Is it future focussed fear & uncertainty about the present or future risks? ...  of climate & or political changes? ... possibly both!! 
    • Is is past focussed fear, regret, feelings of blame, guilt or responsibility for having made mis-judgements or mistakes? 
    • How many people in positions of power & or responsibility are in feelings of DENIAL? .... isn't that just a river running through Egypt?
    • Are our fears in the technologically advanced & industrialised" Developed World", (1st & 2nd world economies) synonymous with the fictional machismo character of Arthur Herbert Fonzarelli (better known as "Fonzie" or "The Fonz") played by Henry Winkler in the American sitcom Happy Days (1974–1984)???
      • How do we maintain our pride & dignity in the face of reality that Western & industrialised civilisation's approach to industrialised agriculture & (lack of ) soil stewardship has got a quite a few things RRRRRrrrrong?  ... or that we're SSSSSSsssorry!!!  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonzie 
      • The fictional Fonze character, ... like his best mate Ritche, doesn't compromise his principles as easily and sticks to what he believes is right!, ..... Might is right!! RIGHT??? WRONG AGAIN!!
      • So What??? So, ... what if we've ALL messed up??, 
      • Do we need to hit the reset button? ... or perhaps we're still thinking that like Fonzie who would at times demonstrate an almost magical ability to manipulate technology with just a nudge, bump or a snap of his fingers for things such as starting a car, turning on lights, coaxing free sodas from a vending machine, making girls respond, or changing the song selection on a juke box..  
      • WAKE UP FOLKS!!! THERE ARE NO SILVER BULLETS OR MAGICAL PANACEAS!! 
          •  ... WAKE UP, WAKE UP, ....WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP ...  PULL UP!!! PULL UP!! DANGER, DANGER,
      • HOWEVER .... DON'T PANIC!!   THINK RATIONALLY,  
      • WHEN IN DOUBT,
        •  ... ASK QUESTIONS!!!  ... & more questions, ... & then ... BE PREPARED TO LISTEN!!!! 
      • THINKING & ACTING OUTSIDE THE CUBE ..... 
        • LISTEN TO UNCONVENTIONAL ANSWERS THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPARENT 
      • WHAT CAN WE DO DIFFERENTLY??  ... ASK YOURSELF:
        • HOW RISKY IS IT TO CARRY ON WITH OUR CURRENT LAND MANGEMENT COURSE?
        • HOW RISKY IS PYROLYSIS OF BIOMASS TO MAKE SYNGAS, CHARCOAL & BIOCHAR? 
        • WHAT ARE THE RISKS OF NOT CHANGING?
      • Paulo Coehlo : "The world is changed by your example, .. Not by your opinion"
        • Be prepared to lead by example ... 
        • Isn't that the way organic production systems have inceasingly become accepted & adopted, 
          • ... by ecological thinking & acting about our soils & food web 
Mike the Worm Guy ... that's another 20 cents worth, ...  isn't it?
Don Graves
17 Wilkie Street
Motueka
ph.(03)5288918

On 04/06/2016 04:28, Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar] wrote:

 

 

Don, I completely agree with you that using gels is the wrong way to go from a sustainability perspective. I also believe that biochar would have even done better than the case studies show on the web site because it is multifunctional as you point out. 

What I believe you can count on is people making decisions based on money, money today. And even if you can get the incentives right, no one wants to stick their neck out and try something new.  And many people can't make a decision. 

In my neighborhood in Southern California you can take a loan for solar, no money down, and cut your electric bill by 2/3.  For me that's almost $250 per month savings.  No one does it.   My conclusion, either my neighbors really don't care about the environment, or they don't realize there are no-money down options (but its widely advertised), or they don't want to take a loan, instead pay a much higher per month fee so their balance sheet looks clean (at the expense of the environment, and their own long term savings).   Or they just can't make decisions.  
We are in the same boat with biochar. 
In my exhaustive experience with agriculture trials, I can't tell you how many time's I've done a successful trial and the customer does not move forward.  They don't want to be first, its not in the budget (so now I offer finance), its more expensive than other amendments, there is always a reason not to move forward.   
There needs to be a behavioral psychology track at the IBI conference!
But I believe!
Rick


From: "dgr...@ihug.co.nz [biochar]"
To: bio...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 3, 2016 2:57 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] Biochar Competition: Gel Technology & Porous Minerals for Improving Crop Yields [1 Attachment]

 
[Attachment(s) from dgr...@ihug.co.nz included below]
Hi Rick, Erich et al...
here's my 2 cents worth!!!
I see by the advertising pics for this product that it's being applied into bare soils!!!    http://moasisgel.com
 
 
  • Q??  How sensible are bare soil surfaces when your main aim is to conserve plant avaiable water and or soil organic matter??
    • Answer - Not at all sensible, ...  Bare soil surfaces exposed to sunlight, increased heat and wind, all evaporate water, & also oxidise soil carbon into atmospheric CO2!!!
  • Q??  When & how can the use of hydro-gel technology or non-renewable mineral amendments placed into bare soil surfaces ever replace renewable resources & common-sense soil-water & soil-carbon conservation, and soil amendment practices such as:
        1. surface mulching & retention of crop residues 
        2. cover crops & green manures
        3. compost 
        4. protecting soil organic matter & humus
        5. maintaining soil microbial populations - e.g. mycorrhizas & rhizosphere bacteria
        6. humic acids & fulvic acid 
        7. BIOCHAR
        8. no-tillage seed drills ... & no-dig / no-weed gardens
  • Q??  What are the physical qualities of biochar that enhance absorption & plant availability of soil water? ... whilst also assisting soil bulk density, soil aeration & soil drainage when / if required?
    • Answer - POROSITY , formed by the cell structure of biological feedstock of wood, leaves, bone, scales, feathers, or hair that charcoal is derived from
  • Q??  What are other water absording products that have similar porous properties to biochar?
    • Answer - Non-renewable mined rock minerals : 
  1. Igneous rocks including ... 
  • Can humans living in warm & dry climates have realistic or rational expectations that the use of finite, non-renweable mineral resources, or manufactured techological & 'chemical hydrogel fixes', in order to amend 'problem soils' with low water holding capacities, that will permanently substiture or replace the use time-proven conservation agricultural practices that protect and maintain soil carbon and soil water?
    • Answer - ask yourselves!!! , ... but in my opinion, very very unlikely 
---
Don Graves
17 Wilkie Street
Motueka
ph.(03)5288918
On 03/06/2016 16:56, Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar] wrote:
Here is an example of a company that supplies crystals that turn to gel when wetted.   Potassium poly acrylate. 
This technology has proven effective at improving crop yields, particularly in loam and sandy soil. 

In addition to higher yields, increases in microbial populations are also reported. Biochar competes with this product in the market place, and the cost of biochar is a disadvantage. 
Tells me that keeping the soil wet, like biochar does, helps crop yields, and that water holding capacity is an important measure for crop-soil performance. 
Rick
From: "Rick Wilson rww...@yahoo.com [biochar]"
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
Tom thanks for pointing the IBI Classification Tool and related articles.  Very good work, IBI has certainly helped us all develop an understanding of the technology!  We need to find a way to continue to fund the work!

In the tool, under particle size class, it explains how particle size can impact plant available water, drainage and aeration.  My view is these parameters are among the most impactful properties of biochar in plant growth trials, and we might want to call these out explicitly (water holding capacity / plant available water, air filled porosity, and percolation rate, respectively.)  As a group we might want to have another pass at the tool.
Rick
From: "'Tom Miles' tmi...@trmiles.com [biochar]"
To: bio...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [biochar] Predicting biochar properties based on how they were made - is not recommended
I have the same question, Hugh, what are you calling the “IBI approach”?
 
The most relevant information from IBI is probably the “IBI Biochar Classification Tool”
The tool is based on work by former IBI president Marta Camps and her paper which is chapter 8 of the second edition of   “Biochar for Environmental Management” (2015) “A Biochar Classification System and Associated Test Methods”,
Marta Camps-Arbestain, James E. Amonette, Balwant Singh, Tao Wang and Hans Peter Schmidt.  
 
“Biochar may offer direct and indirect benefits when applied to soils. These benefits are based on diverse material properties of the biochar and are manifested when added to fulfil specific soil/crop needs. The IBI Biochar Classification Tool—derived from the paper A biochar classification system and associated test methods1—classifies biochars based on a set of physicochemical properties (most of them tested for in the IBI Biochar Standards). At present, four biochar properties are classified:
  • Carbon storage value
  • Fertilizer value (P, K, S, and Mg only)
  • Liming value
  • Particle size distribution
In addition, the tool provides the fertilizer grade for six plant nutrients (N, P, K, S, Ca and Mg). Note that 1) to classify a biochar with the tool users must have laboratory-measured values of: hydrogen to organic carbon ratio (H/Corg) and organic carbon concentrations (Corg); plant-available levels of P, K, S, and Mg; calcium carbonate equivalent (% CaCO3-eq); and particle size distribution, and 2) to provide the fertilizer grade users must have information on total and plant-available levels of N, P, K, S, Ca, and Mg.”
IBI has attempted to stimulate and collect information on research and demonstration and approaches from many sources. What is labelled as “IBI” has been has been reviewed by members of the IBI scientific committee and technical advisors. Suggestions, methods, etc. for the IBI Scientific Committee are welcome. Information on methods and testing has been collected and disseminated to IBI members in white papers, in the IBI newsletter, and on the IBI website. For several years IBI staff have compiled current research in the IBI bibliography. http://www.biochar-international.org/biblio If you search on “hydraulic” it will return many references on the hydraulic conductivity of many biochars in a range of soils. New references have been reported in the member newsletter. IBI is currently seeking funding, or in-kind, help to maintain the bibliography. It is viewed  by several members as one of the most valuable services of IBI.
Some producer members, who move truckloads of biochar to regular customers, use the IBI classification system that was developed for grouping biochars by similar characteristics. They find it a convenient methods of characterizing biochars so they can decide on appropriate markets and uses, and whether to modify the properties of the char through physical (e.g. blending, screening), chemical (e.g. additives, pH balance, or heat treatment), or biological (e.g. fermentation, composting) processing to enhance properties of biochars for specific uses. Evaluating biochars by classes for properties associated with different types of applications would seem to be a “many” to “many” approach.
Making biochar to obtain desired properties is done all the time. The properties of the biochar depend on the feedstock, the design of the process equipment, and the selected operating conditions. We have some very smart people in the biochar community, with several years of experience, who regularly make biochars to suit the end use. We are still learning what can and can’t be done. In 2010 I visited Bob Wells, New England Biochar, who took me into his fields and showed me how he was growing great fruits and vegetables on sandy soil by doing things people had told him that he couldn’t do with biochars.  He and many on this list have a clear understanding of what can be done with different gasifiers chars, pyrolysis chars, and combustion chars. They understand the typical differences in properties and uses. They talk to the plants and sometimes listen to advice from the lab.
We need to be clear about the intent of classifying biochars, what are the metrics, what data has been generated, and how it should be used. We look forward to continuing the discussion.
Tom     
 
     
    
           
 
 
 
 
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 10:01 AM
Having tested 1000+ chars, I no longer expect anything - especially based on descriptors (gasifier, TLUD, retort). The description of the source only defines a probability of a quality. Testing the char is the only reliable means of starting the characterization; subsequently, most units run the same way will produce about the same char.
 
Testing any char once does not seem like a high bar. If it has acceptable adsorption and you can live with the ash characteristics, it probably has  place in the biochar world - assuming it does not have any overt toxicity history (always due to contamination in the feedstock - quit testing for dioxin...... )
 
Hugh McLaughlin
 
--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/soil-age/CAEO_ii_J_ovFf8jYvB%2BJvP_DzV7A5haK7sZL%3DR0mzpuiZY1OXw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/Soil4Climate/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soil-age" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to soil-age+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to soil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/soil-age.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 






__._,_.___

Attachment(s) from dgr...@ihug.co.nz | View attachments on the web

1 of 1 Photo(s)

Posted by: dgr...@ihug.co.nz
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
.

__,_._,___

Erich Knight

unread,
Jun 8, 2016, 11:43:47 PM6/8/16
to biochar, se-bi...@googlegroups.com, Soil Age, Craig Sams, Simon Manley
Hi Joey,

The Owner of the avocado farm , is that the guy that Dolph Cook had done work with?

Do the avocado friut earlier as Craig Sams' Cocoa do?

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/


On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 9:40 AM, mikethe...@aol.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

Stephen,


I could not agree with you more.  

Finding a respected grower, within a specific crop sector, to be an innovation epicenter is critical for the implementation of any new solutions, as well as, the development of ongoing solutions.

Working from this type of arrangement provides the opportunity to realize the cascade of further innovations that can occur when this grower actively participates, as an integrated part, of the innovation cycle.

Once the relationship is established, the goal shifts from trying to sell a product to participating with the grower in improving the grower's operation. 

Mike

__._,_.___
Posted by: mikethe...@aol.com
Check out the automatic photo album with 3 photo(s) from this topic.
IMG_1037.JPG anchorage tank hole.jpg P3302800.JPG
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.

.

__,_._,___

Erich Knight

unread,
Jun 17, 2016, 6:04:43 AM6/17/16
to biochar, se-bi...@googlegroups.com, Soil Age, Gregory Stangl, Phil Blom
Paul, David,  and All,

Very good on Paul for bringing everyone’s attention to the TLUD stoves way of making BioChar.
David's behavior & collective consciousness with TerraChar, Phil Blom et al large organic farming folks is launching the next generation's efforts towards sustainability.

I would also like to bring Greg of Phoenix Energy to this conversation on industrial scale & costs. As he is producing about 6000 tons/year and about 5 MW of green electrons to the grid in CA. from several 1 MW Gasifiers.
What are his number like?, and do they jive with Rick Wilson's formula?

Cheers,

Erich

Erich J. Knight
Shenandoah Gardens
1047 Dave Berry Rd. McGaheysville, VA. 22840
  540-289-9750   

Policy & Community Chairman
2013 North American Biochar Symposium
Harvesting Hope: The Science & Synergies of Biochar
October 13-16, 2013 at UMASS Amherst
http://pvbiochar.org/2013-symposium/


On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, David Yarrow dyar...@gmail.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

hurrah for mike!!
the worm guy quotes some numbers that make the most sense 
for human-scale, farm-size and community-supportive biochar production 
that is integrated with the normal operations of daily and seasonal living.

i'll skip critiques of industrial-scale operations, BS of economics, fluff of elaborate descriptive argument, 
and just ask a question 
about the white sausages parked by a huge majority of farms, ranches, homes, businesses, greenhouses, and facilities in the midwest.
what's in them? (not my question)
propane, an expensive, imported fossil fuel, 
supplied by powerful, multi-national, corrupt, corporate cartels.

my question:
can we create a conversion kit
to turn those white sausages
into biomass pyrolysis burners 
that create biochar, heat, combustible gas, liquid fuel, and wood vinegar?
might such a kit cascade into multiple kinds of common sense solutions 
for farms, ranches, homesteads, and communities across america?
and around the world?

corollary question:
also common in the midwest are white sausages on 4 wheels: 
anhydrous ammonia tanks delivering industrial chemical fertility to nearly-no-carbon, dead soils.
also supplied by powerful, multi-national, corrupt, corporate cartels.
can you imagine a biochar burner conversion kit & soil fertility strategy 
that makes those tanks and their toxic ammonia obsolete, too?

given obvious consequences of engineered, industrial society spawned in 19th & 20th centuries, 
i think we are wise to consider not just the bottomline numbers of any new technology, 
but include and comprehend clearly, honestly 
the human, social, community, cultural, political, and ecological impacts 
of how we implement and integrate this new carbon strategy into emerging, evolving 21st century societies.

i used to say "carbon creates structure" thru its tetrahedral bonding symmetry.
now, i say "carbon creates community" 
among atoms & molecules. among cells & organisms, 
understanding carbon is more than chemistry; 
it requires insight into social behavior & collective consciousness.

in the next two decades, 
not only will societies' sources of energy change, 
the very structure & processes of human society 
are about to undergo radical, barely-imagined transformation.
most of us will not be here to witness the fulfillment of this pole shift, 
but we can help launch the next generations 
on their journey to this new world.

my 7 cents worth of insight.
~david yarrow

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:03 AM, mikethe...@aol.com [biochar] <bio...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

if a 5000 ton per year biochar plants costs 3 million dollars USD to build than what do 5000 one ton a year biochar plants cost ?


__._,_.___
Posted by: David Yarrow <dyar...@gmail.com>
Messages in this topic (115)
Check out the automatic photo album with 11 photo(s) from this topic.
IMG_1037.JPG anchorage tank hole.jpg P3302800.JPG P3032295.JPG july burnoff 3.JPG
Have you tried the highest rated email app?
With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
.

__,_._,___

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages