Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] Biochar, s it really all that's it's cracked up to be?

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Biochar, s it really all that's it's cracked up to be?
  • Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:24:27 -0700


That may be, Uriel. My own study shows that when organic matter decomposes,
the humic and fulvic acids bind with free minerals, which prevents leaching
out and makes them available to plant roots through microbial intervention.
Otherwise some minerals tend to stay immobilized or unavailable to plants.
On that understanding I make a soil amendment by mixing bone meal and
greensand with alfalfa meal and aged manure and a dilute soaking of fish
emulsion and molasses to kick start the process. Obviously it can be done
other ways to take advantage of the mineral binding through organic acids.
And with a biologically active soil like that I won't mess it up with
regular tilling.

paul tradingpost@lobo.net

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

On 1/13/2008 at 10:36 AM uriel wrote:

>In my reading it's been my understanding that the primary advantage of
>biochar is that the charcoal binds to minerals, thus helping preserve
>the viability of the soil. A page with lots of interesting links on the
>subject is http://www.bidstrup.com/carbon.htm .
>
>Uriel Andros
>
>activism98201@verizon.net wrote:
>> I've been having discussions with a proponent of biochar (Tera Preta)
>for some time now and am still struggling with the concept of it, of how
>it can do all the things that is claimed with regards to improving soil
>conditions.
>>
>> My biggest concerns are:
>>
>> 1) That the pyrolysis process can be performed without releasing
>significant amounts of greenhouse gases (one of the claims is that we'd be
>sinking carbon);
>> 2) Existing biomass won't be mined (depleted);
>> 3) That there's a way of incorporating this into the soil with minimal
>disruption to soil biota.
>>
>> The biggest selling point has been the claims of what it did down in the
>Amazon. But if I'm not mistaken the soils down there suffer from too much
>oxidization, heat and poor moisture retention (please correct me if I'm
>wrong). I'm up here in the PNW which doesn't suffer these conditions. As
>such I have tried to discuss how biochar could be beneficial here: it
>seems to require tilling, which, as we know, increases oxidization of the
>soils; it requires gathering up biomass, usually from the forest (mining
>forest nutrients); only positive that I can really see is perhaps with
>moisture retention, but surely one doesn't need all of the mechanics
>associated with biochar to do improve moisture retention.
>>
>> I'd hate to see this step up into the big leagues, ala biofuels
>(subsidies etc.) only to find that in the end we've made things worse off.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> -Mark Nagel
>> Everett, WA







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page