Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["John D'hondt" <dhondt@eircom.net>]

I read the original papers from the anthropologists who "discovered"  "terra preta". Seems that some tribes still make it. It is just a place along a river used as a midden (slaughter waste, fishbones, human and animal excrement and yes, the ashes and bits of unburned wood from camp fires in fact the equivalent of our landfills minus all the toxic stuff modern people throw away) and that no wood was burned specially to make charcoal. After a few years of this waste disposal the tribe would plant a garden on it.

 

And yes crop residues and prunings are much more useful when incorporated in the soil than when first burned.

 

And yes whole forests are now burned down to make charcoal.

John

Of course it wouldn't look good to come right out with it. Fact is, they can't make enough biochar to make a difference without burning down forests, and crop residues better be incorporated back into the soil to keep up the levels of organic matter. ALSO the original Terra Prieta charcoal didn't make crops lush; it was the volcanic soil that did it. Meanwhile no one has been able to duplicate the results.

paul tradingpost@lobo.net


On 9/29/2013 3:13 PM, Rob Wilson wrote:

Tradingpost, no one is suggesting burning down forests to make biochar. There is enough woody weeds and crop residue for these purposes.

Rob

---

From: tradingpost <tradingpost@lobo.net>
To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Sunday, 29 September 2013 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] about climate

As I understand it, living forests sequester more CO2 while producing O2 than burning them down to make biochar.
paul tradingpost@lobo.net


On 9/28/2013 8:21 PM, Rob Wilson wrote:

What utter nonsense. Do not confuse charcoal with biochar.

John I suggest you read the attached comments.

Here in Australia the much revered CSIRO  and other Government primary industry bodies have been conducting large scale broad acre trials with biochar. All report positive outcomes from the application of biochar. The following link is just one or these reports http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/447857/DPI-BioChar-in-Horticulture.pdf

Many years ago, on the advise of my green fingered uncle, I planted peas over trenches that I had buried charaoal. And yes it was the worst crop of peas that I had ever grown. The charcoal had sucked all nutrient out of the ground.

Now days I inoculate my charcoal with compost teas, effective microbial teas and other biological brews. The charcoal can then be referred to as biochar. This gives excellent results. Increased yields, more robust plants and less need of water and fertilisers.

The degraded block of land I am clearing and trying to rejuvenate is benefiting from the carbon I am returning to the ground. This is much preferable to burning windrows and sending it into the atmosphere

Rob Wilson.

---

From: John D'hondt <dhondt@eircom.net>
To: Healthy soil and sustainable growing <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, 28 September 2013 8:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] about climate

I am so glad that at last an official scientific institute has come out
against ""Biochar"". I have been writing about this for ten years at least
since I first did tests with it. I found seedlings and plants to grow less
vigorous with charcoal than without. And this is nothing but logical.
Charcoal is the oldest wood preservative known to man because all soil
organisms avoid it like the plague.
John

_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland

_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland

---

_______________________________________________
Livingontheland mailing list
Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland