Translator

Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts

Friday, 28 April 2017

Biochar average crop boost of 25% in tropics

This research supports potential biochar crop benefits for SEA region. It will be interesting to see how temperate biochar world responds to findings. There are plenty of reasons to use biochar other than crop production enhancement... and there are plenty of temperate soils with deficiencies that biochar can help with and thus boost crop yields. I think that a 'meta-analysis' flattens out all the data, hiding success and failure. The researchers have provided a link to their data spreadsheet. Maybe the results can be refined based on soil deficiency? This would be more useful?

new research on effect of biochar in open field crops:

"Biochar boosts tropical but not temperate crop yields''

"For years it has been promoted as a soil additive to increase crop yields. A new study casts doubt on that view, finding that biochar only improves crop growth in the tropics, with no yield benefit at all in the temperate zone.

The team of researchers gathered data from more than 1,000 empirical observations conducted around the world, each measuring the effect of biochar on crop yield. Then, they used meta-analysis, an advanced statistical technique that analyses many studies at the same time, to test whether the beneficial effect of biochar addition depends on geography.

That’s when the surprising result emerged: “Location, location, location: it really matters for biochar”, said Dr. Jeffery, lead author of the study and senior lecturer at Harper Adams University. “Biochar had a huge benefit in the tropics, a 25 per cent increase in yield. But in the temperate zone, there was just no effect at all. We were really surprised.”

The surprise came because past work has assumed that the beneficial yield effects of biochar are universal, applying to soils no matter where they occur. The new study was the first to test rigorously whether geography matters, and the researchers were able to do this because of the very large dataset they assembled.

The idea of biochar was inspired by a rare type of soil that occurs in the tropics, ‘terra preta’ – Portuguese for ‘black earth’, so named because the soil is rich in black carbon, the partially burned remains of old plants, much like charcoal. ‘Terra preta’ is fertile, with favourable pH, unlike typical tropical soils which are low in fertility and acidic. Initial experiments showed that adding biochar to typical tropical soils increased crop yields, making it possible for farmers to cultivate a plot of land in these soils for more than a few years.

The new study supports that view: “Our findings confirm that biochar can benefit farms in low-nutrient, acidic soils such as in the tropics”, explained Dr. Jeffery. “But in more fertile soils, such as those in the temperate zone, obtaining yield increases through biochar application is much less certain.” While it is possible that, biochar may maintain yields in some soils, while cutting costs on the purchase and application of fertilisers and agricultural lime, more research is needed to identify soils where such applications are relevant.

Many other benefits have been claimed for biochar, including managing waste, sequestering carbon in the soil, soil greenhouse gas flux mitigation, crop disease suppression, and being more environmentally friendly than adding synthetic chemicals to the soil. The new study did not evaluate these other potential benefits, and the authors note that some of these may still hold in both temperate and tropical regions, and that biochar research needs to focus on trade-offs between biochar’s interaction with these ecosystem services.

“While there may be other benefits to using biochar in the temperate zone, like increasing soil carbon to slow climate change”, said Dr. Jeffery, “our analysis, summarising over 1,000 observations, shows that the yield benefits just aren’t there. So if the goal for biochar application is boosting crop yield, stick to the tropics.”

The report has been published, open access, in Environmental Research Letters."

Saturday, 1 April 2017

Climate change, developed world v. developing world and biochar

Climate change, developed world v. developing world and biochar [link to article]

Dr. D. Michael Shafer

Director, Warm Heart Foundation, A.Phrao, Chiang Mai

"Because we are among the world’s 1.2 billion rich people and not its 5.4 billion poor, it is easy to think about the climate crisis, solutions to the climate crisis and sustainability in terms of developed world actions and initiatives. Given the focus of diplomatic, media, policy, and scientific attention, this is entirely understandable. It is also entirely wrongheaded. If you ask, Where can we most easily improve environmental outcomes? Achieve sustainability? Reverse climate change? To say nothing of where can we alleviate the most suffering and promote the greatest good? The answers are all found in the developing world. Environmental action in the developing world by and for the 2.54 billion of the world’s poorest people, very small farmers, can do more right now and at less cost to advance our shared interest in global sustainability than anything else imaginable.

What is to be done? Train billions of small farmers in the developing world to turn their crop wastes into biochar instead of burning it. ..."

Conclusion

"The conclusions that follow from this extended argument should be encouraging for the developed world reader not attempting to commercialize biochar. Stated a boldly as possible: (1) Because the climate change calamity falls largely on the developing world, it must mobilize to solve the problem, not merely postpone it. (2) Unlike the developed world, where much depends on intergovernmental and even inter-nongovernmental organization coordination – a huge task – the remedy required in the developing world requires no coordination and little government action. (3) Developed world efforts to reverse climate change are nascent and decades from ramp up, the technology and project required to remove billions of tons of CO 2 from the atmosphere is ready and waiting in developing world. (4) The developed world winces at the cost of development assistance, but two critical details recommend the proposed program: it clearly serves the interest of the developed world and it will reduce future spending on such financial black hole programs as health and food aid. (5) Finally, because the proposed program works by creating incentives for the world’s poorest to help themselves, it is an investment in reducing climate change’s most salient political challenge: how to manage the hordes of hunger refugees who will storm the borders of the developed world?"

Sunday, 26 February 2017

Michael waves the black flag via Eco-business.com


Can biochar make climate change a profitable business opportunity?

In a world frozen in a futile debate on climate change, can we break the ice with win-win, sustainable solutions like biochar? Michael Shafer from NGO Warm Heart Worldwide thinks we can.



http://www.eco-business.com/opinion/can-biochar-make-climate-change-a-profitable-business-opportunity/



Tuesday, 6 October 2009

Biochar testing standards

The subject of biochar production has an extraordinary number of variables. The variables could be grouped as follows,
  • biomass (wastes & process residues - plant/animal/human, dedicated crops/coppice, algae)
  • scale: kg/day > tonnes/hr (cooking stove > gardener kiln/retort > farm/community > industrial production)
  • conversion process: traditional/simple > future/complex; batch or continuous; gasification, pyrolysis, HTC, microwave; slow, fast or flash carbonization; high or low temperature
  • process products: biochar, producer gas, heat, steam, CO2, electricity, bio-oil/wood vinegar, ash, refined products (charcoal, activated carbon, gas/liquid fuels/products, fertilizer)
  • post-production inoculation (minerals, fertilizers, wood vinegar, compost, urine, humus, Mycorrhizae/microfauna)
  • economic, environmental and social settings.
How do all these variables affect the safety and efficacy of biochar? does it matter? I keep reading that not all biochars are the same. From the list above, this is hardly surprising but I don't think safety will be an issue. The negative impacts of declining soil carbon due to industrial / contemporary farming practices seem to be well understood. The terra preta field trial has been running well for some time. The large and growing number of formal and informal soil trials around the world will be the ultimate arbiter but thats not going to produce a biochar industry any time soon.

These 'upstream' variables for biochar production are matched by 'downstream' application variables for climate, geography, soil type, land use (crop, grass, forest, plantation, organic, intensive, tillage), application rates/methods, utilisation goals/objectives (soil enhancement, remediation, fertilizer reduction/efficiency, carbon sequestration, emission/erosion control).

The decision to make/buy/use biochar may be relatively simple - optimizing the economic outcome based on the many variables will be the hard part. Having some standard assessment criteria between the upstream production and downstream application would aid the decision process. Help may soon be at hand with the development of biochar testing standards...