Dear Gordon Eliott and All,

In India the farmers still love charcoal and ash (source is from cook
stoves, burning crop residue in the fields, and some times charcoal
and ash from the Yagnas (a ritual performed for prosperity and good),
potters kiln, etc.). They do apply silt from irrigation tanks, etc.,
and farm yard manure, which are traditional practices. All these
practices are able to increase the soil carbon, increase in soil
microbial activity and increased fertility of soils. One could even
see all these activities even now in India. In spite of cultivation of
the fields since hundreds of years (even since the times when TP was
practiced in Amazon), but the soils are still useful. Except in the
last 40 years, due to green revolution and application of complex
fertilizers / pesticides and non continuation of the traditional
sustainable practices (by some of the farmers), our lands are
degraded, less productive and have turned into acidic / alkaline.

The hypothesis is that if terra preta soils happened in Amazon basin,
there is no reason why other civilizations around the world have not
discovered similar properties of charcoal and adopted. There is still
scope to study and understand from countries like India. Please see
this link for certain evidences http://e-terrapreta.blogspot.com/

Please also see this study report on the composition of the silt from
irrigation tanks, applied in parts of India. This practice has turned
many fields into dark earths, farmers are happy and it is still
practices in many parts of peninsular India.

"Economic evaluation of sediments as a source of plant nutrients"
www.ias.ac.in/currsci/oct252008/1042.pdf

"The results indicate that the sediments deposited in the water tanks
of Medak District provided significant amount of nutrients (N, P and
K), were richer in organic C and microbial activity, and thus can act
as fertilizer substitutes for crop production. Because loss of
microbial diversity through erosion from fields is one of the
important factors for land degradation, returning tank sediments rich
in nutrients, organic C, microbial biomass C and microbial
population would help in improving the microbial diversity and
biological activity in farm soils, thereby improving soil quality and
crop production. Owing to the large amount of organic C in tank
sediments, application to agricultural fields would increase soil C.

The feasibility of desilting operations and returning such huge
amounts of sediments to agricultural fields was assessed by
determining the sediment quality in terms of nutrients, organic carbon
(C), biological properties and their economic value as a source of
plant nutrients. Analysis of sediment samples showed an average of 720
mg nitrogen (N), 320 mg phosphorus (P), 310 mg potassium (K) and 9.1 g
of organic C per kg of sediment."

Sharing of this information is not to deviate from the Charcoal +
amendments, which we recognize to mitigate ongoing global changes and
challenges.


Dr. N. Sai Bhaskar Reddy

gordon eliott <gordoneliott0@...> wrote:
>
> now let us review what we do know
>
> TP sites are near rivers
> anaerobic sludge is richer in nutrients than surrounding soils
> anaerobic sludge is formed by millions of different microbes and one of the
> main reactions is the reduction of carbohydrates to hydrocarbons. these
> hydrocarbons tend to be aliphatic.
> the process of low temperature pyrolysation charring also produces
> hydrocarbons with an even higher C/H ratio and which tend to be aromatic.
> if the anaerobic sludge had been dredged out and spread on the land for its
> fertility then no doubt human activity would, in the fullness of time, have
> resulted in the addition of pyrolytic carbon.
> there would thus be carbon of different origins in the soil.
> the science to test this idea has not been done. it is quite likely that the
> analytical tools have not been developed.
>
>
>>
>> KC: I wonder if you would be kind enough to look through your Library of
>> $200 books and tell us a few things about Terra Preta:
>>
>> 1: What is the percentage of charcoal in TP?
>> 2: Does a particular soil have to have a minimum percentage of charcoal to
>> qualify as Terra Preta? If so, what is this %?
>> 3: What is the maximum percentage of charcoal found in Terra Preta?
>> 4: What is a typical charcoal content in soils that are not rated as Terra
>> Preta?
>> 5: What is the source and percentage of the other constituents of Terra
>> Preta?
>> 6: When did they start soil analysis for "charcoal type carbon", rather
>> than simply analysing for "organic matter?"
>> 7: Did the Amazonian Terrapretians make their TP, and grow stuff on it for
>> several thousand years without adding nutrients on a periodic basis? If not,
>> what nutrients did they add, from what sources, and how often?
>>
>> The above would be very helpful in understanding TP, and in figuring out
>> how to get best success with TP today, don't you think?
>>
>> Do you really think that sitting up there 1000s of miles from the Amazon,
>> never been there, no degree in any of the professions that can assess this,
>> no visable effort to look at the past research by any of the people who were
>> there and studied this for there entire careers, some of them, that you can
>> just have thought it all out BETTER than all them in total?
>>
>> KC: The way you put it, the Researchers already know everything we need to
>> know about TP. If that is the case, why are many brilliant minds still
>> working on TP Research?
>>
>> You have NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER! You have NOTHING but your
>> story and it makes no sense. All of the TP and TM soils have charcoal in
>> them. This is one of the primary indications that labels it Terra Preta or
>> Terra Mulata.
>> The soils are not made from "oxbow lake" mud.
>>
>> KC: Speaking of evidence, what evidence can you offer to show that black
>> earth from oxbow lakes was not used in the manufacture of Terra Preta? Is
>> there any reason to believe that black earth taken from oxbow lakes would
>> not be an excellent growing medium?
>>
>>
>> Its useless to talk about this anymore. You stubbornly believe in your
>> own and only your own theory and nothing is going to change that!
>>
>> KC: Show me where I am wrong, or show me a better explanation that hangs
>> together, and I would gladly change.
>>
>> Quit telling newcomers there is a competing theory (yours and yours alone)
>> about how Terra Preta was formed. You are disseminating MIS-INFORMATION and
>> that is all you are doing.
>>
>> KC: Wow!! If I am very wrong, it should be very easy for you show the
>> Biochar List where I am wrong, and if you can, then please do. Don't simply
>> hide behind authority figures... show their relevant data. Present a case
>> based on reason and logic.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>