biochar : Messages : 2124-2153 of 15041

Whar was it in the fish emulsion? How is it made? Is the purpose of the emulsioin to be a fertilizer?
FG

2008/10/1 palmtreepathos <palmtreepathos@...>

http://uncutvideo.aol.com/videos/8554b2fca8d9b70c9cb60a37917c8d6f?
index=0

--
----------------------------------------
Folke G�nther
Kollegiev�gen 19
224 73 Lund
Sweden
Phone: +46 (0)46 141429
Cell: +46 (0)709 710306
Skype:folkegun
URL: http://www.holon.se/folke
BLOG: http://folkegunther.blogspot.com/

#2125

From: "Vichetr Uon" <vichetr@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 8:57 am
Subject: Public School in Cambodia is reopening today

vichetr@...

Dear SSF Respectful,

SSF pleases to inform that every public school in Cambodia is reopening their academic year 2008-2009 today and the day after, every registered children for the academic year will be attended their first day of their classes from tomorrow.

SSF is really enjoyed with this reopening occasion and would like to share this enjoyable issue with you. Their reopening will be a part of gathering children to maintain them at school and in education system and as well as to avoid especially children who are living with at risks families in the Cambodia’s poorest communities from all form of violence, exploitation and abuse against.

This year in prevention of children at risks and supporting to their families to ensure they can care their children themselves in the future, SSF is committed to work and offer services to;

1. Around 120 children (40 children at risks in communities that we work with so far and it is a part of 135 children that supported by Riverkids Singapore and Global Colors last year, 30 street children through Food House Project and 20 their siblings will receive non-formal education in their slum, and leftover children will be selected from a at-risks sub-village. The support themes will be started from reintegrate underage children into public education and extracurricular activities and trainings to gain their life-skills and social welfare to ensure their fruitful lives can be began after left the Programmes.

2. Also 30% of new families of those children’s households will be selected to support over 16 families that we supported to setup and expand cottage industries last year. The Cottage Industry we offer such as Grocery Selling for HIV/AID families, cupcake making, vegetable garden, animal and poultries raising and etc.

Those above mentions contain in the Projects of Educational Sponsorship, Food House Project, Reconciliation and Peaceful Living of a at-risks sub-village, and a Program called Livelihood Programme.

SSF strongly hopes that only you, can help us to lead, manage and implement those Projects and Programme to success in the future. With your financial pledge and technical support, SSF colleagues are continued to work hard, struggles and challenges to end individual child or families from all of incredible forms of violence, exploitation and abuse, especially human trafficking that is arisen and it is a chronic issues/problems with very hard to break down. The way that SSF selected basing on its vision “We cannot wait until a child becomes to victim and then rescue and rehabilitate” is totally positive impact as we can prevent hundred children living with poorest of the poor and vulnerable families in the poorest communities of two districts (Chba Mon and Samrong Tong) of Kampong Speu Province from ceasing their children when they were underage and in the meantime that their families are impossible to support their education and burden to their daily aliveness.

SSF is really passionate with such regard as we would like to maintain those children and offering the services of other children without reaching the services yet this year and to prevent/avoid them from ceasing their education and fogging paper to seek jobs while they are underage that is the way that they will be able fallen into challenge traps of violence, exploitations and abuse. Only you can support us to work hard to terminate the critical issues arisen so far! We are waiting your cooperation, collaboration, considerations and support us this year!

With warm regards and respectfulness from SSF,

VICHETR UON
Founder/Executive Director

Phone: (855)12 471 106
E-mail: vichetr@...
Our Blog: http://ssfcambodia.blogspot.com, http://ssfcambodia.wordpress.com
Website: www.ssfcambodia.org

Skype: sao.sary.foundation

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2126

From: <teelws@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 9:10 am
Subject: Re: How many trees?

teel.wayne

All,

The issue of trees is a very important one.  The 61 per person Pat mentions is
surely not enough.  We have heard Lou, Kofi and others bemoan deforestation and
rightly so.  We need the trees (and other plants) to capture the carbon.  They
are the starting point.  We are going to need billions more of them, not the
less and less that we are seeing now.  This was the heart of the fear of biochar
critics, that by promoting biochar as a solution to global warming we would
inadvertently speed global deforestation.  All this made me rethink the roll of
agroforestry again.

Back in the early 1980s when I was working in East Africa we made an attempt to
plant and grow trees on small farms in such a way that the plant material
produced would add to the production on these plots.  The leaves and stems
became garden mulch or "green manure".  The woody stems became fuel.  Most of
the native plants (or exotics like Leucaena leucocephala or Grevillea robusta)
could coppice readily or be pollarded (have branches and top lopped off) to
produce more without having to replant.  There are many trees in the tropics
that do this.  These agroforestry systems are one way we can promote biochar
without receiving the deforestation criticism.

I remain convinced that our target "biomass" to char, in terms of volume, is
going to come from waste wood in small managed forests, woodlots, or farm trees.
The production will be decentralized.  Can we think like Jean Pain did 40 years
ago about biogas composting, but this time focus on biochar production that
meets other energy or fertility needs on smaller farms?  A row of trees in
cropland, along a contour line in steeper locations, could reduce soil loss,
improve soil fertility through use of leaves and green twigs, and provide raw
material for biochar production, which, if a production system were designed
correctly, could simultaneously be the fuel for cooking.  The biochar produced
then goes back on or in the soil as an agricultural amendment.

It all starts with planting trees, perhaps hundreds of trees, then good stove
design.  AD Karve and Robert Flanagan have given a good start on that.  I
suspect that just like every ecosystem has a different set of appropriate trees,
that every cultural system needs a different biochar cooking design.  We have a
challenge, and speed is of the essence.

How many trees?  Perhaps double what exists world wide - maybe another 400
billion.  Think well, and plant a few trees when you get the chance.

Wayne

---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 10:43:31 +0800
>From: Pat <clamshell@...>
>Subject: [biochar] How many trees?
>To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
>
>   Seen in New Scientist magazine, 20 Sept. 08: a
>   review of a new book,
>   "Between Earth and Sky" by Nalini Nadkarni, U. of
>   Calif. Press. With
>   the help of data from NASA, Nadkarni reveals that
>   there are just 61
>   trees for each human on Earth.
>
>   Pat
>   Western Australia
>
>
Wayne S. Teel
MSC 4102 ISAT
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
Tel: 540-568-2798
Fax: 540-568-2761

#2127

From: <teelws@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 9:15 am
Subject: RE: Re: biochar from microwaves

teel.wayne

Mark,

The question then becomes; do you bury the biochar popcorn?  How much have you
sequestered?

Wayne

---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:18:07 -0700
>From: "Mark Ludlow" <mark@...>
>Subject: RE: [biochar] Re: biochar from microwaves
>To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
>
>   I make biochar frequently in our microwave, Well,
>   actually it starts out as microwave popcorn...
>
>
>
>   From: biochar@yahoogroups.com
>   [mailto:biochar@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of

Wayne S. Teel
MSC 4102 ISAT
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
Tel: 540-568-2798
Fax: 540-568-2761

Reply | Messages in this Topic (45)

#2128

From: kofi thompson <peakofithompson@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 9:21 am
Subject: Re: using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

peakofithompson

Good to speak to you, earlier today, Folk. "War was it in the fish emulsion? How is it made? Is the purpose of the emulsioin to be a fertilizer?"
Do keep us posted - if you do follow up and carry out any experiments.

Stay blessed!

Kofi.

--- On Wed, 1/10/08, Folke Günther <folkeg@...> wrote:

From: Folke Günther <folkeg@...>
Subject: Re: [biochar] using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, 1 October, 2008, 9:27 AM

Whar was it in the fish emulsion? How is it made? Is the purpose of the emulsioin to be a fertilizer?
FG

2008/10/1 palmtreepathos <palmtreepathos@ yahoo.com>

http://uncutvideo. aol.com/videos/ 8554b2fca8d9b70c 9cb60a37917c8d6f ?
index=0

--
------------ --------- --------- --------- -
Folke Günther
Kollegievägen 19
224 73 Lund
Sweden
Phone: +46 (0)46 141429
Cell: +46 (0)709 710306
Skype:folkegun
URL: http://www.holon. se/folke
BLOG: http://folkegunther .blogspot. com/

#2129

From: kofi thompson <peakofithompson@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 10:20 am
Subject: Re: How many trees?

peakofithompson

Bless you, Wayne. We have often pondered what the practical effects of global climate change will be, on our farming business.

Will it mean for example, that if, as the experts say, the impact of global climate change on agriculture in the tropics will be largely negative, that our farming business will not be able to support present and future generations of our family?

Well, if that is the case, then what ought to be the best strategy for u to adopt - to enable us continue getting value from our land: and use it in a sustainable fashion, going forward?

Even my own generation of the family today, finds it difficult to stop the hemorrhaging that comes from those who work the land for us - who, sadly, constantly syphon a significant portion of the revenue stream from all our farms: in spite of our being a benevolent and very socially responsible farming business.

My children, and grandchildren, God bless them, are British and Japanese citizens. Although they carry my genes and take an interest in their father's native Ghana, they are, to all intents and purposes, foreigners in their father's country, more or less.

Our goal therefore is to protect their inheritance by leaving them with an organic farming business model that is less Byzantine than what we currently are saddled with. The idea is to find a business model that can even be overseen and handled, if necessary, by accountants, if need be, on their behalf, An IPO at some point in time, and being quoted on the local stock exchange here, might be a possible goal.

The combination of biochar, agro-forestry and carbon offsetting, seems to be the obvious solution for us. It is a perfect win-win for all involved: us, the next generation, those who work the land for us - and humankind generally: as stewards of the planet Earth.

I can see many farming families here eventually following this concept - and as someone said, grow trees as wind breaks, demarcate the borders of fields with trees, etc. etc. in addition to their traditional mixed-crop farming.

We are really grateful to providence that we can take part in a conversation such as this - and learn from so many brilliant minds! We are most definitely believers in biochar - and supportive of the idea of growing more trees in the world. Blessings, to you all!

>Kofi.

--- On Wed, 1/10/08, teelws@... <teelws@...> wrote:

From: teelws@... <teelws@...>
Subject: Re: [biochar] How many trees?
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, 1 October, 2008, 10:10 AM

All,

The issue of trees is a very important one. The 61 per person Pat mentions is surely not enough. We have heard Lou, Kofi and others bemoan deforestation and rightly so. We need the trees (and other plants) to capture the carbon. They are the starting point. We are going to need billions more of them, not the less and less that we are seeing now. This was the heart of the fear of biochar critics, that by promoting biochar as a solution to global warming we would inadvertently speed global deforestation. All this made me rethink the roll of agroforestry again.

Back in the early 1980s when I was working in East Africa we made an attempt to plant and grow trees on small farms in such a way that the plant material produced would add to the production on these plots. The leaves and stems became garden mulch or "green manure". The woody stems became fuel. Most of the native plants (or exotics like Leucaena leucocephala or Grevillea robusta) could coppice readily or be pollarded (have branches and top lopped off) to produce more without having to replant. There are many trees in the tropics that do this. These agroforestry systems are one way we can promote biochar without receiving the deforestation criticism.

I remain convinced that our target "biomass" to char, in terms of volume, is going to come from waste wood in small managed forests, woodlots, or farm trees. The production will be decentralized. Can we think like Jean Pain did 40 years ago about biogas composting, but this time focus on biochar production that meets other energy or fertility needs on smaller farms? A row of trees in cropland, along a contour line in steeper locations, could reduce soil loss, improve soil fertility through use of leaves and green twigs, and provide raw material for biochar production, which, if a production system were designed correctly, could simultaneously be the fuel for cooking. The biochar produced then goes back on or in the soil as an agricultural amendment.

It all starts with planting trees, perhaps hundreds of trees, then good stove design. AD Karve and Robert Flanagan have given a good start on that. I suspect that just like every ecosystem has a different set of appropriate trees, that every cultural system needs a different biochar cooking design. We have a challenge, and speed is of the essence.

How many trees? Perhaps double what exists world wide - maybe another 400 billion. Think well, and plant a few trees when you get the chance.

Wayne

---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 10:43:31 +0800
>From: Pat <clamshell@iinet. net.au>
>Subject: [biochar] How many trees?
>To: biochar@yahoogroups .com
>
> Seen in New Scientist magazine, 20 Sept. 08: a
> review of a new book,
> "Between Earth and Sky" by Nalini Nadkarni, U. of
> Calif. Press. With
> the help of data from NASA, Nadkarni reveals that
> there are just 61
> trees for each human on Earth.
>
> Pat
> Western Australia
>
>
Wayne S. Teel
MSC 4102 ISAT
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
Tel: 540-568-2798
Fax: 540-568-2761

#2130

From: AJH <list@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 10:34 am
Subject: Re: Longevity of biochar

list@...

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:15:18 +0200, Folke G�nther wrote:

>Bild 15 C. M. Preston and M.W. I. Schmidt 2006 : *Black (pyrogenic) carbon:
>a synthesis of current knowledge* Biogeoscience 3,* *397�420
>
>I attach this paper

Thanks all that responded and especially to Sean who prompted two
experts, Annette Cowie and Sander Bruun, to send me their poster
sessions to IBI, where I confess I had not assimilated them well, I
found the poster sessions confusing to work through and deserving of
more space than was available at Newcastle.

The Oz lot at IBI, which included Annette and in particular Lukas,
were more progressive, not to mention Machiavellian, than any other
group at Newcastle, with what seemed to be a better insight of the
nuances of international regulation.

Given that the person I am attempting to reach has all communication
well screened I'm taking it one step at a time, first dealing with a
person that already has a proposal in for a gasifier on the holding
and doesn't have a plan for what to do with the char/ash. So far he
had convinced himself char only lasted for a few years, so I have
cited the Schmidt paper, initially.

What we seem to have found is that the Soil Association, " the UK's
leading environmental charity promoting sustainable, organic farming
and championing human health." will accept char in a soil amendment if
mixed with other compost. Organic farming does seem to have a similar
ethos to the biochar concept but biochar gives a better "return" on
poor soils, a dichotomy?

Unfortunately the proposal Ronal and I made to produce char from a
500kW wood chip stoker has elicited no response and nothing was said
when I went to do the annual clean out and grease up prior to the
rapidly approaching heating season.

Andrew Heggie

#2131

From: "MFH" <mfh01@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 10:50 am
Subject: Sawdust

mfh01@...

Has anyone tried dry or semi-dry sawdust as a feedstock for char? By sawdust in this instance I mean the residue from sawmills converting logs into planks (or boards), which is normally extracted from the bandsaws and benches and piled somewhere in the yard.

Other similar material is the shavings from ‘thicknessing’ or ‘planing’ operations, where the plank is machined on all sides to produce a dimensioned end product.

Several differences between these two waste materials need mentioning:

a) sawdust generally has a high moisture content. Firstly it comes from green logs with high moisture content themselves, and secondly water is used to cool the sawblades

b) shavings however are normally from processing dry timber, and therefore have a relatively low moisture content

c) sawdust (in general) packs tighter than shavings

If a sawmill has to pay to have sawdust and/or shavings trucked off-site, this is a substantial expense. High volume, low density. Proper economic pain.

Convert either or both into char (AT SITE) and there are multiple benefits, so obvious that they hardly need mentioning.

Anyone tried yet?

Max H

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#2132

From: "Rex Manderson" <rexm@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 12:01 pm
Subject: RE: Sawdust

rexmanderson

Max,

We are rather advanced on a plant to process low density feedstock and all of our testing is being done with fine sawdust. The moisture in our test supply is not so high as it is coming from a furniture factory, but we have included a substantial drying stage in the machine, as we intend to be able to feed up to 30% water content material. The packing is a symptom of the challenging characteristics of this material when you are trying to achieve any sort of flow.

Tom posted a snip of our page www.biogasworks.com to the TP pages back on 19^th July. I apologise if the URL is a bit misleading, since we are optimizing for maximum char yield and soil impact. When we have the core stage of the machine running reasonably I will be issuing an update on our status and plans. Unfortunately we expect to have to truck sawdust from north of you to Brisbane once we get into production.

Regards

Rex Manderson

From: biochar@yahoogroups.com [mailto:biochar@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of MFH
Sent: Wednesday, 1 October 2008 8:50 PM
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [biochar] Sawdust

Other similar material is the shavings from ‘thicknessing’ or ‘planing’ operations, where the plank is machined on all sides to produce a dimensioned end product.

Several differences between these two waste materials need mentioning:

a) sawdust generally has a high moisture content. Firstly it comes from green logs with high moisture content themselves, and secondly water is used to cool the sawblades

b) shavings however are normally from processing dry timber, and therefore have a relatively low moisture content

c) sawdust (in general) packs tighter than shavings

If a sawmill has to pay to have sawdust and/or shavings trucked off-site, this is a substantial expense. High volume, low density. Proper economic pain.

Convert either or both into char (AT SITE) and there are multiple benefits, so obvious that they hardly need mentioning.

Anyone tried yet?

Max H

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#2133

From: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 12:32 pm
Subject: Re: sad

kchisholm@...

Dear Lou

Many of on the Biochar List do read other lists containing topics and
subject matter of interest to ourselves, and we come to the Biochar List for
its Biochar related content. We do not come to the Biochar List to read
"generally interesting material". We join the Biochar List to learn about
Biochar.

Would it be possible to keep postings to the Biochar List reasonably close
to the "how-to" aspects of Biochar?

Would it be possible to post other "interesting" material to the
Climatechange List?

Peoples lives could depend on the speed with which we are able to come up
with a "Recipe Book" for using biochar to improve crop yields.

Thanks for your consideration.

Kevin

----- Original Message -----
From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 2:08 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] sad


> Hello All,
>
> If you have the time and inclination to read off-topic here is a very good
> article http://www.reason.com/news/show/129093.html critiquing the US
> financial bail-out. It points out the coming train wreck -- that you
> really
> can't borrow yourself out of debt. The day arrives when there's no more
> credit and the free lunch is over.
>
> I mention this, not as a distraction or diversion, but because I believe
> that the situation is similar in the earth bank. The fossil fuel binge is
> ending, things are crashing and the way I see it, the current bailout is
> biofuel(s). The dream is to keep the binge going and maintain an
> unsustainable level of consumption. The best you can do in this folly is
> to
> bailout the present and make the future pay for it.
>
> Personally, I don't believe that we will commit to radically different
> lifestyles short of a highly motivating crisis (SUVs are pretty cheap)
> and/or crisis-driven dictatorial powers (already the trend). I am hopeful
> that biochar is the way to start rebuilding capital in the earth bank by
> making savings deposits from waste.
>
> But, really, there is something more beyond the development of techniques.
> For myself, Aldo Leopold said it best: "We abuse land because we regard it
> as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which
> we
> belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect."
>
> Long ago, Wendell Berry alerted us to the fact that the basic problems --
> food, energy, etc -- and solutions will have to be both agricultural and
> cultural. They are inseparable.
>
> lou
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Miles <tmiles@...> wrote:
>
>>    Lloyd,
>>
>>
>>
>> I fail to see the connection between the carbonization of biomass and the
>> immolation of the US economy or why you feel the need to express your
>> political sentiments in this forum.
>>
>>
>>
>> To reinforce Walter's point about deforestation the NY
>>
Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF\
.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=BRAZIL&st=cse&oref=slogin>reports
>> this morning that in Brazil "Deforestation increased 228 percent in
>> August compared with the same month a year ago, according to the National
>> Institute for Space Research, which uses satellite images to track
>> logging,"
>> "Environmentalists blame the global spike in food
>>
prices<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/food_price\
s/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>
>> for
>> encouraging soy farmers and cattle ranchers to clear land for crops and
>> grazing." and, "Environment Minister Carlos Minc said coming elections
>> were
>> partly to blame, with mayors in the region turning a blind eye to illegal
>> logging in hopes of gaining votes."  Take your pick for whom to blame.
>>
>>
>>
>> The relevant question for this forum is whether biochar can have an
>> impact
>> on deforestation by, for example, increasing food production or reducing
>> food costs.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com
> http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
> http://youtube.com/my_videos
>

#2134

From: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 12:35 pm
Subject: Re: sad

kchisholm@...

Dear Lou

This is the Biochar List. It is not Deforestation List.


----- Original Message -----
From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:42 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] sad


>A few interesting articles with lots of facts about the causes of
> deforestation in the Amazon
>
> Brazilian government is biggest destroyer of the Amazon
> rainforest<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0930-brazil.html>
> (9/30/2008) A Brazilian government agency changed with land distribution
> to
> the poor is the largest driver of deforestation since 2005, according to
> the
> country's environmental ministry.
>
> Global Commodities Boom Fuels New Assault on
> Amazon<http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2010>
> * With soaring prices for agricultural goods and new demand for biofuels,
> the clearing of the world's largest rain forest has accelerated
> dramatically. Unless forceful measures are taken, half of the Brazilian
> Amazon could be cut, burned or dried out within 20 years.*
>
> More than half the *Amazon* will be lost within 20
> years<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0227-nepstad_amazon.html>(27 Feb
> 2008)
> *...* Cattle ranching, industrial soy farming, and logging are three of
> the
> leading drivers of deforestation in the Brazilian *Amazon*.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Miles <tmiles@...> wrote:
>
>>    Lloyd,
>>
>>
>>
>> I fail to see the connection between the carbonization of biomass and the
>> immolation of the US economy or why you feel the need to express your
>> political sentiments in this forum.
>>
>>
>>
>> To reinforce Walter's point about deforestation the NY
>>
Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF\
.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=BRAZIL&st=cse&oref=slogin>reports
>> this morning that in Brazil "Deforestation increased 228 percent in
>> August compared with the same month a year ago, according to the National
>> Institute for Space Research, which uses satellite images to track
>> logging,"
>> "Environmentalists blame the global spike in food
>>
prices<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/food_price\
s/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>
>> for
>> encouraging soy farmers and cattle ranchers to clear land for crops and
>> grazing." and, "Environment Minister Carlos Minc said coming elections
>> were
>> partly to blame, with mayors in the region turning a blind eye to illegal
>> logging in hopes of gaining votes."  Take your pick for whom to blame.
>>
>>
>>
>> The relevant question for this forum is whether biochar can have an
>> impact
>> on deforestation by, for example, increasing food production or reducing
>> food costs.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

#2135

From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 12:39 pm
Subject: Re: sad

lou_brasil

oh kevin, i see my role here as a connector with the larger conversation. if this is troubling to you, i highly recommend that you stop reading my posts. quite simple, i believe.

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@...> wrote:

Dear Lou

Many of on the Biochar List do read other lists containing topics and
subject matter of interest to ourselves, and we come to the Biochar List for
its Biochar related content. We do not come to the Biochar List to read
"generally interesting material". We join the Biochar List to learn about
Biochar.

Would it be possible to keep postings to the Biochar List reasonably close
to the "how-to" aspects of Biochar?

Would it be possible to post other "interesting" material to the
Climatechange List?

Peoples lives could depend on the speed with which we are able to come up
with a "Recipe Book" for using biochar to improve crop yields.

Thanks for your consideration.

Kevin

----- Original Message -----
From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 2:08 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] sad

> Hello All,
>
> If you have the time and inclination to read off-topic here is a very good
> article http://www.reason.com/news/show/129093.html critiquing the US
> financial bail-out. It points out the coming train wreck -- that you
> really
> can't borrow yourself out of debt. The day arrives when there's no more
> credit and the free lunch is over.
>
> I mention this, not as a distraction or diversion, but because I believe
> that the situation is similar in the earth bank. The fossil fuel binge is
> ending, things are crashing and the way I see it, the current bailout is
> biofuel(s). The dream is to keep the binge going and maintain an
> unsustainable level of consumption. The best you can do in this folly is
> to
> bailout the present and make the future pay for it.
>
> Personally, I don't believe that we will commit to radically different
> lifestyles short of a highly motivating crisis (SUVs are pretty cheap)
> and/or crisis-driven dictatorial powers (already the trend). I am hopeful
> that biochar is the way to start rebuilding capital in the earth bank by
> making savings deposits from waste.
>
> But, really, there is something more beyond the development of techniques.
> For myself, Aldo Leopold said it best: "We abuse land because we regard it
> as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which
> we
> belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect."
>
> Long ago, Wendell Berry alerted us to the fact that the basic problems --
> food, energy, etc -- and solutions will have to be both agricultural and
> cultural. They are inseparable.
>
> lou
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Miles <tmiles@...> wrote:
>
>> Lloyd,
>>
>>
>>
>> I fail to see the connection between the carbonization of biomass and the
>> immolation of the US economy or why you feel the need to express your
>> political sentiments in this forum.
>>
>>
>>
>> To reinforce Walter's point about deforestation the NY
>> Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=BRAZIL&st=cse&oref=slogin>reports

>> this morning that in Brazil "Deforestation increased 228 percent in
>> August compared with the same month a year ago, according to the National
>> Institute for Space Research, which uses satellite images to track
>> logging,"
>> "Environmentalists blame the global spike in food
>> prices<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/food_prices/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>

>> for
>> encouraging soy farmers and cattle ranchers to clear land for crops and
>> grazing." and, "Environment Minister Carlos Minc said coming elections
>> were
>> partly to blame, with mayors in the region turning a blind eye to illegal
>> logging in hopes of gaining votes." Take your pick for whom to blame.
>>
>>
>>
>> The relevant question for this forum is whether biochar can have an
>> impact
>> on deforestation by, for example, increasing food production or reducing
>> food costs.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com
> http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
> http://youtube.com/my_videos
>

--
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos

#2136

From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 12:40 pm
Subject: Re: sad

lou_brasil

was it emerson who said, "consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds"?

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@...> wrote:

Dear Lou

This is the Biochar List. It is not Deforestation List.

----- Original Message -----
From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:42 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] sad

>A few interesting articles with lots of facts about the causes of
> deforestation in the Amazon
>
> Brazilian government is biggest destroyer of the Amazon
> rainforest<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0930-brazil.html>

> (9/30/2008) A Brazilian government agency changed with land distribution
> to
> the poor is the largest driver of deforestation since 2005, according to
> the
> country's environmental ministry.
>
> Global Commodities Boom Fuels New Assault on
> Amazon<http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2010>

> * With soaring prices for agricultural goods and new demand for biofuels,
> the clearing of the world's largest rain forest has accelerated
> dramatically. Unless forceful measures are taken, half of the Brazilian
> Amazon could be cut, burned or dried out within 20 years.*
>
> More than half the *Amazon* will be lost within 20
> years<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0227-nepstad_amazon.html>(27 Feb

> 2008)
> *...* Cattle ranching, industrial soy farming, and logging are three of
> the
> leading drivers of deforestation in the Brazilian *Amazon*.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Miles <tmiles@...> wrote:
>
>> Lloyd,
>>
>>
>>
>> I fail to see the connection between the carbonization of biomass and the
>> immolation of the US economy or why you feel the need to express your
>> political sentiments in this forum.
>>
>>
>>
>> To reinforce Walter's point about deforestation the NY
>> Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=BRAZIL&st=cse&oref=slogin>reports

>> this morning that in Brazil "Deforestation increased 228 percent in
>> August compared with the same month a year ago, according to the National
>> Institute for Space Research, which uses satellite images to track
>> logging,"
>> "Environmentalists blame the global spike in food
>> prices<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/food_prices/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>

>> for
>> encouraging soy farmers and cattle ranchers to clear land for crops and
>> grazing." and, "Environment Minister Carlos Minc said coming elections
>> were
>> partly to blame, with mayors in the region turning a blind eye to illegal
>> logging in hopes of gaining votes." Take your pick for whom to blame.
>>
>>
>>
>> The relevant question for this forum is whether biochar can have an
>> impact
>> on deforestation by, for example, increasing food production or reducing
>> food costs.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

--
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos

#2137

From: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 12:48 pm
Subject: Re: How many trees?

kchisholm@...

Dear Wayne

There is a valid concern for trees and deforestation, and there are many
other venues that deal with that subject. Correct me if I am wrong, but I
understand that he Biochar List was intended to focus on understanding,
making and using charcoal as an agricultural supplement.

The Climatechange sister list was intended to serve as a forum for these
peripheral issues. Could such discussions be carried on there, where they
would be very appropriate?

Biochar does not necessarily have anything to do with deforestation. Biochar
can be made from grasses, forest trash, construction waste, agricultural
residues, etc.

Kevin

----- Original Message -----
From: <teelws@...>
To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] How many trees?


> All,
>
> The issue of trees is a very important one.  The 61 per person Pat
> mentions is surely not enough.  We have heard Lou, Kofi and others bemoan
> deforestation and rightly so.  We need the trees (and other plants) to
> capture the carbon.  They are the starting point.  We are going to need
> billions more of them, not the less and less that we are seeing now.  This
> was the heart of the fear of biochar critics, that by promoting biochar as
> a solution to global warming we would inadvertently speed global
> deforestation.  All this made me rethink the roll of agroforestry again.
>
> Back in the early 1980s when I was working in East Africa we made an
> attempt to plant and grow trees on small farms in such a way that the
> plant material produced would add to the production on these plots.  The
> leaves and stems became garden mulch or "green manure".  The woody stems
> became fuel.  Most of the native plants (or exotics like Leucaena
> leucocephala or Grevillea robusta) could coppice readily or be pollarded
> (have branches and top lopped off) to produce more without having to
> replant.  There are many trees in the tropics that do this.  These
> agroforestry systems are one way we can promote biochar without receiving
> the deforestation criticism.
>
> I remain convinced that our target "biomass" to char, in terms of volume,
> is going to come from waste wood in small managed forests, woodlots, or
> farm trees.  The production will be decentralized.  Can we think like Jean
> Pain did 40 years ago about biogas composting, but this time focus on
> biochar production that meets other energy or fertility needs on smaller
> farms?  A row of trees in cropland, along a contour line in steeper
> locations, could reduce soil loss, improve soil fertility through use of
> leaves and green twigs, and provide raw material for biochar production,
> which, if a production system were designed correctly, could
> simultaneously be the fuel for cooking.  The biochar produced then goes
> back on or in the soil as an agricultural amendment.
>
> It all starts with planting trees, perhaps hundreds of trees, then good
> stove design.  AD Karve and Robert Flanagan have given a good start on
> that.  I suspect that just like every ecosystem has a different set of
> appropriate trees, that every cultural system needs a different biochar
> cooking design.  We have a challenge, and speed is of the essence.
>
> How many trees?  Perhaps double what exists world wide - maybe another 400
> billion.  Think well, and plant a few trees when you get the chance.
>
> Wayne
>
> ---- Original message ----
>>Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 10:43:31 +0800
>>From: Pat <clamshell@...>
>>Subject: [biochar] How many trees?
>>To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
>>
>>   Seen in New Scientist magazine, 20 Sept. 08: a
>>   review of a new book,
>>   "Between Earth and Sky" by Nalini Nadkarni, U. of
>>   Calif. Press. With
>>   the help of data from NASA, Nadkarni reveals that
>>   there are just 61
>>   trees for each human on Earth.
>>
>>   Pat
>>   Western Australia
>>
>>
> Wayne S. Teel
> MSC 4102 ISAT
> James Madison University
> Harrisonburg, VA 22807
> Tel: 540-568-2798
> Fax: 540-568-2761
>

#2138

From: <teelws@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 12:57 pm
Subject: Re: sad

teel.wayne

Lou,

Well quoted.  Creativity happens at the edges of relevance.  Don't stop posting
the "edgy stuff".  It helps keep us connected to life and push to make our
studies appropriate for people across cultures, ecosystems, and in this group,
timezones and continents.

Wayne

---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 09:40:47 -0300
>From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
>Subject: Re: [biochar] sad
>To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
>
>   was it emerson who said, "consistency is the
>   hobgoblin of small minds"?
>
>   On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Kevin Chisholm
>   <kchisholm@...> wrote:
>
>     Dear Lou
>
>     This is the Biochar List. It is not Deforestation
>     List.
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
>     To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
>     Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:42 AM
>     Subject: Re: [biochar] sad
>
>     >A few interesting articles with lots of facts
>     about the causes of
>     > deforestation in the Amazon
>     >
>     > Brazilian government is biggest destroyer of the
>     Amazon
>     >
>     rainforest<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0930-brazil.html>
>     > (9/30/2008) A Brazilian government agency
>     changed with land distribution
>     > to
>     > the poor is the largest driver of deforestation
>     since 2005, according to
>     > the
>     > country's environmental ministry.
>     >
>     > Global Commodities Boom Fuels New Assault on
>     >
>     Amazon<http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2010>
>     > * With soaring prices for agricultural goods and
>     new demand for biofuels,
>     > the clearing of the world's largest rain forest
>     has accelerated
>     > dramatically. Unless forceful measures are
>     taken, half of the Brazilian
>     > Amazon could be cut, burned or dried out within
>     20 years.*
>     >
>     > More than half the *Amazon* will be lost within
>     20
>     >
>     years<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0227-nepstad_amazon.html>(27
>     Feb
>     > 2008)
>     > *...* Cattle ranching, industrial soy farming,
>     and logging are three of
>     > the
>     > leading drivers of deforestation in the
>     Brazilian *Amazon*.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Miles
>     <tmiles@...> wrote:
>     >
>     >> Lloyd,
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> I fail to see the connection between the
>     carbonization of biomass and the
>     >> immolation of the US economy or why you feel
>     the need to express your
>     >> political sentiments in this forum.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> To reinforce Walter's point about deforestation
>     the NY
>     >>
>    
Times<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF\
.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=BRAZIL&st=cse&oref=slogin>reports
>     >> this morning that in Brazil "Deforestation
>     increased 228 percent in
>     >> August compared with the same month a year ago,
>     according to the National
>     >> Institute for Space Research, which uses
>     satellite images to track
>     >> logging,"
>     >> "Environmentalists blame the global spike in
>     food
>     >>
>    
prices<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/food_price\
s/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>
>     >> for
>     >> encouraging soy farmers and cattle ranchers to
>     clear land for crops and
>     >> grazing." and, "Environment Minister Carlos
>     Minc said coming elections
>     >> were
>     >> partly to blame, with mayors in the region
>     turning a blind eye to illegal
>     >> logging in hopes of gaining votes." Take your
>     pick for whom to blame.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> The relevant question for this forum is whether
>     biochar can have an
>     >> impact
>     >> on deforestation by, for example, increasing
>     food production or reducing
>     >> food costs.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> Tom
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >
>
>   --
>   http://lougold.blogspot.com
>   http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
>   http://youtube.com/my_videos
>
>
Wayne S. Teel
MSC 4102 ISAT
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
Tel: 540-568-2798
Fax: 540-568-2761

#2139

From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 1:26 pm
Subject: the political context of biochar

lou_brasil

Folks should be aware of the political context surrounding biochar, at least to avoid being blindsided as happened with the press release media attack on the IBI conference. I am passing on these these links without any kind of endorsement. They are more ideological and sensational than is my own style. But as is always the case with things like this, they carry important kernels of truth that are worthy of consideration.

World Bank Secret Report confirms Biofuel Cause of World Food Crisis
by F. William Engdahl
Global Research, July 10, 2008
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9547

Platform for Collective Action Forum Terra Preta,
Rome June 4, 2008
http://www.foodsovereignty.org/new/

Please folks, I don't want to debate globalization or GM or the New World Order. I would prefer that they are not debated on this forum. My purpose is not to provoke but to inform.

lou

#2140

From: "nkycarbon" <nkycarbon@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 1:28 pm
Subject: Re: How many trees?

nkycarbon

Using those numbers it would take each tree on earth contributing $27
USD to pay off the US national debt.  The US "bailout plan" will add
an extra $2 USD per tree.

So when discussing funding for biochar research and development a
comment that could be made would be "I can point to my trees.  Can you
point to your dollars?"

#2141

From: "Mark Ludlow" <mark@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 1:45 pm
Subject: RE: using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

dosidicas

Fish, autolyzed or enzymatically digested. Most bone removed. (Excellent source of calcium phosphate!) Phosphoric acid used as acidulent for micro-stability as concentrate. 4-1-0. Rich in micronutrients; slow release. Drip or foliar. Not concentrated fishmeal stickwater which is high in chlorides! Listed as “soil amendment”.

Mark

From: biochar@yahoogroups.com [mailto:biochar@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Folke G�nther
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 1:28 AM
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [biochar] using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

Whar was it in the fish emulsion? How is it made? Is the purpose of the emulsioin to be a fertilizer?
FG

2008/10/1 palmtreepathos <palmtreepathos@...>

http://uncutvideo.aol.com/videos/8554b2fca8d9b70c9cb60a37917c8d6f?
index=0

#2142

From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 1:51 pm
Subject: Re: How many trees?

lou_brasil

YES!

Please notice that "certification" can be a can of worms or a purse of carbon coins or a path toward social justice and conservation.

Cutting deforestation can fight climate change, reduce poverty and conflict

WWF ends contentious debate, will now support effort to fight climate change by saving rainforests

Brazil plans to cut Amazon deforestation to zero by 2015

Palm oil firm becomes first to win eco-certification
Be sure to check the comments -- this is industry-driven

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Pat <clamshell@...> wrote:

Seen in New Scientist magazine, 20 Sept. 08: a review of a new book,
"Between Earth and Sky" by Nalini Nadkarni, U. of Calif. Press. With
the help of data from NASA, Nadkarni reveals that there are just 61
trees for each human on Earth.

Pat
Western Australia

--
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos

#2143

From: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 1:53 pm
Subject: Re: sad

kchisholm@...

Dear Lou
----- Original Message -----
From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] sad


> was it emerson who said, "consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds"?

Was it Tom Miles, the List Owner, who said "The purpose of the Biochar list
is to discuss and understand biochar, as an agricultural additive"?

Kevin
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Kevin Chisholm
> <kchisholm@...>wrote:
>
>>   Dear Lou
>>
>> This is the Biochar List. It is not Deforestation List.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@... <lou.gold%40gmail.com>>
>> To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com <biochar%40yahoogroups.com>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: [biochar] sad
>>
>> >A few interesting articles with lots of facts about the causes of
>> > deforestation in the Amazon
>> >
>> > Brazilian government is biggest destroyer of the Amazon
>> > rainforest<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0930-brazil.html>
>> > (9/30/2008) A Brazilian government agency changed with land
>> > distribution
>> > to
>> > the poor is the largest driver of deforestation since 2005, according
>> > to
>> > the
>> > country's environmental ministry.
>> >
>> > Global Commodities Boom Fuels New Assault on
>> > Amazon<http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2010>
>> > * With soaring prices for agricultural goods and new demand for
>> > biofuels,
>> > the clearing of the world's largest rain forest has accelerated
>> > dramatically. Unless forceful measures are taken, half of the Brazilian
>> > Amazon could be cut, burned or dried out within 20 years.*
>> >
>> > More than half the *Amazon* will be lost within 20
>> > years<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0227-nepstad_amazon.html>(27 Feb
>> > 2008)
>> > *...* Cattle ranching, industrial soy farming, and logging are three of
>> > the
>> > leading drivers of deforestation in the Brazilian *Amazon*.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Miles
>> > <tmiles@...<tmiles%40trmiles.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Lloyd,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I fail to see the connection between the carbonization of biomass and
>> the
>> >> immolation of the US economy or why you feel the need to express your
>> >> political sentiments in this forum.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> To reinforce Walter's point about deforestation the NY
>> >> Times<
>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF.html?\
_r=1&scp=2&sq=BRAZIL&st=cse&oref=slogin>reports
>>
>> >> this morning that in Brazil "Deforestation increased 228 percent in
>> >> August compared with the same month a year ago, according to the
>> National
>> >> Institute for Space Research, which uses satellite images to track
>> >> logging,"
>> >> "Environmentalists blame the global spike in food
>> >> prices<
>>
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/food_prices/index\
.html?inline=nyt-classifier>
>>
>> >> for
>> >> encouraging soy farmers and cattle ranchers to clear land for crops
>> >> and
>> >> grazing." and, "Environment Minister Carlos Minc said coming elections
>> >> were
>> >> partly to blame, with mayors in the region turning a blind eye to
>> illegal
>> >> logging in hopes of gaining votes." Take your pick for whom to blame.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The relevant question for this forum is whether biochar can have an
>> >> impact
>> >> on deforestation by, for example, increasing food production or
>> >> reducing
>> >> food costs.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com
> http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
> http://youtube.com/my_videos
>

#2144

From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 1:56 pm
Subject: Re: sad

lou_brasil

that could be.

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@...> wrote:

Dear Lou

----- Original Message -----
From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: [biochar] sad

> was it emerson who said, "consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds"?

Was it Tom Miles, the List Owner, who said "The purpose of the Biochar list
is to discuss and understand biochar, as an agricultural additive"?

Kevin

>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Kevin Chisholm
> <kchisholm@...>wrote:
>
>> Dear Lou
>>
>> This is the Biochar List. It is not Deforestation List.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@... <lou.gold%40gmail.com>>
>> To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com <biochar%40yahoogroups.com>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: [biochar] sad
>>
>> >A few interesting articles with lots of facts about the causes of
>> > deforestation in the Amazon
>> >
>> > Brazilian government is biggest destroyer of the Amazon
>> > rainforest<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0930-brazil.html>
>> > (9/30/2008) A Brazilian government agency changed with land
>> > distribution
>> > to
>> > the poor is the largest driver of deforestation since 2005, according
>> > to
>> > the
>> > country's environmental ministry.
>> >
>> > Global Commodities Boom Fuels New Assault on
>> > Amazon<http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2010>
>> > * With soaring prices for agricultural goods and new demand for
>> > biofuels,
>> > the clearing of the world's largest rain forest has accelerated
>> > dramatically. Unless forceful measures are taken, half of the Brazilian
>> > Amazon could be cut, burned or dried out within 20 years.*
>> >
>> > More than half the *Amazon* will be lost within 20
>> > years<http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0227-nepstad_amazon.html>(27 Feb
>> > 2008)
>> > *...* Cattle ranching, industrial soy farming, and logging are three of
>> > the
>> > leading drivers of deforestation in the Brazilian *Amazon*.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Miles
>> > <tmiles@...<tmiles%40trmiles.com>>

>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Lloyd,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I fail to see the connection between the carbonization of biomass and
>> the
>> >> immolation of the US economy or why you feel the need to express your
>> >> political sentiments in this forum.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> To reinforce Walter's point about deforestation the NY
>> >> Times<
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=BRAZIL&st=cse&oref=slogin>reports
>>
>> >> this morning that in Brazil "Deforestation increased 228 percent in
>> >> August compared with the same month a year ago, according to the
>> National
>> >> Institute for Space Research, which uses satellite images to track
>> >> logging,"
>> >> "Environmentalists blame the global spike in food
>> >> prices<
>> http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/food_prices/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>
>>
>> >> for
>> >> encouraging soy farmers and cattle ranchers to clear land for crops
>> >> and
>> >> grazing." and, "Environment Minister Carlos Minc said coming elections
>> >> were
>> >> partly to blame, with mayors in the region turning a blind eye to
>> illegal
>> >> logging in hopes of gaining votes." Take your pick for whom to blame.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The relevant question for this forum is whether biochar can have an
>> >> impact
>> >> on deforestation by, for example, increasing food production or
>> >> reducing
>> >> food costs.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com
> http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
> http://youtube.com/my_videos
>

--
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos

#2145

From: joe ferguson <jferguson@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 2:00 pm
Subject: Re: Re: biochar from microwaves

jferg2114

If it went to the landfill, does that count?

teelws@... wrote:

Mark,

The question then becomes; do you bury the biochar popcorn? How much have you sequestered?

Wayne

---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:18:07 -0700
>From: "Mark Ludlow" <mark@ludlow.com>
>Subject: RE: [biochar] Re: biochar from microwaves
>To: <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
>
> I make biochar frequently in our microwave, Well,
> actually it starts out as microwave popcorn...
>
>
>
> From: biochar@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:biochar@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of

Wayne S. Teel
MSC 4102 ISAT
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
Tel: 540-568-2798
Fax: 540-568-2761

Reply | Messages in this Topic (45)

#2146

From: Michael <michaelangelica@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 2:03 pm
Subject: Re: Re: How many trees?

michaelangelica@...

The more i think abaoout it the sillier that number seems.
61 trees for each human on Earth.
What is a tree?
this surely is not correct?

Put me down for two large mulberries to be planted in the council reserve next week Let's hope the council doesn't poison or mow them down as they have done in the past This time they are BIG!

The article in the Australian posted by Kelpie Wilson
Did everyone miss that?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24423123-601,00.html

This Professorial dingbat (GarNUT) is heading up Australia's International and National response to Climate Change.
The Lord preserve Us All.

Today we had two more GW denialists writing in the local paper
One saying methane was not a greenhouse gas
Ignorance is bliss.

--
Michael
"What could possibly go wrong?!"
DOCTOR WHO

#2147

From: "Laurens Rademakers" <lrademakers@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 2:17 pm
Subject: Re: the political context of biochar

lrademakers@...

Lou,

I strongly agree with your efforts to broaden the context in which we look at biochar. We should look at it in the context of land use and natural resource use choices, impacts and potentials, and the socio-political implications of these choices. It is better we constantly keep this context in mind and actively refer to it, else we may end up in a sphere in which (sometimes unsubstantiated) doubt and confusion about the possible benefits of biochar will reign supreme.

I have some experience in the arena of policy making (as someone who has given policy makers advice on bioenergy as it relates to development in the Global South) and I have seen the current biofuels debate unfold. It is important to keep reminding onesself that there are many different social and environmental impacts to the multiple land use and resource use choices we want to make. Policy makers often want the big picture, and we should get used to looking at biochar this way.

We, as the "biochar community", are probably over the initial phase of "enthusiasm" we experienced when first exploring the concept. It is good that we're now entering a phase of aksing more fundamental questions, and of practical consequences arising from this analysis (questions about verification, certification, regulation, correct implementation of biochar projects, social & environmental impact assessments for biochar, etc...).

We should keep this discussion going and start working on these issues in an in-depth manner. Some people have already begun this work (see the exchange with Dr Miglietta) and the analysis of topics that we agree should be explored further after IBI2. I would support the creation of "working groups" to divide the labor a bit. This will allow us to focus forces on these different topics.

Cheers,

Lorenzo

----- Original Message -----

From: lou gold

To: biochar@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:26 PM

Subject: [biochar] the political context of biochar

Folks should be aware of the political context surrounding biochar, at least to avoid being blindsided as happened with the press release media attack on the IBI conference. I am passing on these these links without any kind of endorsement. They are more ideological and sensational than is my own style. But as is always the case with things like this, they carry important kernels of truth that are worthy of consideration.

World Bank Secret Report confirms Biofuel Cause of World Food Crisis
by F. William Engdahl
Global Research, July 10, 2008
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9547

Platform for Collective Action Forum Terra Preta,
Rome June 4, 2008
http://www.foodsovereignty.org/new/

Please folks, I don't want to debate globalization or GM or the New World Order. I would prefer that they are not debated on this forum. My purpose is not to provoke but to inform.

lou

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1701 - Release Date: 30/09/2008 19:08

#2148

From: "Ron Larson" <rongretlarson@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 2:30 pm
Subject: Re: Longevity of biochar

ronalwlarson

Andrew -

How about my sending in an e-mail to the council or someone?

Also, I owe you some money. Did I miss a procedure?

I had you in mind when I wrote last night about microwave drying/pyrolysis. Was that option one you ever considered?

Ron

----- Original Message -----

From: AJH

To: biochar@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 4:34 AM

Subject: Re: [biochar] Longevity of biochar

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:15:18 +0200, Folke G�nther wrote:

>Bild 15 C. M. Preston and M.W. I. Schmidt 2006 : *Black (pyrogenic) carbon:
>a synthesis of current knowledge* Biogeoscience 3,* *397�420
>
>I attach this paper

Thanks all that responded and especially to Sean who prompted two
experts, Annette Cowie and Sander Bruun, to send me their poster
sessions to IBI, where I confess I had not assimilated them well, I
found the poster sessions confusing to work through and deserving of
more space than was available at Newcastle.

The Oz lot at IBI, which included Annette and in particular Lukas,
were more progressive, not to mention Machiavellian, than any other
group at Newcastle, with what seemed to be a better insight of the
nuances of international regulation.

Given that the person I am attempting to reach has all communication
well screened I'm taking it one step at a time, first dealing with a
person that already has a proposal in for a gasifier on the holding
and doesn't have a plan for what to do with the char/ash. So far he
had convinced himself char only lasted for a few years, so I have
cited the Schmidt paper, initially.

What we seem to have found is that the Soil Association, " the UK's
leading environmental charity promoting sustainable, organic farming
and championing human health." will accept char in a soil amendment if
mixed with other compost. Organic farming does seem to have a similar
ethos to the biochar concept but biochar gives a better "return" on
poor soils, a dichotomy?

Unfortunately the proposal Ronal and I made to produce char from a
500kW wood chip stoker has elicited no response and nothing was said
when I went to do the annual clean out and grease up prior to the
rapidly approaching heating season.

Andrew Heggie

#2149

From: "Folke G�nther" <folkeg@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 2:45 pm
Subject: Re: using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

folkegse

What is the name of the stuff?
FG

2008/10/1 Mark Ludlow <mark@...>

Fish, autolyzed or enzymatically digested. Most bone removed. (Excellent source of calcium phosphate!) Phosphoric acid used as acidulent for micro-stability as concentrate. 4-1-0. Rich in micronutrients; slow release. Drip or foliar. Not concentrated fishmeal stickwater which is high in chlorides! Listed as "soil amendment".

Mark

From: biochar@yahoogroups.com [mailto:biochar@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Folke G�nther
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 1:28 AM
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [biochar] using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

Whar was it in the fish emulsion? How is it made? Is the purpose of the emulsioin to be a fertilizer?
FG

2008/10/1 palmtreepathos <palmtreepathos@...>

http://uncutvideo.aol.com/videos/8554b2fca8d9b70c9cb60a37917c8d6f?
index=0

--
----------------------------------------
Folke G�nther
Kollegiev�gen 19
224 73 Lund
Sweden
Phone: +46 (0)46 141429
Cell: +46 (0)709 710306
Skype:folkegun
URL: http://www.holon.se/folke
BLOG: http://folkegunther.blogspot.com/

#2150

From: "Mark Ludlow" <mark@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 2:52 pm
Subject: RE: using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

dosidicas

Fish Protein Hydrolysate

From: biochar@yahoogroups.com [mailto:biochar@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Folke G�nther
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 7:45 AM
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [biochar] using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

What is the name of the stuff?
FG

2008/10/1 Mark Ludlow <mark@...>

Mark

From: biochar@yahoogroups.com [mailto:biochar@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Folke G�nther
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 1:28 AM
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [biochar] using powerful components of 'terra preta' in making dark soils

Whar was it in the fish emulsion? How is it made? Is the purpose of the emulsioin to be a fertilizer?
FG

2008/10/1 palmtreepathos <palmtreepathos@...>

http://uncutvideo.aol.com/videos/8554b2fca8d9b70c9cb60a37917c8d6f?
index=0

#2151

From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 3:02 pm
Subject: Re: the political context of biochar

lou_brasil

Lorenzo,

I'm glad that you see it that way. I believe that we are all in an incredible learning process aimed at discovering what sustainability is at the level of practical realities faced by real people in real places. I used to be a hard-core preservationist. I'm learning a lot by opening to the larger perspectives.

I truly believe that both the networks-of-problems and the networks-of-solutions are alternative economy-and-ecology paradigms. The first is based on extraction-and-credit and the other is based on reciprocity-and-savings. Shifting from one to the other is the work of the 21st Century.

I have come to believe that our biochar "mantra" might be "the soil is the fundamental ground of human being." Lots to think about in that one (hehe).

On a more practical note, I really want to thank the many people on this forum and in the biochar movement for doing the hard work of "unpacking" the biochar vision for practical use. I thank you for welcoming an expansive generalist and poetic sort such as myself into the conversation n the midst of all this nitty-gritty work. I send a deep bow of gratitude to all of you.

Touch the earth and blessed be.

lou

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Laurens Rademakers <lrademakers@...> wrote:

Lou,

I strongly agree with your efforts to broaden the context in which we look at biochar. We should look at it in the context of land use and natural resource use choices, impacts and potentials, and the socio-political implications of these choices. It is better we constantly keep this context in mind and actively refer to it, else we may end up in a sphere in which (sometimes unsubstantiated) doubt and confusion about the possible benefits of biochar will reign supreme.

I have some experience in the arena of policy making (as someone who has given policy makers advice on bioenergy as it relates to development in the Global South) and I have seen the current biofuels debate unfold. It is important to keep reminding onesself that there are many different social and environmental impacts to the multiple land use and resource use choices we want to make. Policy makers often want the big picture, and we should get used to looking at biochar this way.

We, as the "biochar community", are probably over the initial phase of "enthusiasm" we experienced when first exploring the concept. It is good that we're now entering a phase of aksing more fundamental questions, and of practical consequences arising from this analysis (questions about verification, certification, regulation, correct implementation of biochar projects, social & environmental impact assessments for biochar, etc...).

We should keep this discussion going and start working on these issues in an in-depth manner. Some people have already begun this work (see the exchange with Dr Miglietta) and the analysis of topics that we agree should be explored further after IBI2. I would support the creation of "working groups" to divide the labor a bit. This will allow us to focus forces on these different topics.

Cheers,

Lorenzo

----- Original Message -----

From: lou gold

To: biochar@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:26 PM

Subject: [biochar] the political context of biochar

Folks should be aware of the political context surrounding biochar, at least to avoid being blindsided as happened with the press release media attack on the IBI conference. I am passing on these these links without any kind of endorsement. They are more ideological and sensational than is my own style. But as is always the case with things like this, they carry important kernels of truth that are worthy of consideration.

World Bank Secret Report confirms Biofuel Cause of World Food Crisis
by F. William Engdahl
Global Research, July 10, 2008
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9547

Platform for Collective Action Forum Terra Preta,
Rome June 4, 2008
http://www.foodsovereignty.org/new/

Please folks, I don't want to debate globalization or GM or the New World Order. I would prefer that they are not debated on this forum. My purpose is not to provoke but to inform.

lou

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1701 - Release Date: 30/09/2008 19:08

--
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos

#2152

From: "lou gold" <lou.gold@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 3:14 pm
Subject: Wood chips, etc

lou_brasil

Good discussion starting at the new Green.Inc blog at the NY Times:

Coal to Wood: The Conversion Calculus

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#2153

From: John Miedema <miedemaj@...>
Date: Wed Oct 1, 2008 3:22 pm
Subject: Re: the political context of biochar

miedemaj

Biochar List,

I am currently working on a skeleton document that we can add to as a group. I will try to get it posted by this week-end.

John

--- On Wed, 10/1/08, Laurens Rademakers <lrademakers@...> wrote:

From: Laurens Rademakers <lrademakers@...>
Subject: Re: [biochar] the political context of biochar
To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, October 1, 2008, 2:17 PM

Lou,

I strongly agree with your efforts to broaden the context in which we look at biochar. We should look at it in the context of land use and natural resource use choices, impacts and potentials, and the socio-political implications of these choices. It is better we constantly keep this context in mind and actively refer to it, else we may end up in a sphere in which (sometimes unsubstantiated) doubt and confusion about the possible benefits of biochar will reign supreme.

I have some experience in the arena of policy making (as someone who has given policy makers advice on bioenergy as it relates to development in the Global South) and I have seen the current biofuels debate unfold. It is important to keep reminding onesself that there are many different social and environmental impacts to the multiple land use and resource use choices we want to make. Policy makers often want the big picture, and we should get used to looking at biochar this way.

We, as the "biochar community", are probably over the initial phase of "enthusiasm" we experienced when first exploring the concept. It is good that we're now entering a phase of aksing more fundamental questions, and of practical consequences arising from this analysis (questions about verification, certification, regulation, correct implementation of biochar projects, social & environmental impact assessments for biochar, etc...).

We should keep this discussion going and start working on these issues in an in-depth manner. Some people have already begun this work (see the exchange with Dr Miglietta) and the analysis of topics that we agree should be explored further after IBI2. I would support the creation of "working groups" to divide the labor a bit. This will allow us to focus forces on these different topics.

Cheers,

Lorenzo

----- Original Message -----

From: lou gold

To: biochar@yahoogroups .com

Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:26 PM

Subject: [biochar] the political context of biochar

Folks should be aware of the political context surrounding biochar, at least to avoid being blindsided as happened with the press release media attack on the IBI conference. I am passing on these these links without any kind of endorsement. They are more ideological and sensational than is my own style. But as is always the case with things like this, they carry important kernels of truth that are worthy of consideration.

World Bank Secret Report confirms Biofuel Cause of World Food Crisis
by F. William Engdahl
Global Research, July 10, 2008
http://www.globalre search.ca/ index.php? context=va&aid=9547

Platform for Collective Action Forum Terra Preta,
Rome June 4, 2008
http://www.foodsove reignty.org/ new/

Please folks, I don't want to debate globalization or GM or the New World Order. I would prefer that they are not debated on this forum. My purpose is not to provoke but to inform.

lou

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1701 - Release Date: 30/09/2008 19:08