toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Nando and list:
I also have not read this report thoroughly, but from my scan believe there is no discussion of pore size optimization - nor optimization of much else. They strove for small particle size - which gave many problems. My guess is that using pore and particle sizes optimum for a final use in agriculture might give them the best economics - an approach not even hinted at here,
I haven’t heard much of your own recent biochar work. What’s happening for you?
Interesting report. I've only had time to scan it, but so far I don't see mention of the amount of micropores in the biochar produced. From what I've read in other papers, maximizing the number of micropore sites in a biochar will increase the amount of CO2 sequestered when adding biochar to a digester. This would require an accurate pyrolysis technique and preferably a feedstock that can optimally produce micropores. As far as I understand, micropore formation requires a certain minimum highest pyrolysis temperature, but if the particles get too hot the micropores that have formed tend to fissure open too wide to capture CO2 molecules.
The increase in value of the biochar would most likely boil down to its ability to adsorb ammonia in a way that is plant available.
My have the impression so far that some combinations of digester feedstock / technique and a certain type of biochar at the correct dosage may be financially viable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this study doesn't seem to have been designed to nail that down with any precision.