Date   

biochar induced biota biomass #biota

Tomaso Bertoli - CISV
 

did anyone attempt at "weighing" the bacteria and fungi that can grow on biochar ? 

for any kg / pound of biochar added to the soil how much organic matter in the form of bacteria and fungi can we expect ?

can anyone guesstimate % of biomass weight that we can add to biochar by biocharging it with compost tea or similar approaches ?

did some google scholar searching but I guess I did not use the right keywords

thanks 

Tomaso


Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Rick Wilson
 

Wayne of course you can use these files.  I don’t need any credit. 

I agree that tipping fees can pay for producing biochar. This is my game plan. 
But any scale is a good scale, small, local, over time, perhaps is better. 

Could be this virus changes the way we think about our role in the environment, and how we impact it.  
You would not believe how clear the air is, and how blue the ocean is right now in Southern California. Astonishing. 
Nature is telling is something. 

Rick


On Mar 27, 2020, at 3:00 AM, Teel, Wayne <teelws@...> wrote:

Rick and all,
 
I like your images.  As a professor/teacher I love to use things like this in classes, so consider this my asking permission to do so.  I won’t use them this year.  Classes are only on line now and we are not even allowed to meet with students because of Covid-19.  Even though $50 is not that much, when you add in the tipping fees saved from both the woody biomass and kitchen/grocery waste (just coffee grounds alone in a city) the dollars add up even before you sell the product.  I have a student working at a local farm associated with a retirement community, and that community sends all their organic waste to the farm.  We are charring the woody biomass using a flame-cap device like the ones Kelpie Wilson describes and then they compost it.  This season it will be the source of nutrient for the farm, whose produce all goes back to the kitchens of the retirement community.  Same kind of cycle you are describing, just that the scale is much smaller and the product is not for sale at the end.  Unfortunately the student is not able to complete the study because of the virus.
 
Wayne
 
From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> On Behalf Of Rick Wilson via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 10:50 PM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Biochar] [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!
 
Hi Ron,
California moves at its own pace.  But once it's in, it goes all in. 

Currently you can get paid $50 per DRY ton for co-composted biochar with the CDFA grants. 
A gasifier char, which is dry, will have a density of #10 per cubic foot, which is 270# per cubic yard. 
So one ton (2000#) of biochar is 7.4 cubic yards. 7.4 cubic yards/ton x $50 = $370 per cubic yard, that's a lot of money for biochar!

My understanding is that the CDFA is coming the the conclusion that biochar stabilizes organic matter.
I am told there is a Lawrence Livermore study but I have not seen it.   And there are others of course. 

I can tell you that biochar is making it into the research programs of the largest compost operators in the state. 
(And they are calling me to help them)

Please see the attached drawings, which is how I am telling them the story of biochar and compost, and where the waste companies fit in. 
These are copyright protected, but I am happy to grant access as long as I know where they are being used (not to compete against me, but with me).

Rick 



USDA Seeks Public Comment on More Revised Conservation Practice Standards #conservation #nrcs

Ron Larson
 

List:

Since biochar seems to fit well with NRCS responsibilities, perhaps some on this list would have an interest in this topic of revised conservation practice standards. (There are 49.)

Some (there are probably several more) that seem to fit with biochar are:






These are from 2-5 pages each.   I didn’t see the word biochar anywhere.  

I don’t know this system.  Is it too late to ask for a few sentences on how biochar can fit ‘revisions” in these areas?

Ron


Begin forwarded message:

From: "USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service" <USDA-NRCS@...>
Subject: USDA Seeks Public Comment on More Revised Conservation Practice Standards
Date: March 27, 2020 at 10:30:10 AM MDT
Reply-To: USDA-NRCS@...

The proposed revisions posted this week with the public comment period closing April 23, 2020.
Trouble viewing this email? View it as a webpage.
USDA Seeks Public Comment on More Revised Conservation Practice Standards

USDA Seeks Public Comment on More Revised Conservation Practice Standards

USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is seeking public comment on proposed revisions to 49 national conservation practice standards through a posting in the Federal Register. The proposed revisions posted this week with the public comment period closing April 23, 2020.

Read the full news release


This email was sent to rongretlarson@... using GovDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service · Public Affairs Division · 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 6221-S · Washington, D.C. 20250 · 1-202-720-3210GovDelivery logo


Re: #carbonsequestration #CDR #ccs #CDR #blockchai #CDR #ccs #blockchai #carbonsequestration

Frank Strie
 

Just think of all the degraded land around the world due to open cut mining activities and or past forest mining / clearfell operations.
Here in Australia we have plenty of space to regenerate/ regreen/ restore  the landscape and build humus in the old soils.
By exploring geology and geography and history of what the site / area could grow again with some human “assistance”/ intervention / investment in close to nature forest management practices (ProSilva = For the Forest style), moist, wet rainforest vegetation could be replanted and seeded in the shelter of short lived pioneer species. The consequence is improved hydrology and nutrient management, soil fertility and productivity and not least optimised carbon sequestration from all green plants.
The objective is to support / foster healthy landscapes with low or reduced flammability risk.
Intensive, intergenerational management strategies can be established via discussion, information sharing
We shall see
Frank

ProSilva Forester & Char Master


From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> On Behalf Of Roger Faulkner via Groups.Io
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2020 9:55 PM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Biochar] #carbonsequestration #CDR #ccs #CDR #blockchai

 

Yes, you do understand my idea. I would like to do some calculations about how much of that biomass that rots in the winter is from crop residues? Is there enough crop residues 2 stop the rise of carbon dioxide?

 

 It is clear from the curve itself that if we can capture all of that carbon and sequester 50% of it that we could stop the rise. But a lot of that is in places like savannas of Earth añd forest and I know I don't want to see those places turned into biochar farms. On the other hand existing firms could readily convert the crop residue to biochar if the price for carbon sequestration was high enough.

 

 

On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 6:27 AM, ROBERT W GILLETT

Roger, 

My understanding of the jigsaw rise and fall of atmospheric CO2 is that the increase in vegetation growth in summer draws down the CO2 levels due to increased photosynthesis in the northern hemisphere where most of the vegetated and cultivated landmass exists. Your idea for a paper seems to focus on capturing and pyrolizing residual biomass to drive the downward leg of the jigsaw further downward. Would you like to elaborate on your approach?

Robert 


Re: "We need to address the demand AND the supply." / [Biochar] [usbiochar] New Research Article on Forest C Sequestration vs. Bioenergy #bioenergy #sequestration

Kelpie Wilson
 

Thanks Frank for sharing your story. The history of human relationship to forests is long and complex. Generally the forests lose, and in the end, we will lose as well. I think Tasmania has lost even more of its forest than Oregon. I remember sitting in jail in a small timber town on the Oregon coast back in 1987, and reading a National Geographic article about the massive citizen protests against the Franklin Dam in Tasmania that would destroy a huge amount of primary forest. We were in jail because we had chained ourselves to a yarder on an old growth logging site in the Siskiyou National Forest where the liquidation of primary forest was accelerating. We were eventually successful: after another 15 years of direct action protests, lawsuits and lobbying, we stopped the logging of old growth and roadless area forests on public lands. However, the private industrial forest lands are still being clearcut and subjected to short rotation forestry, with terrible consequences for soils and streams. Many of my colleagues in forest protection have moved on, like me, to advocate for ecological forestry on the managed lands. There are many benefits to be had, including timber, clean water, biochar and some biomass energy. There are still some environmentalists who are so distrustful that they don't want any logging. That is not realistic. There are still some in the timber industry who want to expand industrial forestry across the landscape and think that you can raise trees like a corn crop. That is not realistic either. Heck, you can't even raise corn like a conventional crop without damage to soil and water!  We need to change the way we do things or we are toast. The UN has warned that soils around the world are heading for exhaustion and depletion, with an estimated 60 harvests left before they are too barren to feed the planet. The Amazon rainforest is at risk of turning from carbon sink to a carbon source within 15 years. We cannot let that happen, so protecting forests is still the highest priority, in my view. Jeff Waldon has pointed out that there are opportunities in the US Southeast to convert degraded pasture land to pine plantations. Great idea. Those are the opportunities we need to look for. And the first, highest and best use of biochar IMHO, is to use it in tree planting to give those new forests a kickstart.
-Kelpie


Re: Biochar Market Strategies - Needs #market

Bob Wells
 

Hi Tom,

    It has been very interesting for me to observe the changes in the wood energy businesses based around the Northeast US over the last couple decades.  It used to be that anyone who was producing an excess of wood chips could sell them into a basic commodity market for biomass to energy plants and although they didn't make much money, at least they had a way to cash them in.  Now since the natural gas availability has caused the price to drop it no longer makes burning wood chips for electricity economical.  The result is that there is not only a glut of wood chips but there is nowhere for them to go outside of the local market for mulch.  We have biomass piling up in town and city dumps as well as contractor's properties.  They now have to pay to get rid of that biomass if they can even find someone who will take it away.  After a good sized windstorm in CT there was one town that piled up thousands of yards of chips and they caught fire from spontaneous combustion and then they had a terrible time putting it out.  All of this is to point out that if we start our biochar business plans by solving a problem of waste biomass instead of asking what is the cost of feedstock, we can start making money before the biomass even goes into the retort.  It may be a strange way to answer your question Tom, but in a way I am marketing biochar as a service to the community before I even make it or sell it. 
    Now that I take that biomass from the community, along with compostable biomass,  I have all the feedstock I need to make wonderful products that go right back to the same community.  My biggest customers become the towns themselves who bring me their biomass and then buy it back from me in the form of biochar/compost mixes that they use to plant new trees and condition park soils, etc...  At this point my business seems more like a service than a manufacturing concern.  This is all being done on stationary equipment.  There is no need for a mobile system which would make using the excess process energy nearly impossible.  I firmly believe that distributed community or farm scale stationary systems will win out in the end.
    After towns that have created laws banning the use of chemical pesticides or fertilizers on public areas, my next biggest customers are the landscape architects and landscape companies that feel increasing pressure to use sustainable materials in their work.  For tree and shrub installations our biochar products have clearly shown faster growth, fewer die offs, and increased drought resistance.  When a landscaper is installing a $30,000.00 tree he has no problem spending a little additional money in order to add biochar to the planting hole.  Especially when he knows that he has increased that plants chances of survival and health.
    The bagged retail products come next in third place.
    Last place would go to farmers who have a hard time understanding and putting a value on the long term benefits of using biochar.  Many want to feed it to their animals which would be the best return on investment, but of course I have to warn them that in spite of the proven benefits of doing that, I can't legally sell it to them for that purpose in the U.S.
    In my opinion, the biggest challenge for the making and selling of biochar is still education of the public.  I have always felt that there is a huge market for biochar but that the market doesn't know it.  As a small and usually struggling businessman, I don't have the means to spend a lot on education and advertising, even though every time I do a presentation it brings in sales.

    Just my thoughts...

Bob Wells - New England Biochar LLC

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 7:25 PM Tom Miles <tmiles@...> wrote:

What are the important quantitative customer and market needs for biochars? We discuss production a lot on this list but we should also focus on markets which is where producers seem to fail.  

 

Why do your customers buy biochar? What needs do biochars and biochar based products satisfy for forestry, agriculture (food, crops, animals), urban landscapes, organic waste and recycling, environment, and ecosystem services (air, water, waste)?

 

WASTE DISPOSAL with carbon recovery seem to drive the conversion of urban wood to biochar with mobile devices. Does conversion of wood residues from forests, right of ways, and construction to biochar reduce the financial risk of wildfire, and reduce chipping, handling and transportation costs sufficiently to offset the cost of conversion? Manure management may be another important need. Are dairies, milk or meat consumers willing to pay to use biochar to management pollution and recycle nutrients in manures? Does biochar substantially improve composting of food wastes and reduce odor?

 

POLLUTION CONTROL. Can biochars be supplied at prices where they can be preferred to other materials to reduce phosphorous runoff from farms, concentrated animal operations, control urban stormwater and erosion, improve plant survival in urban landscaping and reforestation, reduce weight in green roof media used to reduce heat islands in cities. Why do your customers prefer your biochars or biochar based materials to alternatives?

 

ODOR CONTROL. Does the use of biochar to control odors justify the cost? Is reduced odor in confined animal feed operations a benefit that growers will pay for?

 

LAND RESTORATION AND REMEDIATION. Biochar helps remediate and restore soils. Does the incorporation of biochar into these systems substantially improve the process? Who benefits from using biochar?

 

WATER CONSERVATION AND USE in crops, orchards, vineyards appears to be an important need that is satisfied when biochars are combined with compost.

 

SOIL HEALTH is improved with biochar the benefits quantifiable? What are the costs and benefits of restoring cropland by using biochar?  Organic growers claim that along with increasing soil carbon and water retention with biochar as a component of their growing system they get increased yield and more nutrient dense food.

 

Identifying needs will help us develop strategies. Your comments are welcome.

 

Tom

 

Tom Miles

Executive Director

U.S. Biochar Initiative

"Promoting the Sustainable Production and Use of Biochar"

www.biochar-us.org

@USbiochar

Facebook US Biochar Initiative

USBI Logo - Copy (420x176) 

 

              

 



--
Bob Wells
Biochar Systems

New England Biochar LLC
Box 266 - 40 Redberry Ln.
Eastham, MA 02642, USA
T:  (508) 255-3688
bob@...
www.newenglandbiochar.com



Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Valentine Nzengung
 

Your graphics are very good for lectures.
Thank you for the informative work.

Valentine


From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> on behalf of Rick Wilson via Groups.Io <rick012@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 10:50 PM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Biochar] [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!
 
[EXTERNAL SENDER - PROCEED CAUTIOUSLY]

Hi Ron,
California moves at its own pace.  But once it's in, it goes all in. 

Currently you can get paid $50 per DRY ton for co-composted biochar with the CDFA grants. 
A gasifier char, which is dry, will have a density of #10 per cubic foot, which is 270# per cubic yard. 
So one ton (2000#) of biochar is 7.4 cubic yards. 7.4 cubic yards/ton x $50 = $370 per cubic yard, that's a lot of money for biochar!

My understanding is that the CDFA is coming the the conclusion that biochar stabilizes organic matter.
I am told there is a Lawrence Livermore study but I have not seen it.   And there are others of course. 

I can tell you that biochar is making it into the research programs of the largest compost operators in the state. 
(And they are calling me to help them)

Please see the attached drawings, which is how I am telling them the story of biochar and compost, and where the waste companies fit in. 
These are copyright protected, but I am happy to grant access as long as I know where they are being used (not to compete against me, but with me).

Rick


Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Charles Hegberg
 

Very nice graphics. 

 

From: <main@Biochar.groups.io> on behalf of "Rick Wilson via Groups.Io" <rick012@...>
Reply-To: "main@Biochar.groups.io" <main@Biochar.groups.io>
Date: Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 10:50 PM
To: "main@Biochar.groups.io" <main@Biochar.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Biochar] [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!

 

Hi Ron,
California moves at its own pace.  But once it's in, it goes all in. 

Currently you can get paid $50 per DRY ton for co-composted biochar with the CDFA grants. 
A gasifier char, which is dry, will have a density of #10 per cubic foot, which is 270# per cubic yard. 
So one ton (2000#) of biochar is 7.4 cubic yards. 7.4 cubic yards/ton x $50 = $370 per cubic yard, that's a lot of money for biochar!

My understanding is that the CDFA is coming the the conclusion that biochar stabilizes organic matter.
I am told there is a Lawrence Livermore study but I have not seen it.   And there are others of course. 

I can tell you that biochar is making it into the research programs of the largest compost operators in the state. 
(And they are calling me to help them)

Please see the attached drawings, which is how I am telling them the story of biochar and compost, and where the waste companies fit in. 
These are copyright protected, but I am happy to grant access as long as I know where they are being used (not to compete against me, but with me).

Rick


Impacting the seasonal Keeling curve RE: [Biochar] #carbonsequestration #CDR #ccs #blockchai

Paul S Anderson
 

Roger,     (I am sending this message also to the CDR listserv where there might be further discussion – see prior messages below mine.)

Sorry, I changed the Subject line to express the direction of the topic.

 

Please include me in your “study group” (or whatever name might apply).   I have a few contributions regarding biochar production from seasonal crop residue.

 

Regarding Robert’s statement:   

“capturing and pyrolizing residual biomass to drive the downward leg of the jigsaw further downward.”

 

I think a more clear wording would be:

capturing and pyrolyzing seasonal residual biomass to reduce the rise of the upward leg so that the next year’s downward leg (which would be the same annual amount of CO2 removal by photosynthesis) will extend slightly lower than the previous year (except that the current annual net positive rise from fossil fuels overwhelms the impact of the biochar production from the seasonal residual biomass). 

 

If successful (and if other climate-friendly CO2 reductions and  removals can do their part), the “sawtooth” line would eventually become a horizontal sawtooth and would eventually “curve” downward when net world CO2 drawdown occurs.

 

For visually communicating our message of CDR and biochar as sequestration, perhaps a HIGHLY magnified segment of three sawtooths could be graphically displayed with the “contributing factors” labeled.  Factors would include “total annual seasonal biomass refuse” and the target of “seasonal biomass refuse reasonably eligible to become biochar”.    And within that latter amount, something like “crop residues currently burned in fields, producing polluting smoke and health hazards, such as in India and in northern Thailand”.  

 

[Unfortunately, anyone older than 40 might never see the downward curve on the world-wide Keeling curve.] 

 

Stay safe and healthy!!!

 

Paul

 

 

Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website:   www.drtlud.com

     Email:  psanders@...       Skype:   paultlud

     Phone:  Office: 309-452-7072    Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434

Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP

     Go to: www.JuntosNFP.org  to support woodgas (TLUD) projects

     incl. purchase of Woodgas Emission Reduction (WER) carbon credits

     and please tell you friends about these distinctive service efforts.

Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at www.capitalism21.org)

     with pages 88 – 94 about  solving the world crisis for clean cookstoves.

 

From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> On Behalf Of Roger Faulkner via Groups.Io
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2020 5:55 AM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Biochar] #carbonsequestration #CDR #ccs #CDR #blockchai

 

[This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to abuse@...]

Yes, you do understand my idea. I would like to do some calculations about how much of that biomass that rots in the winter is from crop residues? Is there enough crop residues 2 stop the rise of carbon dioxide?

 

 It is clear from the curve itself that if we can capture all of that carbon and sequester 50% of it that we could stop the rise. But a lot of that is in places like savannas of Earth añd forest and I know I don't want to see those places turned into biochar farms. On the other hand existing firms could readily convert the crop residue to biochar if the price for carbon sequestration was high enough.

 

 

On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 6:27 AM, ROBERT W GILLETT

Roger, 

My understanding of the jigsaw rise and fall of atmospheric CO2 is that the increase in vegetation growth in summer draws down the CO2 levels due to increased photosynthesis in the northern hemisphere where most of the vegetated and cultivated landmass exists. Your idea for a paper seems to focus on capturing and pyrolizing residual biomass to drive the downward leg of the jigsaw further downward. Would you like to elaborate on your approach?

Robert 


Re: #carbonsequestration #CDR #ccs #CDR #blockchai #CDR #ccs #blockchai #carbonsequestration

Roger Faulkner
 

Yes, you do understand my idea. I would like to do some calculations about how much of that biomass that rots in the winter is from crop residues? Is there enough crop residues 2 stop the rise of carbon dioxide?

 It is clear from the curve itself that if we can capture all of that carbon and sequester 50% of it that we could stop the rise. But a lot of that is in places like savannas of Earth añd forest and I know I don't want to see those places turned into biochar farms. On the other hand existing firms could readily convert the crop residue to biochar if the price for carbon sequestration was high enough.


On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 6:27 AM, ROBERT W GILLETT
<themarvalus.wabio@...> wrote:
Roger, 

My understanding of the jigsaw rise and fall of atmospheric CO2 is that the increase in vegetation growth in summer draws down the CO2 levels due to increased photosynthesis in the northern hemisphere where most of the vegetated and cultivated landmass exists. Your idea for a paper seems to focus on capturing and pyrolizing residual biomass to drive the downward leg of the jigsaw further downward. Would you like to elaborate on your approach?

Robert 


Re: [usbiochar] New Research Article on Forest C Sequestration vs. Bioenergy #bioenergy #sequestration

ROBERT W GILLETT
 

Tom,

Having a bit of a Rodney Dangerfield moment here. I was excited to read this news when the paper came out and shared it to this group. It did not appear to get the attention deserving of the breakthrough it could really be. Glad to see someone else finally noticed it, too.

Robert 


Re: #carbonsequestration #CDR #ccs #CDR #blockchai #CDR #ccs #blockchai #carbonsequestration

ROBERT W GILLETT
 

Roger, 

My understanding of the jigsaw rise and fall of atmospheric CO2 is that the increase in vegetation growth in summer draws down the CO2 levels due to increased photosynthesis in the northern hemisphere where most of the vegetated and cultivated landmass exists. Your idea for a paper seems to focus on capturing and pyrolizing residual biomass to drive the downward leg of the jigsaw further downward. Would you like to elaborate on your approach?

Robert 


Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Teel, Wayne
 

Rick and all,

 

I like your images.  As a professor/teacher I love to use things like this in classes, so consider this my asking permission to do so.  I won’t use them this year.  Classes are only on line now and we are not even allowed to meet with students because of Covid-19.  Even though $50 is not that much, when you add in the tipping fees saved from both the woody biomass and kitchen/grocery waste (just coffee grounds alone in a city) the dollars add up even before you sell the product.  I have a student working at a local farm associated with a retirement community, and that community sends all their organic waste to the farm.  We are charring the woody biomass using a flame-cap device like the ones Kelpie Wilson describes and then they compost it.  This season it will be the source of nutrient for the farm, whose produce all goes back to the kitchens of the retirement community.  Same kind of cycle you are describing, just that the scale is much smaller and the product is not for sale at the end.  Unfortunately the student is not able to complete the study because of the virus.

 

Wayne

 

From: main@Biochar.groups.io <main@Biochar.groups.io> On Behalf Of Rick Wilson via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 10:50 PM
To: main@Biochar.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Biochar] [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!

 

Hi Ron,
California moves at its own pace.  But once it's in, it goes all in. 

Currently you can get paid $50 per DRY ton for co-composted biochar with the CDFA grants. 
A gasifier char, which is dry, will have a density of #10 per cubic foot, which is 270# per cubic yard. 
So one ton (2000#) of biochar is 7.4 cubic yards. 7.4 cubic yards/ton x $50 = $370 per cubic yard, that's a lot of money for biochar!

My understanding is that the CDFA is coming the the conclusion that biochar stabilizes organic matter.
I am told there is a Lawrence Livermore study but I have not seen it.   And there are others of course. 

I can tell you that biochar is making it into the research programs of the largest compost operators in the state. 
(And they are calling me to help them)

Please see the attached drawings, which is how I am telling them the story of biochar and compost, and where the waste companies fit in. 
These are copyright protected, but I am happy to grant access as long as I know where they are being used (not to compete against me, but with me).

Rick


Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Rick Wilson
 

Ron, apologies I made a mistake in my calculations. $50 per ton of biochar on a cubic yard basis is a small number.
$50/7.4 cubic yard = $6.75 per cubic yard.


Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Rick Wilson
 

Hi Ron,
California moves at its own pace.  But once it's in, it goes all in. 

Currently you can get paid $50 per DRY ton for co-composted biochar with the CDFA grants. 
A gasifier char, which is dry, will have a density of #10 per cubic foot, which is 270# per cubic yard. 
So one ton (2000#) of biochar is 7.4 cubic yards. 7.4 cubic yards/ton x $50 = $370 per cubic yard, that's a lot of money for biochar!

My understanding is that the CDFA is coming the the conclusion that biochar stabilizes organic matter.
I am told there is a Lawrence Livermore study but I have not seen it.   And there are others of course. 

I can tell you that biochar is making it into the research programs of the largest compost operators in the state. 
(And they are calling me to help them)

Please see the attached drawings, which is how I am telling them the story of biochar and compost, and where the waste companies fit in. 
These are copyright protected, but I am happy to grant access as long as I know where they are being used (not to compete against me, but with me).

Rick


Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Ron Larson
 

Benoit and ccs:

Thanks for the added information on the California webinar and biochar.  Sounds like I didn’t miss much.  (Kelpie Wilson gave a great biochar webinar that day.)

Your screen shot is in one of the cites below - plus many similar.  There are an amazing number of practices that do count fully even while biochar is only MAYBE OK..

Perhaps soon we will have enough data from the thousands of biochar tests going on, that we can answer how to “measure benefits for soil health”.   For sure there will have to be consideration of more than the first year changes.

Ron



On Mar 26, 2020, at 6:16 PM, Benoit Lambert, PhD <benoit.lambert7@...> wrote:

Ron, 

I did attend this webinar below on Tuesday and ask why biochar was not mentioned. The speaker was very good but his answer on biochar had to do with the difficulty to measure benefits for soils’ health, something of the sort. I join a print screen of croplands eligible practices. Despite IPCC recognition, biochar is still not recognized as it should, at least for now.

"The Climate Group cordially invites you to join our upcoming webinar delivered in partnership with the Government of California.​

Tune in to learn about state and regional strategies to improve soil health and carbon sequestration in farmlands and ranchlands, based on the experience of California’s Healthy Soils Program.​

As soil health deteriorates globally, programs promoting healthy soils become imperative. Practices that support healthy soils offer many co-benefits, including agricultural sustainability, climate change adaptation, emissions reductions and increased yields and farm income.
 
In this webinar, California presents its innovative approach to improving soil health, the Healthy Soils Program, and breaks down the program’s key components and mechanisms. ​

Speakers: Amrith Gunasekara, Science Advisor to the Secretary, California Department of Food and Agriculture​" 

<Capture d’écran 2020-03-24 à 11.29.44.png>

Le 26 mars 2020 à 19:49, Ron Larson <rongretlarson@...> a écrit :


List,  cc 2 in California

At first this announcement didn’t seem to include biochar.




We find that compost information says on page 5 of this publication:  https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/healthysoils/docs/CompostApplicationRate_WhitePaper.pdf



Begin forwarded message:

From: CalCAN <donotreply@...>
Subject: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!
Date: March 26, 2020 at 12:20:08 PM MDT






Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Benoit Lambert, PhD <benoit.lambert7@...>
 

Ron, 

I did attend this webinar below on Tuesday and ask why biochar was not mentioned. The speaker was very good but his answer on biochar had to do with the difficulty to measure benefits for soils’ health, something of the sort. I join a print screen of croplands eligible practices. Despite IPCC recognition, biochar is still not recognized as it should, at least for now.

"The Climate Group cordially invites you to join our upcoming webinar delivered in partnership with the Government of California.​

Tune in to learn about state and regional strategies to improve soil health and carbon sequestration in farmlands and ranchlands, based on the experience of California’s Healthy Soils Program.​

As soil health deteriorates globally, programs promoting healthy soils become imperative. Practices that support healthy soils offer many co-benefits, including agricultural sustainability, climate change adaptation, emissions reductions and increased yields and farm income.
 
In this webinar, California presents its innovative approach to improving soil health, the Healthy Soils Program, and breaks down the program’s key components and mechanisms. ​

Speakers: Amrith Gunasekara, Science Advisor to the Secretary, California Department of Food and Agriculture​" 


Le 26 mars 2020 à 19:49, Ron Larson <rongretlarson@...> a écrit :


List,  cc 2 in California

At first this announcement didn’t seem to include biochar.




We find that compost information says on page 5 of this publication:  https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/healthysoils/docs/CompostApplicationRate_WhitePaper.pdf



Begin forwarded message:

From: CalCAN <donotreply@...>
Subject: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!
Date: March 26, 2020 at 12:20:08 PM MDT





Re: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Ron Larson
 

List, cc Josiah and Rick;

Apologies.  I didn’t mean to have this sent.  

Below,  I’ve inserted my intended two questions - in hope that we can get other states to follow suit.

Ron



On Mar 26, 2020, at 5:49 PM, Ronal Larson <rongretlarson@...> wrote:

List,  cc 2 in California

At first this announcement didn’t seem to include biochar.



We find that compost information says on page 5 of this publication:  https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/healthysoils/docs/CompostApplicationRate_WhitePaper.pdf

"Composts to which biochar was added during the composting process as a process amendment are also eligible for the program as long as they meet all of the requirements above. Biochar materials alone or biochar materials that have been added to compost in contexts other than as an amendment to facilitate the composting process are not eligible for this incentives program. The reason for excluding biochar in the CDFA Incentive Program at this time is because regulatory standards are in the process of being developed and there are few experimental field trials that examine the application rate of biochar along with evaluating its benefits and limitations. "

So, because California is so important for biochar activity,  can anyone give a little more on 
a.   the likelihood of California biochar applicants for these funds being successful, and
b.  what is happening to remove this exclusion.

Ron




Begin forwarded message:

From: CalCAN <donotreply@...>
Subject: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!
Date: March 26, 2020 at 12:20:08 PM MDT





[New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers! #organic

Ron Larson
 

List,  cc 2 in California

At first this announcement didn’t seem to include biochar.



We find that compost information says on page 5 of this publication:  https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/healthysoils/docs/CompostApplicationRate_WhitePaper.pdf



Begin forwarded message:

From: CalCAN <donotreply@...>
Subject: [New post] The Healthy Soils Program benefits organic producers!
Date: March 26, 2020 at 12:20:08 PM MDT




Re: #carbonsequestration #CDR #ccs #CDR #blockchai #CDR #ccs #blockchai #carbonsequestration

Roger Faulkner
 

I have been wanting to write a paper on the potential for biochar in carbon capture and sequestration in which I use the carbon dioxide concentration block from the top of that a lion mountain Hawaiian boat where they've been measuring it for more than 50 years. That jigsaw watch shows very clearly that carbon dioxide levels decrease every summer and that can be quantified. Give some of that went matter which rocks every winter could be converted to biochar ... I'm sure you see where I'm going with this. I myself have ALS and it is difficult for me to do research but I am a chemical engineer and I would like to wait a paper on this and I'm looking for a co-author to help me.

Sorry about the transcription errors above I write these things with my voice and it is quite difficult for me to go back in and correct mistakes.


On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 9:09 PM, Kim Chaffee
<kim.chaffee2@...> wrote:
Thanks, Rob.  I subscribed to the free emails.
Kim



On Mar 25, 2020, at 8:26 PM, Robert Lehmert via Groups.Io <roblehmert@...> wrote:

I have discovered an interesting read if you are into "serious" carbon offsets (voluntary and compliance). Probably 2 people on this forum will enjoy this, but the depth of of this topic is growing like the Keeling Curve.  Here's the link to the weekly digest: www.carbon-pulse.com.    

If you dig around on the site, you find some interesting bits on carbon taxes and legislation -- such as this tidbit:

HAWAII

The Hawaii Senate advanced a $40/tonne carbon tax bill this week, sending the proposal on for consideration in the House.

The state Senate approved SB-3150 by a 23-2 margin on a floor vote Tuesday, with one Democrat joining the upper chamber’s lone Republican in dissent.

The legislation would assign a CO2 tax equivalent to $40/tonne on fossil fuels in 2021, incrementally rising to $80/tonne by 2030. The exact rates on specific fuels will be set in conference with the House of Representatives.

In doing so, the proposal would alter Hawaii’s environmental response, energy, and food security tax, and it would make an Aloha State carbon levy the highest CO2 price in North America.

To help blunt the costs of the carbon price on low-income and middle-class residents, residents would receive a refundable tax credit.

A previous version of the bill allocated that credit to residents earning 60% or less of the state’s median income, but the iteration the House will now consider changed that rate to an unspecified amount.

The Hawaii 2020 legislative session ends May. 7. Democrats also command the House with a 46-5 grip over the GOP.

By Matt Lithgow – matt@...

Enjoy.

3921 - 3940 of 30803