Paul and list:
Thanks for a very complete response. This is to hope Crispin will respond
fully.
If so, I ask him three more to add to yours
a. why he has chosen to NOT join the sister biochar lists, given the
heavy emphasis there as well in char-making stoves.
b. whether much of his knowledge on biochar has come from WUWT. If not
what source (i am asking for a few specifics -not generalities) has he for his
statement below
> There have been many claims made for biochar which, based on what I read and
> hear from people who read much more broadly, that don’t stand up to close
> scrutiny.
>
c. Does he see the connection I do between his being a "climate denier"
and being a skeptic on biochar?
Ron
On Apr 21, 2013, at 5:25 PM, Paul Olivier <[email protected]> wrote:
> See comments below.
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Jeff
>
>
>
> Thanks for that contribution.
>
>
>
> The point of Paul’s description is that in the circumstances where he is, it
> works. It works on several levels and it will probably continue to work for a
> long time.
>
>
>
> The scenario was discussed on this list several times before, going back
> years, but there was nowhere that all the ingredients were present. One of
> the things that makes the rice hull char attractive is the existence, on a
> big scale apparently, of land that benefits from the addition of the char,
> and growing of crops that benefit from it.
>
>
>
> There have been many claims made for biochar which, based on what I read and
> hear from people who read much more broadly, that don’t stand up to close
> scrutiny.
>
>
> Crispin, I take issue with this statement. The biochar research that I have
> been involved with (that is, biochar from my gasifiers) has been done in
> three different countries, and it involved seven universities. More than 20
> experiments have been carried out, and in none of these experiments did
> biochar have negative effects. Contrary to what you might believe, this
> research does stand up to close scrutiny. These people are not just reading
> about biochar, but they are actually doing biochar research. I know many of
> these researchers, and they are not engaged in deceit. They are trying to
> help poor farmers understand the benefits of biochar.
>
> The same holds for permaculture
>
>
> What's wrong with permaculture?
> and improved stove and lots of things, so there is nothing ‘special’ about
> char, it is just that people get enthusiastic about something and wish it
> were universally true.
>
>
> Crispin, it is hard for me to believe that you actually wrote this!
> How do you know that that there is nothing special about biochar?
> Is this your field of expertise?
> Have you actually been involved in biochar research?
> I strongly suggest that you read the following:
>
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22013094/Biochar/Agronomy_Carter%20et%20al%202013%2002%2017.pdf
> http://www.lrrd.org/public-lrrd/proofs/lrrd2501/chha25008.htm
> http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd23/2/siso23032.htm
> http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd24/2/siso24026.htm
> http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd24/2/siso24039.htm
> http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd24/2/siso24034.htm
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22013094/Biochar/Biochar%20utilization%20in%20Rice%20crop%20on%20Tuk%20Vil%20Luvisol.pdf
> http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd24/11/leng24199.htm
>
> If you really want to understand the benefits of biochar, please read this
> book:
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22013094/Biochar/Johannes%20Lehmann%2C%20Stephen%20Joseph-Biochar%20for%20environmental%20management_%20science%20and%20technology.pdf
>
> The people who wrote and edited this book are not charlatans. They are not
> deceitful. They are as good in their science as anyone could possibly be.
> Crispin, the moment you start doing biochar research of your own, then you
> might have something serious to say in this regard.
>
>
>
> No problem, we can live with filters on information to sift out what is
> beneficial and in what circumstances the claims how true. Independent
> investigation will support it if it is.
>
>
> Then do the independent investigation yourself.
>
>
>
> As I understand if, the Japanese have being doing this the longest and they
> are very circumscribed about what claims are made for biochar.
>
>
> Some of the best biochar research was done by the Japanese (Ogawa et al) back
> in the early 90's. They showed how biochar positively impacts the growth of
> AM fungi. This is explained in the book by Lehmann and Joseph.
>
> It is particular soils, particular crops and particular treatment of the char
> (temperature, species) that are in combination, what gives improved results.
> This theme constantly appears in the literature. As has been pointed out,
> just randomly putting char into soil can have negative consequences – it
> depends on the soil conditions. The last thing we need is a case of the char
> causing more harm than good while claims are made that it is improving
> things. The stove community should be working with agricultural trials
> experts.
>
>
>
> I read in the past that adding rice hull ash to rice fields is beneficial –
> maybe because the silica is extra-available, don’t know. Not my field.
>
>
> If this is not your field, then on what authority do you base your statements
> about rice hull biochar or rice hull ash?
> Again, I challenge you: do the research, as Preston, Leng and Shackley have
> done.
> What upsets me here is that I know well some of the people who have been
> conducting research with rice hull biochar.
> They know agriculture quite well, they have impeccable scientific
> credentials, and they, unlike you, are experts in this field.
> Then you come along, without any basis in fact, and question their research
> as not being scientific.
> Wow!
>
> I am just glad we have a working example of using gas and char that makes
> economic sense.
>
>
> It only makes economic sense, Crispin, if biochar plays a positive role in
> promoting plant and animal growth. If biochar does not play a positive role,
> we might as well burn it.
>
> Thanks.
> Paul Olivier
>
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Crispin
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> [email protected]
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
> http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Paul A. Olivier PhD
> 26/5 Phu Dong Thien Vuong
> Dalat
> Vietnam
>
> Louisiana telephone: 1-337-447-4124 (rings Vietnam)
> Mobile: 090-694-1573 (in Vietnam)
> Skype address: Xpolivier
> http://www.esrla.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> [email protected]
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
> http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
[email protected]
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
