ATIP Foundation

Bioichar 2018: Agricultural Session

This page provides annotated links to key presentations in the Agriculture Sessions of the the Biochar 2018 Conference in Wilmington, DE on August 21,2018. The Foundation recommends these presentations as part of the library relevant to the TX Biochar Initiative.

• Biochar More than meets the eye — Kurt Spokas This highly scientific presentation lacks a summary of the findings. Those interested in learning more should contact Dr. Kurt Spokas, USDA-ARS, St. Paul, MN

• Biochar for Small Woodland Owners — Kelpie Wilson. This presentation reports on results from a Natural Resource and Conservation Service (NRCS) Biochar and Manure Conservation Innovation Grant (Oregon) that covers methods for privately owned forested areas to produce biochar, providing some guidelines and opportunities for private woodland owners. This presentation cites some data from 2017 western woodlands fires that pales in comparison to the current 2018 fire system in the western states. It also documents role of biochar to reduce odors from animal production.

• Benefiting Lower Watershed Health Through Upper Watershed Wildfire Risk Reduction Projects: Forest2Farm Biochar Concept — Jim Archuleta. Slide 15 in this presentation provides references to benefits of carbon (biochar) in pine forests, crop yields, reduction of mobility of soluble contaminants, and value in seeding forests.

• Can Carbonaceous Particle Amendments Improve the Anaerobic Digestion of Agr. Waste — Doug Call. Slide 15 in this presentation indicates that “biochar was not far behind graphite, with granular biochar yielding > 20% increase in CH4 production rates than bioreactors without particles.”

• Transformation of P in PL during conversion to biochar — Mingxin Guo. Conclusion slide (#18) recommends that 350-450 degrees C was recommended for converting poultry litter to biochar to optimize characteristics and value of biochar.

• Effect of biochar addition on H2S — Abhinav Choudhury. Slide 14 concludes “Biochar was effective in reducing H2S in biogas and % reduction increased with increasing amounts of added biochar.”

• Using Poultry Derived Biochar as Litter Amendment — Hong Li. Conclusion slide (#21) indicates …” Acidified PL [poultry litter] biochar could be used to control NH3 from broilers without negative impact on production performance and health.”

• The effects of biochar interpores and intrapores on soil-gas transport — Susan Li. This presentation provides data on soil structure with biochar added (in sandy soils, and in sandy loam soils) in the context of how it affects soil-gas transport.” Interpores were reduced with biochar, which reduced diffusion in sand; Intrapores stored water, reduced diffusion ; Biochar increases tortuosity. Lower diffusivity mayimply lowere Green House Gas (GHG) emissions from soil. See slide 21 for details

• The Global Agriculture Solution — Scott Laskowski. Presentation highlights value of biochar in an increasing need for indoor and above-ground farming. these are viewed as critical in meeting protein needs of the world’s anticipated population in 2050 (needing >40% more protein production than today).

• Optimal Dosages for Biochar — Sean Thomas. There are a number of key take-away messages in this presentation related to practical use in crop production (slide 21) ;

  • Biochar dose-response relationships are asymmetrically hump-shaped;

  • The Mitscherlich equation provides the best description for pooled patterns among functional forms examined;

  • The pooled optimum point is ~20 t/ha (with different crop groups ranging from 10-50 t/ha);

  • Adjusting dosages to approximate optima has large potential effects on crop performance;

  • Analyses provide evidence that optima and “critical points” for biochar dosage vary with climate and soil

  • conditions, and most strongly among crops;

  • Results are consistent with conclusion that strongest biochar responses are found with legumes, vegetable crops, and natural vegetation including woody plants

• Decision Support Tool — Claire Phillips. This presentation looks at what kind of biochar should be used in crop production, and how much. From Conclusion slide 18, “This decision-support tool is an important step forward in establishing a process to use biochar effectively.”

• Biochar utilization for soil quality improvement, greenhouse gas reduction, metal, and nutrient sequestration — Jeff Novak. Key take-away messages from this presentation (slide 17):

  • Biochars can be designed to target their chemistry to a specific soil/spoil deficiency.

  • The background soil/spoil deficiency must be well established prior to designer biochar production.

  • The designer biochar technology will be applied to counter poultry related soil and environmental issues in the

    Delmarva area (2018-2020).

• An integrated research program for the assessment of the potential of engineered biocarbon added to beef cattle diets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture— Rodrigo. This presentation provides practical recommendations on the value of adding biochar to the diet of beef cattle. Key conclusions are in slide 28:

  • Economic evaluation of adding Biochar to feedlot rations How will producers benefit?

    • Average daily gain

    • Feed conversion efficiency

    • Days on feed

    • Yardage costs

    • Extra costs (i.e. storage)

    • Potential carbon credits

    • Enhanced fertilizer value

    • Improved soil health and crop production