Terra Preta Nova

Why? The research is showing some of the carbon is staying in the soil for 100s of years. If you would visit redrok dot com you would see that other design methods exist, and they have been demonstrated to generate higher tempratures. While 'excessive wood' exists, wood is a limiting factor for CO2 to Carbon char. Using crop wastes as the source of bio-char increases the CO2 to Carbon conversion ratio. Not to mention killing various things that effect plants which might be 'hiding' in the crop waste. Don't discount the use of the outgasing material as a way to generate power via stirling or internal combustion engines. wood gas was used during WWII as a substute for harder to obtain gasoline. Generation of units with a low enought cost, high enough heat and ease of operation while avoiding the known carcinogen effects of the resulting tars will be the engineering challenge.

This position does not reflect the 1700-2200 year old Carbon being found in Terra Preta. That is the method today, yes. Based on the data I have seen, burning does not get you charcoal. You need heat and lack of oxygen. Burning is the reaction of something with oxygen. And this is a different problem than any other farm operation exactly how? And you have data to refute the work being done on Terra Preta? Please post these links. Yet the method you are suggesting is exactly what what you say is a problem when you state: Most crop rotations are done to either bring minerals from the sub-soil to the top (trees, alfalfa) or to add some nitrogen to the soil (soybeans) But feel free to post data showing that adding charcoal to the soil is a placebo effect.

They have been bringing up links and references. You have been saying they are incorrect. So back up your claim that such a position is incorrect. Do you often exhibit a shrug when you are wrong? Because in this 20 or so page thread, you mentioned the use of charcoal in your garden more than once. Which I had read before I signed up. Given no one seems to have referenced Duane Johnson redrok dot com, you might wish to visit his web site on Heilostats and consider joining his mailing list on the topic rather than taking wild design stabs at making a device to drive off water.

Then make your position clear. Provide documentation.

And all I'm wanting the other poster to do is back up their contrary view with some actual links is all. Data. Because the paperwork/research I'm reading on the topic shows a whole lotta positives....yet one gent is claiming the position taken based on the research is bad. The other poster looks to have a 'gut full of truthy-ness' to paraphrase the Steven Colbert character.

Thank you for your admission that you actually have not researched your claim. De Nile is not just a river in Egypt it seems. Rather than admit your position is without a research basis, you make a different statement which is not demonstratable as factual. Not to mention how you do not refute the research that some of the Carbon in the Terra Preta soils is 1700-2260 years old. And follow it up with a 'shrug'. No emotocon for 'I was wrong and don't want to admit it'? I've pointed out research that back up the claims. Your position is to 'shrug'. You have over 10 posts, lets see some links.

If by improve you ment to say better plant growth and health - yes. Interesting claim. Yet no one here is claiming 'a means of climate change' but instead is claiming that you can take atmospheric Carbon and place it into the soil for years. "carbon dating has shown them to date back to between 1780 and 2260 years."Source: Wim Sombroek (pers. comm.); Bechtold, 2001 So are you claiming that the terra preta soil somehow failed the people? By all means, produce that evidence! Otherwise, the main theories of lying documentation to the sights seen or death via diesease vectors from the old world have nothing to do with your claim of the soil failing the people.

So you are claiming that lump charcoal is not 'the same' and contains Is that your claim? Interesting. Because the bag of charcoal *I* have says that it doesn't. The bag I have is from the cowboy charcoal company. The original poster you say 'no' to doesn't say what product they have, but simple observation at the store shows you to be wrong.

I'm here because of the fine thread about Terra Preta and the one person who is making counter claims. I wish to challenge thier position to produce data to support thier claims.