U.S.-FocUSed Biochar report - BioEnergy Lists

More documents

Recommendations

Info

signer biochar produced at different temperatures and their effects on a loamy sand. Annals of EnvironmentalScience 3:195-206.Ogawa, M. 1994. Tropical Agriculture Using Charcoal. Farming Japan 28-5:21-35.Ogawa, Makoto. 2008. Introduction to the Pioneer Works of Charcoal Uses in Agriculture, Forestry and Others inJapan. unpublished manuscript:15.Okimori, Yasuyuki, Makoto Ogawa, and Fumio Takahashi. 2003. Potential of CO 2 Emission Reductions by CarbonizingBiomass Waste from Industrial Tree Plantation in south Sumatra, Indonesia. Mitigation and AdaptationStrategies for Global Change 8:261-280.Oswald, Sonja N., and Sally Campbell. 2009. Forest Health. In Forest Resources of the United States, 2007, editedby W. B. Smith, P. D. Miles, C. H. Perry and S. A. Pugh. available online http://nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr_wo78.pdf: USDA, US Forest Service, RPa.Perlack, Robert D., Lynn L. Wright, Anthony F. Turhollow, Robin L. Graham, Bryce J. Stokes, and Donald C. Erbach.2005. Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of aBillion-Ton Annual Supply. edited by U. S. D. o. A. U.S. Department of Energy. Oak Ridge, Tennessee: OakRidge National Laboratory.Pimentel, D., Jennifer Gardner, Adam Bonnifield, Ximena Garcia, Julie Grufferman, Claire Horan, Julia Schlenker,and Emily Walling. 2009. Energy efficiency and conservation for individual Americans. Environ DevSustain 11:523-546.Pimentel, David, Alison Marklein, Megan A. Toth, Marissa N. Karpoff, Gillian S. Paul, Robert McCormack, JoannaKyriazis, and Tim Krueger. 2009. Food Versus Biofuels: Environmental and Economic Costs. Hum Ecol 37:1-12.Pratt, Kimberley, and Dominic Moran. 2010. Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of global biochar mitigation potential.Biomass and Bioenergy article in press.Reijnders, L. 2009. Are forestation, bio-char and landfilled biomass adequate offsets for the climate effects ofburning fossil fuels? Energy Policy 37:2839-2841.Roberts, Kelli G., Brent A. Gloy, Stephen Joseph, Norman R. Scott, and Johannes Lehmann. 2010. Life Cycle Assessmentof Biochar Systems: Estimating the Energetic, Economic, and Climate Change Potential. Environ.Sci. Technol. 44:827-833.Rondon, M., J. A. Ramirez, and J. Lehmann. 2005. Charcoal additions reduce net emissions of greenhouse gasesto the atmosphere. Paper read at Proceedings of the 3 rd USDA Symposium on Greenhouse Gases and CarbonSequestration, March 21-24 2005, at Baltimore, USA.Rondon, Marco A., Johannes Lehmann, Juan Ramirez, and Maria Hurtado. 2007. Biological nitrogen fixation bycommon beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) increases with bio-char additions. Biology and Fertility of Soils DOI10.1007/s00374-006-0152-z.Sauerbeck, D. R. 2001. CO 2 emissions and C sequestration by agriculture - perspecives and limitations. NutrientCycling in Agroecosystems 60:253-266.———. 2001. CO 2 emissions and C sequestration by agriculture - perspectives and limitations. Nutrient Cycling inAgroecosystems 60 (1-3):253-266.Searchinger, Timothy, Ralph Heimlich, R. A. Houghton, Fengxia Dong, Amani Elobeid, Jacinto Fabiosa, SimlaTokgoz, Dermot Hayes, and Tun-Hisang Yu. 2008. Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increase GreenhouseGases Through Emissions from Land Use Change. Science 319:DOI: 10.1126/science.1151861.Seifritz, Walter. 1993. Should we store carbon in charcoal? International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 18 (5):405-407.Sheng, Guangyao, Yaning Yang, Minsheng Huang, and Kai Yang. 2005. Influence of pH on pesticide sorption bysoil containing wheat residue-derived char. Environmental Pollution 134:457-463.12U.S.-Focused Biochar Report:Assessment of Biochar’s Benefits for the United States of America
Skjemstad, J. O., D. C. Reicosky, A. R. Wilts, and J. A. McGowan. 2002. Charcoal carbon in US agricultural soils.Soil Science Society of America Journal 66 (4):1249-1255.Skjemstad, Jan. 2001. Charcoal and other resistant materials. Paper read at Net Ecosystem Exchange WorkshopProceedings, 18-20 April 2001, at Canberra ACT 2601, Australia.Soil Quality National Technology Development Team. 2006. Crop Residue Removal For Biomass Energy Production:Effects on Soils and Recommendations. In Soil Quality - Agronomy Technical Note, edited by N. USDA.Greensoro, NC.Sombroek, Wim G., Freddy O. Nachtergaele, and Axel Hebel. 1993. Amounts, Dynamics and Sequestering ofCarbon in Tropical and Subtropical Soils. Ambio 22 (7):417-426.Spokas, K. A., W. C. Koskinen, J. M. Baker, and D. C. Reicosky. 2009. Impacts of woodchip biochar additions ongreenhouse gas production and sorption/degradation of two herbicides in Minnesota soil. Chemosphere77:574-581.Steiner, Christoph. 2007. Slash and char as alternative to slash and burn - Soil charcoal amendments maintain soilfertility and establish a carbon sink. Dissertation, Faculty of Biology, Chemistry and Geosciences, Universityof Bayreuth, Germany, Bayreuth.Steiner, Christoph, K. C Das, N Melear, and D Lakely. 2010. Reducing Nitrogen Loss During Poultry Litter CompostingUsing Biochar. Journal of Environmental Qality (doi:10.2134/jeq2009.0337).Steiner, Christoph, Keshav C. Das, Marcos Garcia, Bernard Förster, and Wolfgang Zech. 2008. Charcoal andSmoke Extract Stimulate the Soil Microbial Community in a Highly Weathered Xanthic Ferralsol. Pedobiologia51:359—366.Steiner, Christoph, Bruno Glaser, Wenceslau Geraldes Teixeira, Johannes Lehmann, Winfried E. H. Blum, andWolfgang Zech. 2008. Nitrogen Retention and Plant Uptake on a Highly Weathered Central Amazonian Ferralsolammended with Compost and Charcoal. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science.Steiner, Christoph, Wenceslau G. Teixeira, Johannes Lehmann, THomas Nehls, Jeferson Luis Vasconcelos deMacêdo, Winfried E. H. Blum, and Wolfgang Zech. 2007. Long term effects of manure, charcoal and mineralfertilization on crop production and fertility on a highly weathered Central Amazonian upland soil. Plantand Soil 291 (1-2):275-290.Steiner, Christoph, Wenceslau G. Teixeira, Johannes Lehmann, and Wolfgang Zech. 2004. Microbial Response toCharcoal Amendments of Highly Weathered Soils and Amazonian Dark Earths in Central Amazonia - PreliminaryResults. In Amazonian Dark Earths: Explorations in Space and Time, edited by B. Glaser and W. I.Woods. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.Strand, Stuart E., and Gregory Benford. 2009. Ocean Sequestration of Crop Residue Carbon: Recycling Fossil FuelCarbon Back to Deep Sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43:1000-1007.Tilman, David, Robert Socolow, Jonathan A. Foley, Hill Jason, Eric Larson, Lee Lynd, Stephen Pacala, John Reilly,Tim Searchinger, Chris Somerville, and Robert Williams. 2009. Beneficial Biofuels: The Food, Energy, andEnvironment Trilemma. Science 325 (5938):270-271.Topoliantz, Stéphanie, Jearn-Fraçois Ponge, and Sylvain Ballof. 2005. Manioc peel and charcoal: a potential organicamendment for sustainable soil fertility in the tropics. Biology and Fertility of Soils 41:15-21.USDA, US Forest Service. 2003. A Strategic Assessment of Forest Biomass and Fuel Reduction Treatments inWestern States. available online http://www.fs.fed.us/research/pdf/Western_final.pdf.Vries, Sander C. de, Gerrie W. J. van de Ven, Martin K. van Ittersum, and Ken E. Giller. 2010. Resource use efficiencyand environmental performance of nine major biofuel crops, processed by first-generation conversiontechniques. Biomass and Bioenergy 34:588-601.Wardle, D. A., O. Zackrisson, and M. C. Nilsson. 1998. The charcoal effect in Boreal forests: mechanisms and ecologicalconsequences. Oecologia 115:419-426.Biochar in agricultural and forestry applications in:Biochar from Agricultural and Forestry Residues – A Complimentary Use of “Waste” Biomass13
Page 2 and 3: AcknowledgmentsThe Center for Energ
Page 4 and 5: U.S.-Focused Biochar Report:Assessm
Page 7 and 8: an efficiency of 32% and convention
Page 9 and 10: tion of N and S) get enriched in th
Page 11 and 12: Benefits of Biofuels and Potential
Page 13 and 14: conversion were taken into account.
Page 15: Lal, R. 2003. Global Potential of S
Page 19 and 20: Biochar and energy linkages in:Bioc
Page 21 and 22: of value. Depending on the process,
Page 23 and 24: eowner will have one half of the 3.
Page 25: 100%10%Char yeild (wt % of dry biom
Page 28 and 29: chars acting more like lime and rai
Page 30 and 31: ConclusionSociety has hundreds of d
Page 34 and 35: • Free biochar particles with emb
Page 36 and 37: Smernik (2009) has suggested that b
Page 38 and 39: al. (2009) reported a reduction in
Page 40 and 41: Bauer A, Black AL (1994) Quantifica
Page 42 and 43: Shrestha RK, Lal R (2007) Soil Carb
Page 44 and 45: Sustainability OverviewThe most com
Page 46 and 47: • thinnings (both understory and
Page 48 and 49: nineties, more than six million acr
Page 50 and 51: 3. Biomass shall not come from land
Page 52 and 53: Sustainability Protocol Purpose 181
Page 54 and 55: • Administrative• Social• Qua
Page 56 and 57: y Biochar.- Societal Benefits: Bioc
Page 58 and 59: 1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acres; 100 he
Page 60 and 61: the seven in the BBTV.Continuing al
Page 62 and 63: F2 (Expanded forestry residues; 0.1
Page 64 and 65: projects (p 81 of his thesis) doubl
Page 66 and 67:
Other Global NPP. projections To be
Page 68 and 69:
former term, as well as “Biochar
Page 70 and 71:
Biochar relevance in GHG markets in
Page 72 and 73:
It is far easier to measure emissio
Page 74 and 75:
STEPS ANDDOCUMENTATIONRESPONSIBLE P
Page 76 and 77:
only account for 4.5% of members’
Page 78 and 79:
Analysis: Biochar And Carbon Market
Page 80 and 81:
Quantification of reductions for bi
show all

U.S.-FocUSed Biochar report - BioEnergy Lists

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?