U.S.-FocUSed Biochar report - BioEnergy Lists
U.S.-FocUSed Biochar report - BioEnergy Lists U.S.-FocUSed Biochar report - BioEnergy Lists
Shrestha RK, Lal R (2007) Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in 28-Year-Old Land Uses in Reclaimed Coal Mine Soils ofOhio. Journal of Environmental Quality 36, 1775-1783.Smernik RJ (2009) Biochar and sorption of organic compounds. In ‘Biochar and Environmental Management:Science and Technology.’ (Eds J Lehmann and S Joseph) pp. 289-300. (Earthscan: London)Sohi S, Lopez-Capel E, Krull ES, Bol R (2009) ‘Biochar, climate change and soil: A review to guide future research.’CSIRO Land and Water Science Report 05/09.Sperow M (2006) Carbon Sequestration Potential in Reclaimed Mine Sites in Seven East-Central States. Journalof Environmental Quality 35, 1428-1438.Steiner C, Glaser B, Teixeira W, Lehmann J, Blum W, Zech W (2008) Nitrogen retention and plant uptake on ahighly weathered central Amazonian Ferralsol amended with compost and charcoal. Journal Plant Nutritionand Soil Science 171, 893-899.Tejada M, Hernandez MT, Garcia C (2007) Application of Two Organic Wastes in a Soil Polluted by Lead: Effectson the Soil Enzymatic Activities. Journal of Environmental Quality 36, 216-225.Thies J, Rillig M (2009) Characteristics of Biochar: Biological Properties. In ‘Biochar for Environmental Management:Science and Technology’. (Eds J Lehmann and S Joseph) pp. 85-106. (Earthscan: London, UK)Uliana MW (2005) Identifying the source of saline groundwater contamination using geochemical data and modeling.Environmental and Engineering Geoscience 11, 107-123.Van Zwieten L, Singh B, Joseph S, Cowie A, Chan K (2009) Biochar and emissions of non-CO 2 greenhouse gasesfrom soil. In ‘Biochar for Environmental Management. Science and Technology.’ (Eds J Lehmann and S Joseph)pp. 227-249. (Earthscan: London)Vance GF, King LA, Ganjegunte GK (2008) Soil and Plant Responses from Land Application of Saline-Sodic Waters:Implications of Management. Journal of Environmental Quality 37, S-139-148.Warnock DD, Lehmann J, Kuyper TW, Rillig MC (2007) Mycorrhizal responses to biochar in soil - concepts andmechanisms. Plant and Soil 300, 9-20.Whittemore DO (1995) Geochemical differentiation of oil and gas brine from saltwater sources contaminatingwater resources: case studies from Kansas and Oklahoma. Environmental Geoscience 2, 15-31.Zhao H, Vance GF, Urynowicz MA, Gregory RW (2009) Integrated treatment process using a natural Wyomingclinoptilolite for remediating produced waters from coalbed natural gas operations. Applied Clay Science42, 379-385.38U.S.-Focused Biochar Report:Assessment of Biochar’s Benefits for the United States of America
Biochar sustainability in:Biochar and Sustainable Practicesgloria Floragflora@s-o-solutions.orgBackgroundBiofuels and biomass-based energy have the potential to become major contributors to the global primary energysupply over the next century, expanding significantly in both developed and developing nations. 1 However,unchecked, overzealous establishment of plantations for biomass production and excessive removal of biomassfrom agricultural systems and natural ecosystems can cause of plethora of social, cultural, environmental andeconomic ills. Genetic modification of plant species for expediting biomass growth can likewise lead to a rangeof problems, from perceptions of danger to actual environmental chaos from unintended consequences. Giventhese potential pitfalls and the intensifying interest in all forms of bio-energy and biomass utilization, agenciesand conservation organizations are scrambling to develop sustainability standards.Sustainability standards and guidelines are therefore not only timely but also essential. Fortunately, the call toaction has been heeded by a broad spectrum of government and non-governmental organizations at international,national and regional levels. This section of the report will outline the current thinking on biomass sustainabilityas it relates to biochar production from industries to small community operations, through partnershipsand collaborations to single providers. Primarily, this section provides a brief bibliographic review of the currentleading reports on biomass sustainability and certification.This review will look at biomass sustainability through the lens of biochar production. Even though biocharproduction and use have many advantages, people still have solid concerns that, similar to the head-long rushinto biofuels from corn, certain critical aspects may be being overlooked. Central to their concerns is ensuringprocurement of biomass in ways and amounts that do not significantly affect human food supply, wildlife habitats,biodiversity, hydrologic functions and forest ecosystems. Likewise, people do not want materials that couldbe up-cycled 2 to be irretrievably altered in a biomass-consuming system.Secondarily, but critical to certain sectors, are concerns that new and expanded use of biomass will reduce availabilityand increase prices for current biomass uses such as animal feed, the production of paper, cardboard,durable wood products, pellets for wood stoves and in other energy industries such as methane production.1 Berndes, Göran, et.al.. “The Contribution of Biomass in the Future Global Energy Supply: a Review of 17 Studies”. Biomassand Bioenergy, Vol. 25, Issue 1, July 2003, pages 1-28. http://www.chem.uu.nl/nws/www/publica/Publicaties2003/E2003-40.pdf2 Recycled to an equally as valuable or better productBiochar sustainability in: Biochar and Sustainable Practices39
- 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 and 16: Lal, R. 2003. Global Potential of S
- Page 17 and 18: Skjemstad, J. O., D. C. Reicosky, A
- 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 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
Shrestha RK, Lal R (2007) Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in 28-Year-Old Land Uses in Reclaimed Coal Mine Soils ofOhio. Journal of Environmental Quality 36, 1775-1783.Smernik RJ (2009) <strong>Biochar</strong> and sorption of organic compounds. In ‘<strong>Biochar</strong> and Environmental Management:Science and Technology.’ (Eds J Lehmann and S Joseph) pp. 289-300. (Earthscan: London)Sohi S, Lopez-Capel E, Krull ES, Bol R (2009) ‘<strong>Biochar</strong>, climate change and soil: A review to guide future research.’CSIRO Land and Water Science Report 05/09.Sperow M (2006) Carbon Sequestration Potential in Reclaimed Mine Sites in Seven East-Central States. Journalof Environmental Quality 35, 1428-1438.Steiner C, Glaser B, Teixeira W, Lehmann J, Blum W, Zech W (2008) Nitrogen retention and plant uptake on ahighly weathered central Amazonian Ferralsol amended with compost and charcoal. Journal Plant Nutritionand Soil Science 171, 893-899.Tejada M, Hernandez MT, Garcia C (2007) Application of Two Organic Wastes in a Soil Polluted by Lead: Effectson the Soil Enzymatic Activities. Journal of Environmental Quality 36, 216-225.Thies J, Rillig M (2009) Characteristics of <strong>Biochar</strong>: Biological Properties. In ‘<strong>Biochar</strong> for Environmental Management:Science and Technology’. (Eds J Lehmann and S Joseph) pp. 85-106. (Earthscan: London, UK)Uliana MW (2005) Identifying the source of saline groundwater contamination using geochemical data and modeling.Environmental and Engineering Geoscience 11, 107-123.Van Zwieten L, Singh B, Joseph S, Cowie A, Chan K (2009) <strong>Biochar</strong> and emissions of non-CO 2 greenhouse gasesfrom soil. In ‘<strong>Biochar</strong> for Environmental Management. Science and Technology.’ (Eds J Lehmann and S Joseph)pp. 227-249. (Earthscan: London)Vance GF, King LA, Ganjegunte GK (2008) Soil and Plant Responses from Land Application of Saline-Sodic Waters:Implications of Management. Journal of Environmental Quality 37, S-139-148.Warnock DD, Lehmann J, Kuyper TW, Rillig MC (2007) Mycorrhizal responses to biochar in soil - concepts andmechanisms. Plant and Soil 300, 9-20.Whittemore DO (1995) Geochemical differentiation of oil and gas brine from saltwater sources contaminatingwater resources: case studies from Kansas and Oklahoma. Environmental Geoscience 2, 15-31.Zhao H, Vance GF, Urynowicz MA, Gregory RW (2009) Integrated treatment process using a natural Wyomingclinoptilolite for remediating produced waters from coalbed natural gas operations. Applied Clay Science42, 379-385.38U.S.-Focused <strong>Biochar</strong> Report:Assessment of <strong>Biochar</strong>’s Benefits for the United States of America
Change language