Recycling Green Waste into Black - Biochar

Biochar offers some strong positives for use in agriculture, and not only in boosting highly durable long lasting soil organic carbon.

There are many articles on the subject, and Wikipedia has a good overview - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochar.  I have some previous blog posts as well on soil carbon and biochar.

The article below comes from the online edition Qld Country Life and due acknowledgement is made to them.

But it is a report on a forum in which the message is being delivered to Australian farmers that biochar is not some pie in the sky airy fairy technology.......it might be real, very soon and here.

It is true that delivering adequate carbon to larger farms is a difficult and costly issue with even the logistics expensive.  But systems similar to that below will evolve, and maybe quicker than peope realise.

Using pyrolysis is a reasonably well understood process system so marrying that into a field suitable system requires application and not inconsiderable $$.  But doable.

This is a reasonable step on an evolving process.

------------------------------------------------


Revolutionary recycling

       

14 Feb 2013

 

 

TO farmers in the Burdekin it may have looked like something out of a Dr Who episode - but it is possibly the forerunner to one of the most revolutionary machines to hit the agriculture industry in decades.

A farm may never use one, but research shows that the product the unusual looking machine produces – biochar - can increase the fertility of the soil, increase moisture retention and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Biochar is a form of charcoal and is produced by heating organic matter in a low oxygen environment. The process is termed pyrolysis which is “a thermochemical decomposition of organic material at elevated temperatures without the participation of oxygen”. Pyrolysis can even be achieved by microwaving.

Biochar has the potential to help mitigate climate change, via carbon sequestration. It can increase soil fertility, increase agricultural productivity and provide protection against some foliar and soil-borne diseases.

The man behind the biochar producing machine at the Ayr CFI forum is Dr James Joyce. Dr Joyce did his PhD on biomass gasification and, noticing a great biomass in sugar cane trash, set out to design a pyrolysis unit that met the criteria of low capital and operating cost, mobility, flexibility and ability to handle un-shredded cane trash.

The result to date has been a series of biochar machines of various sizes. His company BIG (Black is Green) presently has two machines in Canada, one in Hawaii, Germany and Wales and two in India.  The machine not only turns potentially methane emitting, green waste into stable charcoal or biochar, the heat it produces during the process can be used to generate electricity.

One problem he has come across is finding locations with a good supply of biomass where electricity generated can be uploaded into the main grid.  The machine can convert 1.2 – 1.5t/hr of green, agricultural or industrial waste (7000-10,000t per annum) into 0.2-0.3t/hr of biochar.

Currently there is a gate price of $700/t for biochar with most outlets selling biochar at $1000-$2000 per tonne.

In Europe 80 per cent of the biochar produced is being mixed into stock feed with experiments revealing impressive weight gains and health benefits in ruminant animals.

In India biochar has become extremely popular in home gardens from which owners not only feed themselves but obtain an income from selling the produce.

Whichever way you look at it, biochar production appears destined to become a major industry throughout the world for use as a soil conditioner/ fertiliser, stockfeed additive and as a way of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Investors in this technology are surely on a win-win situation.    

What is biochar?
Biochar is a stable form of charcoal produced from heating natural organic materials (crop and other waste, woodchips, manure) in a high temperature, low oxygen process known as pyrolysis. Biochars can be produced from a variety of organic sources or feedstocks.

Due to its molecular structure, biochar is chemically and biologically in a more stable form than the original carbon form it comes from, making it more difficult to break down. This means that in some cases it can remain stable in soil for hundreds to thousands of years.

The production of biochar via pyrolysis also yields bioenergy in the form of synthesis gas (or ‘syngas’). Syngas consists of a variety of gases which in turn can be captured and used to produce heat and power.

Not all biochars are created equal

There are many different types and qualities of biochar. The key chemical and physical properties of a biochar are greatly affected by the type of material being used and the conditions of the pyrolysis process (i.e. temperature and time).

For example, biochar made from manure will have a higher nutrient content than biochar made from wood cuttings. However, the biochar from the wood cuttings will be more stable over a longer period of time. The two different chars will look the same but will behave quite differently.

Similarly, biochars produced at higher temperatures (700°C compared to 400°C) are more porous and more adsorptive. These biochars have greater potential to adsorb toxic substances and could be used to help rehabilitate contaminated environments

Understanding the characteristics of a particular biochar is important to match it to the requirements of its end use.

Capturing CO2 with Nickel

Sounds as if serendipity is alive and well..........but the concept works and is cheap and easy.  If it works well once scaled up then the implications are potentially major.......think of all the power stations around the world! 

British researchers have discovered that sea urchins use nickel particles on their exoskeletons to effectively capture CO2 and turn it into a solid form, an intriguing finding that could offer an inexpensive way to capture and store carbon from fossil fuel-fired power plants.

Scientists from Newcastle University were studying how marine organisms absorb CO2 to make shells and skeletons when they discovered that sea urchin larvae have a high concentration of nickel on their exoskeletons, which helps them absorb CO2.  When the researchers added nickel nanoparticles to CO2-saturated water, they discovered that the nickel completely removed CO2 and turned it into calcium carbonate, a chalk-like mineral.

Current efforts to capture and store carbon dioxide from power plants involve either pumping it underground or using an enzyme called carbonic anhydrase to convert it to calcium carbonate.  But both methods are expensive, and the Newcastle researchers say that using nickel to capture and store CO2 bubbled through water could be a thousand times cheaper than employing carbonic anhydrase. “

 

It seems too good to be true, but it works,” said Lidija Siller, a physicist at Newcastle.

 

The research was published in Catalysis Science & Technology.

 

 

The Emerging Carbon Economy in North Australia

The print media is all over this today, with syndicated versions of the press release on line and in print at many regional newspapers.

It could be a good thing - but there is work to do beforehand, and it will not happen overnight.

There are some issues also worth considering, that are not in the report.  Algae production has started at Karratha - growing algal cultures and harvesting for conversion to biofuel or other materials including animal feeds is promising.   So is use of duckweed especially in wastewater ponds, or any nutrient rich water source, even irrigation tailwater [ ther ewill be more of that] to clean it of nutrients before it re-enters downstream rivers.

Northern Australia has and is suffering from disinvestments in agriculture [broadly interpreted term] over many years.  There are few if any crops specifically with varieties developed for the region [ sugar may be an exception] and with major seed companies now dominating this sector I cannot see them investing in the region as the market is so small.

It may be possible to identify crop varieties from eg Brazil, or possibly through varieties developed in international centres eg IRRI or ICRISAT and used in Asian or African / Indian areas, but some work will be needed to identify them.  And governments have little appetite to spend those $$ at the moment.
While it is possible that the beef herd could expand significantly, the Australian government has not helped over recent years with their activities in curtailing the live cattle trade.  Yes, new abattoirs are coming, but they may not necessarily quickly allow for herd increases.  And can these animals be more methane efficient anyway?  If feed quality went up - maybe, and that often involves more legume in the diet - will we see more of a pangola / leucaena finishing system?  It works and that was demonstrated in the 1970s at Kununurra.

Do not hold your breath........but actively offer ideas.

The media release by the Federal government is below but the report is more difficult to find.  Try the link here for the report, and there is a summary also available -

http://www.regional.gov.au/regional/ona/carbon-economy-for-northern-australia-2012.aspx

The report is brief, 20 pages and easy to download.

Media release

Tapping the carbon market of northern Australia could provide a valuable new revenue stream for the region – once key obstacles are removed, according to a government report.

Reduced greenhouse gas emissions from fire and livestock, sequestering carbon in soils and vegetation, and the production of renewable feedstock for aviation biofuel are three of the main opportunities identified in The Emerging Carbon Economy for Northern Australia report.

"These opportunities will provide northern farmers the potential to reap a billion-dollar return," Regional Australia Minister Simon Crean said.

"CSIRO found the benefits of the carbon economy will not be confined to climate change action, but could generate environmental and livelihood benefits," he said.

 

The region covers some 300 million hectares north of the Tropic of Capricorn. Mr Crean said the federal government would work with state and local governments to help regions "embrace the carbon economy" by generating credits that they can sell to big emitters under its carbon market.
While the report identifies possible areas of income generation – such as a potential of $200 million dollars a year in abatement of carbon emissions through better savannah-burning management and $240 million from the livestock industry – it also specifies how much work still needs to be done.

For instance, the property rights to carbon would need clear ownership rules, while the scale of carbon stocks in the soil and its potential enhancement "warrant continued scientific enquiry", the report said.

Similarly, while indigenous groups have been able to earn carbon credits for savannah-burning under the government's Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI), the report found "practical barriers to wider implementation of this method remain".

Likewise, the government is yet to approve a methodology allowing farmers to earn credits under the CFI for methane abatement efforts in the livestock industry. The northern beef herd counts some 13 million animals.

The biofuel potential could amount to 5 per cent of the jetfuel use in Australia, although that assessment also is based on "early stages of investigation", the report said.

The Coalition has vowed to scrap the carbon tax and planned emissions trading market if it wins office, although it has signalled it may continue with some of the government's carbon farming program.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/northern-australias-carbon-market-potentially-vast-report-finds-20121129-2ahnv.html#ixzz2DfTApk3T

Tropical Vegetation Soaks Up More Carbon Than Previous Estimates

The lush vegetation wrapping the center of the globe is one of the most important features for regulating a stable climate in the world.

Much excess CO2 emissions from industrialized regions find their way to the equator to be absorbed by abundant CO2-consuming plant life. However, as large tracts of tropical rainforest are cut down in the Amazon, Congo, and Southeast Asia, worries have grown that this vital region may turn from a carbon sink to a carbon source. Those worries can be put at ease somewhat thanks to a recent study from the Woods Hole Research Center (WHRC).

Their report suggests that carbon storage of forests, shrublands, and savannas in the tropics are 21 percent higher than previously believed.

Larger carbon storage equates to a larger capacity to absorb and retain greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere. The loss of carbon storage due to deforestation is still a concern, but has been overestimated. In fact, the net flux of carbon into the atmosphere from tropical vegetation loss is overestimated by up to 12 percent.

Data used excludes any information from Australia, so estimates may be somewhat inaccurate. Even so, it does conclude that the tropical forests are a very major carbon sink.

The full published article is here
http://eorder.sheridan.com/3_0/display/index.php?flashprint=1608

Australia and Now California - Have a Carbon Reduction Plan

It has received almost no media attention in Australia, yet California, which is said to be the world's 8th largest economy, has late last week, passed the final draft of a "cap and trade" program to provide financial incentives for polluters to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Some parts of the plan will commence in 2012, major parts including compliance for some of the worst polluters, including power plants, commence in 2013, and others to commence in 2015. The plan will cover 85% of the emissions in California.

The broad thrust of the Californian scheme is generally similar to that proposed for Australia, with the start of the market mechanism, after a few years of the mandated carbon price, planned for mid 2012.

With California's economy being considerably larger than Australia's, this is a big step for them, and some hope the rest of the USA might follow in time.

I am amazed that this move in California continues to receive such little attention from the media and pro carbon adherents in Australia to add weight to their arguments.

More media information from the US here - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/21/business/energy-environment/california-adopts-cap-and-trade-system-to-limit-emissions.html

and here -
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/20/california-cap-and-trade_n_1022314.html

There are quite a few sceptics, believing it will not work, but many think it might.

Carbon Science - There is More Phytosynthesis Occurring!

It is not all doom.....recent experiments and measurements have shown that current phytosynthesis - globally - is about 25% more than has previously been calculated.

The work is based on isotopic analysis of atmospheric carbon dioxide, but essentially follows flows of oxygen and carbon dioxide in and out and through the atmosphere.

Plants take up CO2 and emit oxygen, and from that, using isotope analysis total phytosynthesis is estimated..........and it is a lot more than previously thought.

It will have considerable effect on the performance of the climate change models, but this nett phytosynthesis increase still has to be incorporated into the large and complex models used.

Read more details here in a CSIRO media release-
http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness-and-general/general/new-leaf-turns-for-carbon-science/2308093.aspx?storypage=0

BUT.....is it possibly related to more CO2 in the atmosphere boosting plant utilisation, seen as a response to more CO2 in the atmosphere? That is not mentioned.

And there is more as well - http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/43340 with this story also reporting an increase in plant productivity via uptake of carbon - essentially the same data as above but reported in a different way, referring to productivity of land plants. Remember, they produce oxygen!

Carbon Farming and Cattle - Can Co-exist

It is not all gloom and doom in the cattle and carbon equation. There seems to have been a position developing that would exclude any mutual benefit. This need not be so.

When cattle are grass grown, then these two issues can be developed alongside one another, according to some advocates. There is a new and potentially exciting market developing for grass grown livestock. This is a niche position that the north of Australia should be aiming to occupy.

Is this a line of production that could be developed for the new AA processing facility in the Darwin region? Afterall, it is possible to develop and finish cattle with high growth and liveweight gains using a leucaena / grass mix.......a mixed pasture possible to use in the region.

A recent article adds to this issue.
http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/grains-and-cropping/general/life-down-on-the-carbon-farm/2292929.aspx?storypage=0

It is worth reading some of the articles within the link to the carbon ranch below.
------------------------------
Life down on the carbon farm
MATTHEW CAWOOD
20 Sep, 2011 04:00 AM

"Personally," says American conservationist Courtney White, "I think an answer to the climate crisis is to eat more meat—from a carbon ranch".

Mr White's concept of the "carbon ranch" is an opportunity to unite a range of solutions to various challenges, including climate change, farm productivity and regional economic decline.

Currently, Mr White said, "the carbon landscape is broken into pieces, and we often pit each carbon use against each other".

Mr White will tell Australian audiences that carbon can be managed and exploited in ways that unite these uses into a single theme of regeneration of landscapes, communities and economies.

The executive director of the Quivera Coalition in the American South-West, Mr White has been instrumental in developing a rancher-conservationist alliance that has successfully sidestepped the toxic wrangling of landholder-environmentalist relations to produce results satisfactory to all.

He will be talking about the Coalition and the carbon ranch at the Carbon Farming Conference, to be held in Dubbo, NSW, on 27-29 September.

Mr White has developed a "carbon map" to show that rather than a series of separate issues, carbon is common factor across all landscapes and endeavours, from wilderness to city and everywhere in between. "We have to start with the idea that we can put this puzzle together," Mr White said.
He believes that uniting carbon-related issues within the overall framework of climate change can bring exponential benefits to landholders and the regions they live in.

Some progressive ranchers have already begun drawing those pieces together, Mr White said. They are using rotational grazing to boost grass productivity, moving to grassfed beef production versus the lotfed beef more common in the US, selling direct to local urban consumers, and paying attention to ecosystem services.

Some landholders are also engaging with the energy question, including a young New Hampshire farmer he recently met who is growing 100 per cent of his farm's energy needs on 10 per cent of his land.

Sequestering more carbon in the landscape is only half the equation, Mr White said. The other half is lowering farming's emissions footprint.

Lowering emissions through changed energy use, restoring ecological functions and overall reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is relatively straightforward, in Mr White's view.

More challenging is the question of ruminant methane, an issue that as led to the "eat less red meat" theme now common in discussions of climate change. "For the purposes of a carbon ranch, the methane emission issue is just one part of the overall 'footprint" assessment," Mr White said.

The real challenge is not necessarily to reduce methane production - although that can help with productivity - but to reduce overall farm emissions to the point of becoming carbon-neutral or carbon-negative. At this point, methane emissions become less relevant, leading to Mr White's observation about eating meat from a "carbon ranch".

Along with its direct contribution to addressing climate change, Mr White's vision of the carbon ranch also includes a range of "co-benefits" from uniting the carbon landscape. They include improved ecosystem services, habitat protection, rural economic development, maintenance of culture and diversity, and greater opportunities for succeeding generations.

* More details of Courtney White's "carbon ranch" concept can by found at www.awestthatworks.com/carbonranch.html

* Details of the Carbon Farming Conference can be found here.

Carbon Farming Coming Soon to Australia

CFI bill passes: On-farm carbon mitigation to be rewarded
24 Aug, 2011 10:11 AM

The National Farmers’ Federation (NFF) has acknowledged the passage of the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) through the Parliament, enabling farmers to be rewarded for carbon mitigation practices undertaken on-farm.

“The NFF has been broadly supportive of the concept and intent of the CFI from the outset as positive recognition of the major role agriculture can play in mitigating carbon emissions through on-farm management,” said NFF President Jock Laurie.

“We have long said that voluntary, market based mechanisms, using a carrot rather than a stick approach to carbon abatement, is the best way to engage with farmers in this challenge. The CFI fits this description.

“The NFF has also been consistent in saying that Australian farmers are under no illusions that the CFI will transform farm income, especially not in the short- to medium-term.

“However, with a continued focus on productivity-based research and the development of methodologies underpinning abatement projects, we hope that the CFI can mature to draw a meaningful contribution to Australia’s carbon mitigation effort,” Mr Laurie said.

“It is positive that the CFI legislation passed late yesterday has addressed a number of the key concerns raised by the NFF, particularly surrounding the potential for shifting regional land use away from agriculture and towards forestation. “We know that this Bill has undergone extensive debate and scrutiny and for this reason we feel confident that many of the potential pitfalls in this relatively new and complex area of carbon abatement have now been ironed out. “However, we will continue to closely monitor outcomes under the CFI to ensure that no unintended consequences emerge in regional Australia to the detriment of our farmers. “It is now vital that the Government intensifies its education process to ensure that farmers who decide to engage with the CFI do so with complete and unbiased information about the responsibilities that come with the program,” Mr Laurie concluded.
NFF Source: http://www.nff.org.au
---------------------------------

While a positive move, there is much to be done especially around determining soil carbon and its movements.

A new process currently under final development at the University of Sydney does seem to offer some possibilities on the measurement aspects. But......will it apply around Australia?

Australia Will Have a Carbon Price - It's Official!

As of about four hours ago Australia will have a carbon price of $23 a tonne, and it will commence in July 2012.


Has been an open secret all week, but it is now confirmed. No doubt there will be more details to come, both in the near term as well as before next year.


Read a brief overview here:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/07/10/3265732.htm

Plastic Bags - Worse Than You Think!

Many cities, towns and even countries [ China, Ireland, Australia] have banned already or are implementing plastic bag bans.

Sometimes there is opposition, sometimes very strong opposition, but in real terms their use drops enormously after steps are taken to restrict use.

Recent studies also are beginning to show that their impact is probably more damaging than previously thought.

The article link will bring you up to date on more recent studies..........and it is generally NOT GOOD.

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/facing_the_dirty_truth_about_recycled_plastics/2400/

Plastics are a serious issue in relation to disposal and / or recycling, and much more needs to be done in that area.

At least in Darwin they have finally allowed more classes of plastic to be recycled. A good start, I suppose.

Mangroves - Worth Loving for Carbon Storage

Mangroves have been under threat as mankind increasingly lives near the water's edge - especially the saltwater edge!

Maybe recent events such as earthquakes and tsumanis might encourage a rethink living on the edge of the sea, but for now, many areas of mangroves are torn out for development - of various kinds.

One school of thought even suggests that their prsence along coastlines mitigates cyclonic storm surges and related events, preventing considerable damage, even some distance inland. I recall comments about several major storms in Asia where more damage occurred than might be expected due to the removal of protection from mangroves, torn out for aquaculture development.

Land developers commonly remove mangroves to develop canal estates too.

Some recent scientific research on tropical mangrove trees show they are better at storing carbon dioxide than most other forests, and cutting them down unleashes more greenhouse gas than deforestation elsewhere. Mangroves are so efficient at keeping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere that when they are destroyed, they release as much as 10 per cent of all emissions worldwide attributable to deforestation - even though mangroves account for just 0.7 per cent of the tropical forest area, according to some new research.

Daniel Donato, of the US Agriculture Department's Forest Service and lead author of a study published in the journal Nature Geoscience, says mangroves store two to four times the carbon that tropical rainforests do. "Mangroves store a lot of carbon, much more so than most forests on Earth, on a per hectare basis," says Donato. "Since they store so much carbon, there's probably a lot being released from all the mangrove deforestation that's going on."

Yes, if you live near the coast you tend to dislike the mangroves - the source of mosquitoes and sand flies, midges and related biting insects.

Maybe it is better you protect yourself, and leave the mangroves to store carbon and protect us from natural disasters.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2011/04/04/3181798.htm?site=science&topic=enviro provides more details.

Carbon Pricing in Australia

July 2012 will see a carbon price implemented in Australia.

Is it a carbon tax? Well, yes I guess it is. But views as to using carbon tax versus an ETS have evolved and changed over the past several years, with the complexity and bureaucratic shemozzle of an ETS seen as a big stumbling block to any implementation of a scheme about climate change. A carbon tax is seen as economically efficient.

Neither is perfect.

A lot more detail still to come, and a few heads will no doubt get kicked along the way.
It is probably fair to say only the absolute diehard sceptics still subscribe to a view that climate change is not real and happening.....and maybe accelerating, even if there is some noise about normal cyclic movements in climate, sometimes attributed to changes in the solar energy cycles.

An interesting piece has been seen on the ABC web site today:[http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/25/3148883.htm ]

This is a reasonable cover of the issues, without getting into the trade exposed intensive industries arguments that were discussed during the previous ETS discussions.

But this option of a tax can be done now and should send appropriate signals to consumers and industry that there is not a free ride anymore.

It should be an interesting period over the next few years as this evolves......or gets stymied depending on how the political pieces fall.

Australian University Bans Bottled Water

The University of Canberra (UC) is introducing a total ban on the sale of bottled water on its campus.

It is believed to be the largest ban of its kind in Australia and the first across a university.

Read more here:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/20/3117523.htm

While at least one Australian town, Bundanoon, has also banned bottled water, this is a very significant acceleration of the trend into a young demographic group.

Yes, some other places are doing similar things, but this one is with the support of the retailers on campus.

Afterall, what is wrong with being self reliant and bringing water from home?

Strategic Alliance to Build Carbon Management Reforms - Origin and Australian Carbon Trust

Origin Energy & Australian Carbon to work together on energy efficiency

Australian Carbon Trust and Origin Energy today signed an agreement to develop a strategic alliance for dedicated and more accessible financing, designed to accelerate the uptake of energy efficiency technologies and practices by Australian businesses.

To read the following release click here
-----------------------------------------------------

This is an interesting follow up to the previous post.

Origin and its senior executives have long been strong advocates for a realistic carbon management system in australia, becoming increasingly but quietly vocal in most of the right places - where policy change happens. There are many statements on record to support that position.

This is an interesting development that should offer strong support to smaller businesses to also move to better carbon managment practices.

Bring it on!!

Clean Technology Is Still Thriving - BUT a Carbon Price Would Help

A recent report indicates that the US clean tech industries are still developing, despite a complete failure of policies to develop a carbon price or any real progress on climate change type in the US at national level.

Australia is not much better, given the current policy imbroglio here, after the failure of the prevous government attempts through an ETS - a cap and trade scheme.

But the US industry personnel are still pushing ahead, and many are very positive.

It is not if, but when, in their view, and they want to be around and active. Or they will operate elsewhere - Asia, Europe or maybe China.

This recent article offers some interesting views.

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/green_technology_sector_advances_despite_failure_of_us_climate_bill/2341/

Composting in Australia - More Action Needed

Breaking down the benefits of composting
Tuesday, 16 November 2010

A press release worth reading.......

Increasing the use of organic compost to intensive agriculture industries such as citrus could save 30% of irrigation water and deliver millions of dollars of extra income through increased crop yields to regions such as the Riverina as well as providing significant carbon abatement and sequestration opportunities for the nation, according to the Waste Management Association of Australia (WMAA).

CEO of the WMAA, Val Southam. believes greater investment in the utilisation of organic materials in agriculture may be part of the solution to restoring health to the Murray-Darling Basin without jeopardising the livelihoods of farmers and regional communities.“The economic and environmental benefits of composting are enormous. In addition to improving water use efficiency, there are significant environmental benefits accrued through carbon abatement and sequestration.

Organic material diverted from landfill could abate 2 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent every year- approximately 461,893 cars off the road annually.

“Around 420,000 tonnes of compost is used in our intensive agricultural industries per year. Compost improves soil condition by adding organic matter, and a 5% increase in soil organic material will result in the quadrupling of a soil’s water holding capacity. It also suppresses weed growth thus reducing the need for chemicals.” Southam said composting also prevents the loss of valuable top soil and reduces the damaging effects of erosion - savings of between 2.3 and 17 tonnes per hectare of soil loss due to erosion can be achieved. “Our industry is calling on all levels of government to provide R&D funding to fully evaluate the economic and environmental benefits of composting and fund programs which promote awareness of the benefits of compost use in our agricultural industries and wider community,” she said.

Chair of Compost Australia (a division of WMAA), Peter Wadewitz believes there’s much more government, industry and the community can do to increase the use of compost. “At least 20 million tonnes of organic material is available for recycling through composting. Composting organic material such as cardboard and food scraps can reduce the amount of waste going to landfill by as much as 50%. “The Recycled Organics Industry is already processing over 5 million tonnes of organic material annually but the benefits to our environment and economy from increasing this amount are significant,” Wadewitz said. “In addition to increased R&D funding and raising awareness of the benefits of composting, one option may be to establish tax incentives for producers of recycled organic products in more sustainable agricultural production systems,” he added.

Compost for Soils reported that SARDI (South Australian Research and Development Institute) citrus trials (composted green organics, grape marc, animal manure) showed a positive return on the initial investment.An application of 40 m3ha-1 of composted green organics in Loxton North produced the highest benefit at 5.38 – that is, for every dollar invested around $5 is returned to the grower.

---------------------

While this information is not new, in our current debate about carbon, and improved productivity in Australian agriculture, this is a very timely press release and should be heeded around the country.

There is so much wasted food and recyclable organics available. There is technology available to do a lot more, from very simple systmes to quite complex operations. Other countries see this as a valuable resource for agriculture, yet we in australia with relatively poor soils and low moisture holding capacity in soils, really do need this material to improve productivity of the land.

And that applies especially so in the tropics, with higher temperatures driving a faster turnover of the soil carbon as well as a faster soil moisture cycle........and even poorer soils in general.

There are structural issues, with local government [or their contractors] often the handler of organic wastes, yet it must have better leadership at State or National level to achieve serious change.

Yes, there are skilled people that could achieve more.........let there be some action along the lines proposed in terms of R and D!!

Can Energy be Less Black in Australia?

Australia's energy markets, their regulation and development might be in for some serious challenges it seems, right at the nub of change - policy intervention.

Australia has much of our energy production from coal, including some from particularly dirty brown coal. These are all on one side. Shall we say the brown, or maybe black corner.

Then there are the new energy producers, with renewable energy in various forms, but commonly wind in the majority at present, but more alternatives coming, or at worst, gas as the primary energy source. The green corner, you might think.

Lobbying from the black corner has so far been quite successful, with their success relatively undiminished. Even a few more recent successes. There has been a focus on preservation of the policy status quo. BUT.......the green corner is pushing hard, and might be on the cusp of some decent gains.

Read the article here and look at the links. An interesting time is upon us.

http://www.environmentalmanagementnews.net/storyview.asp?storyid=1564856&sectionsource=s0

Can the politicians yet be convinced that it is within their power to actually do something??

Plant Power - Build Better Plants for More Carbon Capture or Bioenergy

WOW!!! Scientific American seems to have woken up to a fact probably well understood by many in the agriculture research area, and also by many farmers.

Better plants for carbon capture, biofuels, or for that matter almost anything else requires an investment in R and D, specifically some decent plant breeding and genetics. Along with some public policy work to see that the plants get used.

The article below appeared in http://www.sciam.com/ in mid October 2010, and at least the review does build a case for a decent and ongoing investment in plant research, something that seems to have been over looked in the rush to develop geosequestration of carbon. Algae also probably has a place, especially for coal power stations, as does agrichar.

The comments about a price for carbon are very US-centric, and reflect what I would consider as "head in the sand" thinking by many US policy gurus, as another study, on mainstream media reports today, has indicated that many countries already have an explicit or implicit carbon price, including China and the EC countries, and that the US is probably out of line in its current thinking.

The article really says little that is new, but getting this approach into the mainstream thinking is very necessary to ensure the $$$$ do flow into a very useful avenue of development, in a time when agriculture seems to be less endowed with investment for long term progress.

Review article below.

-----------------------------
Flower Power: Genetic Modification Could Amply Boost Plants' Carbon-Capture and Bioenergy Capacity
A new review sums up options for increasing global carbon-sequestration by flora, and speculates that genetically engineering crops and trees could enhance the process, trapping gigatons of the greenhouse gas as well as increasing bioenergy production.

Human activities currently add about nine gigatons of carbon to the atmosphere yearly.
Photosynthetic organisms on land and in the ocean absorb about five of those gigatons through the natural uptake of CO2, leaving to humans the task of dealing with the rest. But no matter how much carbon there is, capturing it and preventing it from reentering the atmosphere is an immense engineering challenge; even today's best technology is orders of magnitude less effective than photosynthesis at trapping atmospheric carbon.

A new analysis published in the October issue of Bioscience suggests that by 2050 humans could offset between five and eight gigatons of the carbon emitted annually by growing plants and trees optimized via genetic engineering both for fuel production and carbon sequestration.

Bioenergy crops represent an opportunity to mitigate atmospheric carbon dioxide in two separate ways, says lead author Christer Jansson, a senior staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's Earth Sciences Division. First, they are a carbon-neutral energy source that could offset the burning of fossil fuels. Second, "if they are the right kind of plants, they have a chance to transfer a lot of carbon underground for long-term sequestration," he says.

Plants take up CO2 and store carbon in their biomasses. Carbon can stay for decades or centuries in leaves, stems, branches, seeds and flowers aboveground, whereas carbon allocated to underground root systems is more apt to be transferred into the soil, where it can stay sequestered for millennia. Therefore, an ideal bioenergy plant would produce lots of aboveground biomass for fuel as well as have an extensive root system. Preliminary research indicates that genetic engineering approaches could be employed to enhance both these traits.

Using genetic modification to enhance photosynthesis and thus biomass yield is a realistic approach, says Stephen P. Long, a professor of crop sciences at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign who was not part of the study. Long notes that transgenic tobacco plants, with simple modifications applicable to other plants as well, have already been shown to be more productive. "We are in a position now where we certainly know enough to where we could engineer quite a few of these changes," he says.

Meanwhile, regarding the problem of coaxing plants to allocate more carbon to their root systems, Jansson says an important difference between perennial and annual plants is a good place to start. "Perennials are more efficient than annuals at hiding carbon underground," he says. That's because annuals, which make up most of the world's food crops, spend much more energy producing seeds, stems and leaves than for building their root systems. On the other hand, perennials like switchgrass and Miscanthus have more extensive root systems—necessary because they remain dormant for part of the year and then must grow up again from their roots.

Whereas it may be exciting to imagine a bioenergy or food crop that produces lots of aboveground biomass and has large, carbon-sequestering root systems, research into whether this goal is realistic is still in its early stages. "Perenniality is a complex trait," Jansson says. He suggests it may end up being easier to modify perennials so they possess desirable annual-like features, as opposed to the other way around—but it's too early to tell. For the short term Jansson is confident that science can modify plants so they are more drought resistant and salt tolerant. Crops that could be maintained with brine or brackish water, such as industrial wastewater or seawater, would help preserve freshwater supplies. "These are important traits that need to be introduced into food and bioenergy crops," Jansson says, adding that "we will see this sooner" than enhanced photosynthesis or perennials with annual traits and/or vice versa.

The authors stress that genetic engineering should not be viewed as a cure-all, but rather part of a larger breeding effort. Further, Jansson says, "One problem is that the different aspects we mention—increasing photosynthesis, improving bioenergy crop yield, and putting more carbon into the root systems—are highly interlinked, and thus not necessarily additive." It could be, for example, that a modifying a plant to grow more roots takes away aboveground biomass production. Again, research in this area is too preliminary to tell.

Allison Thomson, who studies climate change and land use at the Joint Global Change Research Institute in College Park, Md., also expressed the need for caution when interpreting the study's projections. They are valuable in principle, she says, but also based on many assumptions regarding future economic conditions, land availability, and the size of bioenergy's role in a larger future energy strategy. For example, she says, "you can't really say how much bioenergy we are going use if you're not also considering other available energy sources and how much they emit." Furthermore, she points out, whether or not there is a price for carbon, which is hard to account for at this point, will figure heavily into future energy scenarios.

Also important to consider are potential land-use issues related to increasing demand for food. "When we do modeling, that's the one demand you can't ignore," Thomson says. "People want to eat before they want bioenergy."Besides all the unknowns, there is also existing regulatory policy regarding genetically modified organisms, which imposes high costs of compliance, thereby making it difficult to assess whether the ideas discussed in the paper are all doable.

Long says: "The bottleneck and damper on all this is really, 'How do you get transgenics out there, and meet all the regulatory requirements and costs?'"

Soil Stability Enhanced by Using No-Till Agriculture

Nothing new in that statement, you say.

For users and advocates of the conservation farming approach, it would seem to be old knowledge. But similar outcomes might also be expected for areas where similar practices are now also being used. For example, use of recycled organics in transport corridors, rehabilitating mining sites with similar products and similar off farm uses.

A recently concluded 19 year study across a wide region of the US has delivered some quite definitive results. Using plant residues on the soil surface, along with no till farming delivers significant improvements in soil stability and resistance to erosion.

The "cover" term in the universal loss loss equation has been so modified as to bring modifications to soil loss. And as said above, the same should apply to other areas where surface cover with organic materials is practised.

read more here - http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/cm/news/2010/SoilStability/

The critical part is this - "No-till stores more soil carbon, which helps bind or glue soil particles together, making the first inch of topsoil two to seven times less vulnerable to the destructive force of raindrops than ploughed soil.

The structure of these aggregates in the first inch of topsoil is the first line of defense against soil erosion by water or wind. Understanding the resistance of these aggregates to the erosive forces of wind and rain is critical to evaluating soil erodibility. "

Get your soil cover in place.

Especially so in the tropics where erosion impacts from high intensity storms can create erosion problems very quickly. And it is a wise practice for many civil engineering developments as well.

Better Energy Efficiency in Buildings Mean BIG Energy Savings

Building energy management is one of the big issues in Australia's drive to improve carbon management.

A recent report by the Carbon Trust Australia is reported here
http://www.environmentalmanagementnews.net/storyview.asp?storyid=1035664&sectionsource=s0

and can be downloaded via a link in the news item. The report shows enormous potential for energy savings through building retrofits.

Another highly relevant report is also available at:
http://www.climateworksaustralia.com/low_carbon_growth_plan.html as either a summary or full report.

Both offer strong pathways to achieve large carbon savings. Efficiently and cost effectively!