Biochar additions to soils:Biochar additions to soils: expected effects and

preliminary results of field experiments in the

Nature and Landscape

experiments in the Netherlands

Pleasure GreenBiochar – Climate Savior or Bluff

Package? Package?

Berlin 5 October 2011Environment Berlin, 5 October 2011Romke Postma & Kor Zwart

& others

Environment

Sustainable Agriculture

& others

Importance of organic matter agriculture

for soil qualityO i (OM) l k l i h i f Organic matter (OM) plays a key role in the maintenance of soil quality aspects, such asSoil fertilitySoil fertility

Nutrient (N, P and S) supply by decomposition of OM Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC), for Ca, Mg, K and ..

Ph i l il liPhysical soil quality Stability of soil aggregates

Water holding capacity Water holding capacity

Biological soil quality Supplying C and energy to pp y g gy (micro)organisms

Situation in EU and the Netherlands

agriculture

Situation in EU and the Netherlands

Th d li i i i i h f The decline in organic matter is a serious threat for soil quality in most countries (..)

This risk seems to be relatively low in the Netherlands This risk seems to be relatively low in the Netherlands, but regional differences occur (see figures)

Reijneveld et al. (2009)

Possible contribution of biochar agriculture

to maintain soil qualityPart of strategy that aims to keep organic

matter contents at a desired level Important elements:Soil improvers/conditioners (e.g. compost, biochar)p ( g p , )

Organic matter (OM) content & stabilityNutrient content

C t ti ( t l t h ) Crop rotation (e.g. root crops, cereals, catch crops) Fate of crop residues (straw) Tillage practices (e g minimum tillage) Tillage practices (e.g. minimum tillage)

Biochar properties: C and N content

agriculture

Biochar properties: C and N content

S ti f bi h d f i Some properties of biochars made from various originating materials. Based on Chan et al. (20071), 20082)) and Harris et al. (20073)).

green waste 1)

poultry manure 2)

poultry manure 2)

wood chips 3)

poultry manure 3)

C g C/kg 360 380 330 720 – 820 390 – 460C, g C/kg 360 380 330 720 820 390 460 N, g N/kg 1.8 20 8.5 2.0 – 2.5 31 – 35 C/N-ratio 200 19 39 300 – 400 10 – 15 CEC 240 - - 50-100 380-600

Large differences, depending on feedstock used C f diff i C/N i f

CEC (mmol+/kg)

240 - - 50-100 380-600

Consequences of differences in C/N-ratio for bioavailability?

Biochar properties: CEC

agriculture

Biochar properties: CEC

CEC of biochar in comparison with organic matter CEC of biochar in comparison with organic matter Effect of pH and ageing of biochar

Material CEC pH-KCl 4,5 CEC pH-KCl 7-7.5p ,(mmol+/kg)

p(mmol+/kg)

Organic matter (humus) 500 2750 Fresh biochar(1) 8 8

(1)

CEC of OM and Biochar increases with pH which might

1 yr old biochar(1) 31 73130 yr old biochar(1) 390 1160

CEC of OM and Biochar increases with pH, which might be expected

CEC of fresh biochar was very low, but it strongly i d ith increased with age

CEC of aged biochar is somewhat lower than OM/humus

Biochar – soil interaction: CEC agriculture

after the application to soil

Effect of biochar type and application rate on CEC of soil

eCEC (mmol+/ kg soil) Biochar – type at increasing biochar doses (Mg/ha)

0 10 25 50 100 A) Biochar from green waste+) 83 80 - 88 103 B)

+) average of 2 treatments, A) Chan et al. (2007), B) Chan et al. (2008)

B) Biochar from poultry manure 91 109 128 - 151 B) Activated biochar from poultry manure 111 132 172 - 195

Significant increase in CEC at high application rates Effects of feedstock: Biochar from animal manure/green Effects of feedstock: Biochar from animal manure/green

waste

Experimental research with agriculture

pbiochar in the Netherlands

Fate of biochar as a otential by roduct of bioenergy Fate of biochar as a potential by-product of bioenergy production – Possibilities for soil amendment? Effects on C sequestration and N2O emissionq 2

Incubation experiments in the lab (Cayuela et al., 2010)

Biochar production from animal manure as a way to improve the value of surpluses of animal manure improve the value of surpluses of animal manure fractions (dry fraction of digested pig slurry) Optimization of the pyrolysis process Inventory of the quality of the produced chars (Ehlert &

Oenema, 2010)

Field experiments with biochar as a soil improver – Field experiments with biochar as a soil improver –effects on physical soil quality

Bioenergy and its by-products

BIODIESEL BIODIESEL(from algae)

ALGAE RESIDUE

agriculture

BIOGAS(anaerobic digestion)

(1st generation) (from algae)

PALM OIL CAKE,

BIOMASS

digestion),RAPESEED MEAL DIGESTATE• Less available C

• More recalcitrant CBIOMASS• More N, nutrients• Toxic compounds?

BIOETHANOLBIO-OILSYNGAS(pyrolysis) BIOETHANO (1st generation)(pyrolysis) BIOETHANOL

(2nd generation)BIOCHAR

DDGSNON-FERMENTABLES

Tons of by-products generated

agriculture

o s o by p oduc s ge e a edper ton of fuel

Biodiesel (1st generation) rapeseedmeal 1.6Bioethanol (1 i ) wheat DDGS 1 5Bioethanol (1st generation) wheat DDGS 1.5Bioethanol (1st generation) sugarcane meal 0.8Bi h l f bl 7 4Bioethanol (2nd generation) non-fermentables 7.4Biogas (anaerobic digestion) digestate 3.5Bio-oil (pyrolysis) biochar 1.0Biodiesel (algae) algae residue 1.2

Possible uses of BBPs Biorefinery?

NOW FUTUREagriculture

Animal Feed?

Waste EXPANSION OF

BIOENERGY

Agricultural Soil

Disposal?BIOENERGY

SECTORgAmendment?Marketing of by-products is

critical for biofuel industry

agriculture

Second generation biofuels outperform first generation in C sequestration and N2O emission

Ch h hi h C t ti d l N O i iCayuela et al., GCB Bioenergy 2009

Chars have high C-sequestration and low N2O emission

Dynamics of decomposition and agriculture

y paccumulation of SOM and BC in soil

Amount of C, kg C content %

500

600

700

800

900

1000

BiocharSOMpeatcompostcattle slurry

Amount of C, kg

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

5,0

sandy soil+ compost+biochar

C content, %

0

100

200

300

400

500

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

crop residue

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

time, years

6

7

8reclaimed peatold marine claysandriverine clay

C content, %

0,00 20 40 60 80 100

Time, in years

Decomposition of organic products

Effect of repeated application of BC

2

3

4

5

6 riverine clayloessyoung marine clay

organic products

Decomposition of organic C in

application of BC and compost on the course of soil C

0

1

0 20 40 60 80 100time, in years

organic C in Dutch soil types

Biochar from animal manure: agriculture

effects of pyrolysis conditions

Effect of pyrolysis temperature, duration and O2

Ehlert & Ehlert & Oenema, 2010

Relative biochar yield decreased with increasing temperature Effects of pyrolysis duration and presence/absence of O2

were marginal

Biochar from animal manure:

agriculture

Biochar from animal manure: extractable C and N-mineralization

E l C C Hot Water Extractable C (HWC) decreased with increasing pyrolysis temperature

Anaerobic N mineralization was the lowest in 400 oC chars: at Anaerobic N mineralization was the lowest in 400 oC-chars: at lower and higher temperatures N-mineralization was higher

Ehlert & Oenema, 2010

Ehlert & Oenema, 2010

agriculture

Field experiments: locations L l Locations differed in soil type and

crop rotation Crop rotations were representative

1

Crop rotations were representative for the region 2

3year location

1 2 3

2010 s.wheat s.beet s.barley

2011 potatoes potatoes s.beet

2012 s.barley s.barley potatoes

2013 s.beet potatoes carrots

Field experiments: soil properties

agriculture

Field experiments: soil properties and experimental set up

l l Biochar additions varied between locations (table) Charcoal, activated carbon and torrefied material Control (no soil i ro er) and reference (co ost) Control (no soil improver) and reference (compost) Mineral fertilizers applied according to recommendations

Soil properties Type and amount of biochar applied, in Mg per ha

Loca-tion

Soil type

pH- KCl

clay %

OM, %

Crop 2010

Charcoal Activated b

Torrefied i lKCl % % carbon material

1 KW Light clay 7.0 26 3.5 spring wheat

5 5

2 VM Reclaimed 5 2 2 11 6 sugar beets 5 5 152 VM Reclaimed peat

5.2 2 11.6 sugar beets 5 5 15

3 LS Silt clay 6.8 17 2.0 spring barley

2.5 & 5

Field experiments:

agriculture

Field experiments: results 2010

Small and non significant effects of biochar on crop yield Small and non significant effects of biochar on crop yield and/or quality

It is expected that effect will increase after several yearsp yTreatment Location 1 –

grain yield wheat Mg/ha

Location 2 – fresh weight sugar beet, Mg/ha

Location 3 – grain yield barley Mg/hawheat, Mg/ha Mg/ha barley, Mg/ha

1. Control 8.00 61.7 9.20 2. Charcoal – 2.5 Mg/ha 9.02 3 Ch l 5 M /h 8 16 59 5 9 113. Charcoal – 5 Mg/ha 8.16 59.5 9.114. Activated carbon 8.40 58.6 5. Torrefied material 61.4 6. compost, 6 Mg DM/ha 7.84 60.5 9.02LSD 0.05 0.38 4.2 0.65

agriculture

Plans for 2011-2013 Continuation of field experiments Continuation of field experiments Additional biochar treatment (loc. 2) Further characterization of biochars applied Further characterization of biochars applied Monitoring of crop yield and quality Monitoring of chemical physical and biological soil Monitoring of chemical, physical and biological soil

properties at location 2: Chemical: CEC, OM%, pH, nutrient availability Physical: bulk density, pF-curves, infiltration rate Biological: C and N mineralization, microbial density of

bacteria and fungi, N2O emissionbac e a a d u g , 2O e ss o