influence of biochar additions on net greenhouse gas ... · production (ug co 2 0.5g char-1 day-1)...
TRANSCRIPT
Influence of Biochar Additions on Net Greenhouse Gas Production
Kurt Spokas 1 and Don Reicosky
1 – USDA-ARS, Soil and Water Management Unit, St. Paul, MN2 – USDA-ARS, North Central Soil Conservation Laboratory, Morris, MN
Influence of Biochar Additions on Net Greenhouse Gas Production
and Don Reicosky 2
ARS, Soil and Water Management Unit, St. Paul, MNARS, North Central Soil Conservation Laboratory, Morris, MN
Biochar Research
➲ Benefits of biochar additions to oxisol soils are known
➲ What happens for other soils with the addition of biochars?
Biochar Research
Benefits of biochar additions to oxisol soils
What happens for other soils with the addition of biochars?
• Part of new ARS multi-location
Biochar and Pyrolysis Initiative
•6 ARS locations :
Ames, IA; Kimberly, ID; St. Paul, MN;
Big Spring, TX; Florence, SC; Prosser, WA.
Biochar Research
Big Spring, TX; Florence, SC; Prosser, WA.
• Fast pyrolysis char used in replicated field plots
•Continuous corn (same crop for comparison)
•In addition to following crop yield and
soil carbon:
� Soil gas concentrations and trace gas fluxes
� Seedling Emergence/Initial seedling growth rates
location
Biochar and Pyrolysis Initiative
; Kimberly, ID; St. Paul, MN;
Big Spring, TX; Florence, SC; Prosser, WA.
Biochar Research
Big Spring, TX; Florence, SC; Prosser, WA.
Fast pyrolysis char used in replicated field plots
Continuous corn (same crop for comparison)
In addition to following crop yield and
Soil gas concentrations and trace gas fluxes
Seedling Emergence/Initial seedling growth rates
Rosemount Biochar Field Trials
•Small scale triplicate plots (16’ x 16’)
Largely due to the limited availability of biochar.
(Application rate : 20,000 lbs/acre)
•Fast pyrolysis biochar (sawdust, CQuest
•With and without manure addition (5,000 lb/acre)
•Slow pyrolysis biochar (woodchip, Best
•Slow pyrolysis biochar (macadamia nut, Biochar
•Slow pyrolysis updraft gasifier (wood pellets, Chip
1-Names are necessary to report factually on available data; however, the USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the
standard of the product, and the use of the name by USDA implies no approval of the product to the exclusion of others
that may also be suitable.
•Larger strip plots (16’ x 93’)
•Hardwood charcoal (ground lump charcoal, Kingsford
•Slow pyrolysis biochar (macadamia nut, Biochar Brokers
•3 rates: 5,000, 10,000 and 20,000 lb/acre
Rosemount Biochar Field Trials
Small scale triplicate plots (16’ x 16’)
Largely due to the limited availability of biochar.
CQuestTM Dynamotive1)
With and without manure addition (5,000 lb/acre)
Slow pyrolysis biochar (woodchip, Best Energies1)
Slow pyrolysis biochar (macadamia nut, Biochar Brokers1)
(wood pellets, Chip Energy1) [Fall 2009]
Names are necessary to report factually on available data; however, the USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the
standard of the product, and the use of the name by USDA implies no approval of the product to the exclusion of others
Larger strip plots (16’ x 93’)
Hardwood charcoal (ground lump charcoal, Kingsford1)
Slow pyrolysis biochar (macadamia nut, Biochar Brokers1)
3 rates: 5,000, 10,000 and 20,000 lb/acre
Laboratory Studies
� Overview:
� 24 different biochars evaluated
� 11 different biomass parent materials
Represents a cross-� Represents a cross-available “biochars”
� C content
� N content
� Production Temperatures
Laboratory Studies
24 different biochars evaluated
11 different biomass parent materials
-sectional sampling of -sectional sampling of
1 to 84%
0.1 to 2.7%
Production Temperatures 350 to 850 C
BC # Parent Material Source
1 Corn stover Best Energies
2 Pine wood chip EPRIDA
3 Peanut hulls EPRIDA
4 Corn stover R. Brown – Iowa State
5 Corn stover EPRIDA
6 N/A Char C Group(BiosourceTM)
7 Turkey manureWoodchip
SWROC-Univ. of MN
8 Hardwood D. Laird (USDA-ARS)
9 Pine woodchip EPRIDA
10 Peanut hulls EPRIDA
11 Corn stover EPRIDA
12 Corn stover EPRIDA
13 Coconut shells(Activated)
Willinger Bros.
14 Woodchip (pellet) Chip Energy
15 Hardwood lump charcoal
Kingsford
16 Macadamia shells Biochar Brokers(EternaGreen™)
Pyrolysis Temp (oC)
C N O Ash Surface Area(m2 g-1)
815 45 0.5 1 55 4.4
465 75 0.3 9 6 0.1
481 59 2.7 12 15 1.0
500 25 0.6 5 69 4.2
410 42 1.0 11 54 2.2
465 43 2.2 N/A N/A 63.5
850 1 0.1 3 89 4.8
N/A 69 0.7 9 14 19.2
465 71 0.2 11 9 0.2
481 60 0.9 10 15 286
505 66 1.2 4 54 17.3
515 51 1.0 0 74 9.9
450 83 0.4 0 12 960
650 69 0.2 20 6 63
538 53 0.4 10 27 7.2
N/A 84 0.6 2 2 0.4
BC # Parent Material Source Pyrolysis Temp
17 Distillers grain (ethanol plant residues)
Illinois Sustainable Technology Center
(ISTC)
18 Distillers grain (ethanol plant residues)
ISTC
19 Corn cob ISTC
20 Corn cob ISTC
21 Wood waste (mixed) ISTC
22 Wood waste (mixed) ISTC
23 Algae Univ. of MN Hydrothermal carbonization
24 Sawdust Dynamotive(CQuest™)
Pyrolysis Temp (oC)
C N O Ash Surface Area(m2 g-1)
350 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
400 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
350 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
400 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
400 N/A N/A N/A N/A 23
500 N/A N/A N/A N/A 27
Hydrothermal carbonization
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.11
550 61 0.2 11 20 46
Weathering impactBC # Parent Material Pyrolysis
Temp (oC)C
3 Peanut hulls(fresh)
481 59
10 Peanut hulls (weathered)
481 66
Weathered char (1 yr on outdoor storage pile):
� Minor changes in composition data
� Loss of N � would indicate N is available
� Major change in surface area (286 times)
Weathering impactN O Ash Surface Area
(m2 g-1)
59 2.7 12 15 1.0
66 0.9 10 15 286
Weathered char (1 yr on outdoor storage pile):
Minor changes in composition data
would indicate N is available
Major change in surface area (286 times)
Laboratory Incubations
• Minnesota agricultural soil
•
Soil incubations used to assess the impacts of these 24 different biochars with soils from 3 different ecosystems:
•
• Wisconsin forest nursery soil
•
• California landfill cover soil
•
Laboratory Incubations
Minnesota agricultural soil
Waukegan silt loam
Soil incubations used to assess the impacts of these 24 different biochars with soils from 3
Waukegan silt loam
Wisconsin forest nursery soil
Vilas loamy sand
California landfill cover soil
Marina loamy sand
Triplicate Incubation SetSet # Biochar Amount
(g)
1 0.5
2 0.5
3 0.5 Agricultural soil (5g)
4 0.5 Forest nursery soil (5g)
5 0.5 Landfill cover soil (5g)
6 None Agricultural soil (5g)
7 None Forest nursery soil (5g)
8 None Landfill cover soil (5g)
9 (Control) None
Triplicate Incubation Set-upSoil Water (mL)
None 0
None 1.0
Agricultural soil (5g) 0.74
Forest nursery soil (5g) 0.60
Landfill cover soil (5g) 1.24
Agricultural soil (5g) 0.74
Forest nursery soil (5g) 0.60
Landfill cover soil (5g) 1.24
None 1.0
Assessment of Gas Production
• 5 g of soil mixed with 0.5 g biochar (10% w/w)
• Headspace periodically monitored with GC/MS
• 10 day pre-incubation
• Production rates estimated from the change in concentration with time.
• Length of incubations 25
• Requirement: O2 concentrations >15%
Assessment of Gas Production
5 g of soil mixed with 0.5 g biochar (10% w/w)
Headspace periodically monitored with GC/MS
incubation
Production rates estimated from the change in concentration with time.
Length of incubations 25 – 100 days
concentrations >15%
Pro
duction (ug C
O2 0
.5g c
har-1
day-1
)
2030405060708090
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Dry
Wet (1ml H2O/0.5 g)
Biochar CO
Control
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
CO
2 P
roduction (ug C
O
-60-50-40-30-20-10
01020
Red line = average soil basal respiration (3 different soils)9 above and 14 below soil average
Biochar CO2 Production
*
*
*
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
BC
-17
BC
-18
BC
-19
BC
-20
BC
-21
BC
-22
BC
-23
Red line = average soil basal respiration (3 different soils)9 above and 14 below soil average
Methane : Biochar alone P
rodu
ction (
ng C
H4
0.5
g c
har-1
d-1
)
4
20
30
40
50
Dry
Wet (1ml H2O/0.5 g)
Co
ntr
ol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
CH
4 P
rodu
ction (
ng C
H
-4
-2
0
2
Methane : Biochar alone
Dry
Wet (1ml H2O/0.5 g)
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
BC
-17
BC
-18
BC
-19
BC
-20
BC
-21
BC
-22
BC
-23
O P
roduction (
ng N
2O
0.5
g c
har-1
d-1
)
-2
0
2
4
6
N2O : Biochar alone
Only 4 biochars were significantly different than
control (no char) – 1 produced N
consumed N2O (sorption or denitrification?)
Contr
ol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
N2O
Pro
duction (
ng N
-6
-4
O : Biochar alone
Soil Average = 22 ng N2O /g/day
Only 4 biochars were significantly different than
1 produced N2O and 3
O (sorption or denitrification?)
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
BC
-17
BC
-18
BC
-19
BC
-20
BC
-21
BC
-22
BC
-23
Correction for Biochar production
(5
Corrrected Rate ProductionCO 22
soil
soilbiochar
g
CO=
+
soilbiocharCO
+
2 is the total CO2 production from the soil + biochar + water incubation
biocharCO2 is the total CO2 production (µg) at time t
dt is the time of sampling (days)
Correction for Biochar production
),
)t(
2
dsoil
biocharsoilCO−
from the soil + biochar + water incubation (µg CO2) at time dt
dt for the biochar + water incubation
Soil
Contr
ol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
CO
2 P
roduction
(ug C
O2g s
oil-1
d-1
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Uncorrected
Corrected
820/717 P
rod
uction
g s
oil-1
d-1
))
20
40
60
80
100
Soil
Co
ntr
ol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
CO
2 P
rod
uction
(ug
CO
2 g
so
il-1d
ay
-1)
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
So
il C
on
trol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
CO
2 P
rod
uction
(ug C
O2
g s
oil
-40
-20
0
20
CO2
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
Agricultural Soil
Forest Nursery Soil
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
Forest Nursery Soil
Landfill Cover Soil
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
-367
Pro
du
ction
g s
oil-1
d-1
)
200
300
400
500
Soil
Contr
ol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
CH
4 P
rod
uctio
n/O
xid
atio
n
(ng
CH
4 g
soil-1
d-1
)
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
Uncorrected
Corrected
So
il C
on
tro
l
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
CH
4 P
rod
uction
(ng C
H4 g
soil-1
d-1
)
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
So
il C
on
tro
l
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
CH
4 P
rodu
ction
(ng C
H4 g
soil
0
100
200
CH4Agricultural Soil
Forest Nursery Soil
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
Forest Nursery Soil
Landfill Cover Soil
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
Soil
Contr
ol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
N2O
Pro
du
ctio
n
(ng N
2O
g s
oil-1
d-1
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Uncorrected
Corrected
O P
rod
uction
(ng N
2O
g s
oil-1
d-1
)
0
1
2
15.8/15.2
So
il C
ontr
ol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
N2O
Pro
duction
(ng N
-2
-1
Soil
Con
trol
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
N2O
Pro
duction
(ng N
2O
g s
oil-1
d-1
)
0
100
200
300
400
N2O
BC
-13
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
Agricultural Soil
Forest Nursery Soil
380
BC
-13
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
Forest Nursery Soil
Landfill Cover Soil
BC
-13
BC
-14
BC
-15
BC
-16
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
CO
2 P
rod
uctio
n
(mg C
O2
/gso
il/d
ay)
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.2
O P
rodu
ctio
n
O/g
so
il/d
ay)
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Influence of biochar amount on GHG Production
Biochar Amount (g)
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
N2
O P
rodu
ctio
n
(ng
N2O
/g
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
CH
4 P
rod
uctio
n
(ng
CH
4/g
so
il/d
ay)
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Influence of biochar amount on GHG Production
Biochar Amount (g)
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
CO
NC
EN
TR
AT
ION
40
60
80
100
120
NH
4+
C
ON
CE
NT
RA
TIO
N
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.03.4 108
NO
3-
CO
NC
EN
TR
AT
ION
0
20
40
Soil
Con
tro
l
BC
-1
BC
-2
BC
-3
BC
-4
BC
-5
BC
-6
NO
2-
CO
NC
EN
TR
AT
ION
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
12.9
108 6.2
BC
-6
BC
-7
BC
-8
BC
-9
BC
-10
BC
-11
BC
-12
BC
-13
12.9 17.3
Conclusions� Positive effect observed so far in laboratory
� Reduction in N2O production potential
� Besides BC-14; No consistent trends in COacross soil types
� Majority reduced basal CO� Majority reduced basal CO
� BC-14 (wood pellet aerobic char) increased COproduction across all soils
� Majority of biochars reduced� Soil methanotrophs are the only known biological sink for
atmospheric methane
� Also reduced methanotroph activity (CH
ConclusionsPositive effect observed so far in laboratory
O production potential
14; No consistent trends in CO2 effects
basal CO respirationbasal CO2 respiration
14 (wood pellet aerobic char) increased CO2production across all soils
reduced CH4 oxidation activitySoil methanotrophs are the only known biological sink for
methanotroph activity (CH4 production)
Conclusions
� Not all biochars are the same:
Creation process, original feedstock,
temperatures, etc..
�Greenhouse gas production:
Complicated by biochar production,
release, or sorption release, or sorption
particularly important for CO
�Overall, greenhouse gas impacts function
of both char and the soil
Conclusions
Not all biochars are the same:
Creation process, original feedstock,
temperatures, etc..
Greenhouse gas production:
Complicated by biochar production,
release, or sorption – this is release, or sorption – this is
particularly important for CO2
Overall, greenhouse gas impacts function
char and the soil
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the cooperation:Dynamotive Energy SystemsFast pyrloysis char (CQuest™) through nonagreement
Best EnergiesSlow pyrolysis char through a nonSlow pyrolysis char through a non
Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC) [Univ. of Illinois]
Biochar Brokers
Chip Energy
Technical Support :
Martin duSaire, Tia Phan, Lindsey Watson, and Lianne Endo
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the cooperation:
Fast pyrloysis char (CQuest™) through non-funded CRADA
Slow pyrolysis char through a non-funded CRADA agreementSlow pyrolysis char through a non-funded CRADA agreement
Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC) [Univ. of Illinois]
Martin duSaire, Tia Phan, Lindsey Watson, and Lianne Endo