Post on 23-Jun-2018
transcript
Biochar and Soil Health
Johannes LehmannDepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University
Biochar InterestEarly reports: Encyclopedia of Agriculture (Miyazaki, 1697) Terra Preta (Orton, 1870; Hartt, 1880; Sombroek, 1966) Charcoal use in soil (Allan, 1846; Trimble, 1851; Liebig, 1878)
withoutbiochar
withbiochar
Retan 1915 Forestry Quarterly
©J.
Maj
or, 2
003
“Terra Preta”‘normal’ soil
Terra Preta
‘normal’ soil
(Central Amazon, Brazil)
©B
. Gla
ser,
2001
The Terra Preta - Biochar Story
“Naturally” Biochar-rich and Fertile Soils
Downie et al 2011, AEE 140, 137-147Mao et al., 2012, Env Sci Techn, publ online
Iowa Mollisol: 50% (of OC) biocharAustralia
Black Carbon Rich Soils Globally
Black Carbon Rich Soils Globally
Krull et al, 2008, in: Nova Sci Publ
Biochar Conversion
Lehmann et al., 2010, in: Imperial College Press, London
H2OCO, CO2, CH4volatile organics O
O
OH
O O
O
OCH2
OH
OHOH
O OH
OH
O
OH
O+ CH3
HO
CH+
O
OH
O
OH
HOHO
OH
OHO
OOH
OH
OH
n
O
H
HH
H
OH
H OH
O
OH
O OH
H
HH
OH
H
OH
OH
OH
Cellulose, Lignin etc. Amorphous Carbon Turbostratic Carbon
O/C 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1H/C 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.3Temperature ~200°C ~400°C ~600°C
Relative Proportion
Pyrolysis Intensity
Biochar Persistence
Biochar persistence about 1-2 orders of magnitude greater than uncharred feedstock (Kuzyakov et al., 2009; Zimmerman, 2010)
Biochar Persistence in Soil
H/Corg ratio
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
MR
T (y
ears
)
100
1000
10000(a)
0.48
MRT=6439 e-2.8(H/Corg)
r2=0.12n=47, p<0.05
H/Corg
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2B
C10
0 (%
)0
20
40
60
80
100(c)
Regression:BC100=-30.1(H/Corg) +105r2=0.44n=47, p<0.01
Threshold:BC100=-73(H/Corg) +116
Lehmann et al, forthcoming
Biochars with low H/Corg ratios have high persistenceBiochars made at >500ºC from wood has H/Corg <0.48
Biochar Properties and Agronomic Value
Corn greenhouse experimentUpstate NY loamy soil (no significant fertility constraints)Eight different feedstocksFour different temperatures (300-600°C)
Rajkovich et al., 2012, BFS 48, 271–284
Dependency on Biochar Properties
Dairy Manure Food Waste
Paper Mill Waste
PoultryControl 100
0.20.5
2.0
7.0
Tota
l Bio
mas
s (g
pot
-1)
0
5
10
15
20
300ºC
20 Corn greenhouse trialUpstate NY loamy soilN=2 (mean ±SE)
Biochar application rate (% w/w)
Control
Rajkovich et al., 2012, BFS 48, 271–284
Production Temperature vs Feedstock
Mean
Poultry manure 16.8 A
Corn stover 15.4 B
Hazelnut shells 14.3 C
Dairy manure 14.2 C
Oak 13.8 CD
Paper waste 13.7 CD
Pine 13.5 D
Food waste 10.3 E
Mean
500°C 14.4 A
600°C 14. AB
400°C 13.8 BC
300°C 13.7 C
Rajkovich et al., 2012, BFS 48, 271–284
Production Temperature vs Feedstock
Effects df MS df MS F value P
Effect Effect Error Error
Feedstock (F) 7 109.3 128 1.58 69.2 0.0000
Pyrolysis temperature (PT) 3 7.8 128 1.58 5.0 0.0028
Application rate (AR) 3 133.7 128 1.58 84.6 0.0000
F PT 21 8.3 128 1.58 5.2 0.0000
F AR 21 29.8 128 1.58 18.9 0.0000
PT AR 9 3.5 128 1.58 2.2 0.00235
F PT AR 63 5.1 128 1.58 3.2 0.0000
Rajkovich et al., 2012, BFS 48, 271–284
Production Procedure vs Feedstock
Food
Food
Cocon
ut
Food
FoodOak
Woo
d
Paper
Contro
l
PineOak
Hazeln
ut
Corn
Pine
Paper
Hazeln
ut
Oak
Leav
es
Pine
Paper
Kuikui
Hardw
ood
Switchg
rass
Pine
Dairy
PinePine
Dairy
Brush
Woo
d
Oak
Dairy
Hazeln
ut
Hazeln
ut
Dairy
Grass
Soybe
an
Dairy
Poultry
Dairy
Mixtur
e
Peanu
t
Rice hu
sk
Paper
PoultryCor
n
Softwoo
d
Corn
Corn
Corn
Mixtur
e
Poultry
Switchg
rass
Poultry
Poultry
Tota
l Bio
mas
s (g
pot
-1)
0
5
10
15
20
25ControlSlow pyrolysisFlash pyrolysisFast pyrolysisUpdraftTorrefactionGasificationActivated carbon
*
*
* * ***** * ***
** * ****
**
Rajkovich et al., 2012, BFS 48, 271–284
Biochar Properties and Agronomic Effects
Slow pyrolysis
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
pH K
Cl
4
6
8
10
12
cow manureannual biomasswoody biomasshigh-ash waste
(a) Ash (% w/w)
Ash (% w/w)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60pH
KC
l
4
6
8
10
12
(b)
cow manureannual biomasswoody biomasshigh-ash waste
Arrows from lowest to highest temperature within a given feedstock
Ash (% w/w)
Enders et al.,2012, Biores. Techn. 114, 644-653
Biochar Properties and Agronomic Effects
Van Zwieten et al., 2010, Plant and Soil 327:235–246
Australia10 t/ha biochar from paper mill waste+ wood chips (550°C; pH 9.4; 8.2)
Cheng et al, 2008, GCA, 72, 1598-1610
Biochar and Nutrient Retention
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
0
50
100
150
200
250
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
0
50
100
150
200
250
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
50
100
150
200
250
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
50
100
150
200
250
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
50
100
150
200
250
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
pH
Surf
ace
char
ge (m
mol
e kg
C-1
)
New-BCHF
BC30
BC70 QC
NY
BC-HA
New-BCGW
CT
Negative chargePositive charge
Point of zeronet charge(PZNC)
>2000
<20 >7
<3
130-year-old Biochar(from pig iron production) in comparison to biochar made with traditional kilns
Biochar and Nutrient Retention
Liang et al., 2006, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 70: 1719-1730
Organic Carbon (mg g-1)
0 10 20 30
Cat
ion
Exc
hang
e C
apac
ity (m
mol
c kg-1
)
0
100
200
300
r2=0.909CEC=2.81C+9.1
r2=0.784CEC=8.60C-18.6
Anthrosols
Adjacent Soils
DSACULGHAT
Other Anthrosols (Sombroek et al., 1993)
Biochar-rich terra preta soils
Biochar-poor soils
Laird et al, 2010, Geoderma 158, 436-442
Biochar Properties and Nutrient Leaching
Typic Hapludoll, IowaHardwood charcoalColumn experiment, n=6
Biochar Effects on N Use Efficiency
Corn field experimentBiochar application in 2007Corn stover biochar (550°C)Nitrogen study in 2009N-15 labeled NH4 (10 atom%)N=3
Guerena et al., 2013, Plant Soil
Year Secondary N fertilizer
Total N uptake (kg total N ha-1)
(% of recommended
fertilizer application)
0 t ha-1 12 t ha-1 p (biochar effect)
2007 50 55.69 46.61 0.5996 100 68.77 58.68 0.2596
2008 50 78.26 80.44 0.8683 100 116.22 116.28 0.9958
2009 50 72.88 69.55 0.7416 100 112.28 121.58 0.4565 2010 50 97.50 87.82 0.7899 100 113.01 116.23 0.7294 p (N effect)
0.0117 0.0048
Biochar Effects on N Use Efficiency
Guerena et al., 2013, Plant Soil
One order of magnitude greater NO3 than NH4leaching
More organic N leaching than NH4 leaching
Biochar Effects on N Use EfficiencyOrganic Nitrogen Retention in Soil?
*
Guerena et al., 2012, Plant Soil
Equilibrium concentration (mg N L-1)
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5
Adso
rbed
DO
N (m
g N
g-1
)
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Control (0 t ha-1)Biochar (12 t ha-1)
y = 4.60x - 16.2r2 = 0.76
y = 4.66x - 24.3r2 = 0.30
Biochar Effects on N Use Efficiency
Van Zwieten et al., 2010, AJSR
Similar plant growth at lower N application
Biochar Effects on Denitrification
N2O emission decrease by 10-90% in 14 different agricultural soils
In 10 out of the 15 measured soils, also the total N denitrified between 4 and 232%
Cayuela et al., 2013, sumitted
Fluxes of N2 and N2O when the difference between biochar and control N2O fluxes was maximum**
Soil
N2 (mol kg-1 soil h-1)
N2O (mol kg-1 soil h-1)
N2O/(N2 + N2O)
Control Biochar Control Biochar Control Biochar
Elba
2.75 3.03
17.39 17.99
0.864 0.856
Lins 0.06 0.06 2.26 0.44 0.972 0.850
Arkport 15.77 4.82 0.54 0.09 0.053 0.038
Lentiscosa 3.41 23.73 4.45 2.34 0.550 0.159
Tioga 0.12 0.14 1.43 0.38 0.820 0.651
Howard 1.23 2.08 7.46 9.39 0.793 0.766
Secanos 5.23 0.76 3.64 0.61 0.443 0.394
Cabezo 10.95 4.29 1.74 0.67 0.295 0.142
Hudson A 0.22 0.22 0.36 0.48 0.607 0.291
Madalin 0.58 0.97 3.64 0.17 0.795 0.130
Niagara 0.41 1.06 18.53 9.10 0.971 0.854
Hudson B 3.59 4.04 7.28 4.61 0.643 0.511
Costa 7.79 14.25 5.67 2.36 0.458 0.179
Coronela 14.49 2.26 9.99 1.47 0.468 0.244
Guarapuava 0.17 0.09 1.63 0.14 0.782 0.447
Values are the mean of 4 replicates.
Biochar Effects on DenitrificationReason for decreases in denitrification
Cayuela et al., 2013, sumitted
-0.4 1.0
-0.6
0.8
Total N denitrified (N2 + N2O) decreases
ratio N2O/(N2 +N2O) decreases
Cumulative N2O decreases
Tsand
T silt
TclayDOC
pH
NO3-
NH4+
Lins
Arkport
Secanos
Tioga
Lentisc
Guarap
CabezoHoward
HudsonA
Niagara
Coronela
Madalin
HudsonB
Costa
Biochar Effects on Soil Biota
Lehmann et al, 2011, Soil Biol Biochem 43, 1812–1836
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
• Microorganisms observed on biochar surfaces
• Total microbial biomass increases in most studies
• Effects largely unexplored
Biochar Effects on Plant Disease
Elmer and Pignatello, 2011, Plant Disease 91, 960-966
Fusarium on asparagus
Biochar Effects on Plant Disease
Elad et al, 2010, Phytopathology 100, 913
Grey mold on tomatoArea under disease progression
Several studies have shown disease reductions with biocharadditions.Mechanisms unclear, longevity of effect unquantified
Biochar Products
Biochar as a System
Biochar Systems – Beyond Material