<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.17097" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>Hi Dr Karve,</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=2>As this particular line of discussion is
relevant to work of my associates, I would like to offer some comments that may
be of interest to yourself and others who use the term biochars for soils
enhancement. I also have personal interest as a organic citrus grower (in past
years), and there is some relevance to put reason behind certain
failures.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>>we have tested wood vinegar as a pesticide on
plants. It works in the<BR>>case of moderate infestation, but if the
infestation is severe,<BR>>especially with sucking pests such as mealy bugs
and woolly aphids,<BR>>one has to use a conventional organo-phosphatic
systemic insecticide.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>As an acid, wood vinegar cannot penetrate
the waxy type coating of "some" pests. From experience (not with wood vinegar),
you need to add a surfacicant, which wets the infestation through it's
protective coating. This is a simple as adding a liquid detergent to the
spray mix. I have no recommended ratio, but you can see it work when the spray
wets the insect. Most phenolic compounds will kill or upset the insect to detach
and leave the feeding surfaces.</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> </DIV>
<DIV>>Biochar has never worked in our local soils, which have pH
higher<BR>>than 8.5. Wood vinegar has a number of organic acids in it, which
may<BR>>be used by the soil micro-organisms as their carbon source, so
that<BR>>they multiply their numbers. That the population density of
soil<BR>>micro-organisms is positively correlated with soil fertility, is
a<BR>>known and accepted fact. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>If the soils are already containing high levels of carbon or
micro-organisms, what you say has relevance, but key here in this type of
discussion, is the type of char being used. Most char readily available as a
waste stream and dumped as soil enhancement, is of the wrong type to provide a
habitat for soil micro-organisms, being made to maximize the carbon content and
density for smokeless cooking. This is the type needed for carbon sequestrian to
maximize the reduction of atmospheric carbon. Soil bacteria on the other hand,
need safe habitats, and this type of carbon is of the activated type, with huge
internal surface porosities. Other than providing a habitat, the carbon also
provide the means of holding nutrients in soils that might not retain them if
applied just to the soils.</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Therefore, any treatment, which causes the<BR>soil microbe population to
rise, would automatically result in higher<BR>soil fertility.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>I am 100% behind your conclusion, and hope the work that many are
devoting their soil research work, can add to their knowledge from the flow
on effect, of gasification technology.</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Hope this might be of interest.</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Doug Williams,</STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Fluidyne Gasification.</STRONG></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>