<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23536"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>
<DIV>Hi Tom, all, </DIV>
<DIV> Biochar has it's place growing plants. Like
everything else, there is no one consistent solution for soil problems. It takes
testing and balancing soil to the environment and plants grown to achieve
success. Sometimes it seems more art than science because it is not always easy
to collect complete data in a real world environment. Weather and climate are
always changing. Where soils are the most in need of improvement, the cost and
availability of lab tests are often prohibitive. Trial and error experiments may
often be the best solution. Why cook charcoal from lower quality and green
feedstocks when composting can make better use of it? </DIV>
<DIV> While the study, experimentation, and use of
biochar for plants is worth while, it should not be a distraction from the best
large scale use for charcoal. </DIV>
<DIV> The guaranteed best use for char is to
replace rock coal dug from the ground. Even if you dispute climate science
theories, you cannot dispute: total environmental destruction, depletion of
coal reserves, heavy metal and radiation leaks, methane releases, toxic ash
and coal dust piles, dangerous occupations, and collapsing mine tunnels. </DIV>
<DIV> On the positive note, char can be made from waste,
reducing methane and CO2 releases, reducing landfill space. Even the production
of char can be energy producing. Also gases and valuable chemicals can be
produced. This is the way of the future. I don't think we will find large
accumulations of fossil hydrocarbons outside our planet anytime soon. </DIV>
<DIV> Maybe this helps sum it up. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Dan Dimiduk </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 12/4/2013 9:54:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
linvent@aol.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>Bio Char has limited and spotty benefits to the soil. If the soil is
deficient in zinc, adding a carbon plus other materials other than zinc merely
dilutes the zinc and hurts the plant, other nutrients suffer similarly.
Nitrogen is another victim of the use of bio char as the carbon in it depletes
the nitrogen while it is being consumed and converted by the microbes in the
soil. </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WHITE-SPACE: pre" class=Apple-tab-span></SPAN>The low cation
exchange of bio char or compost also limits the nutrient releasing to the
plant. </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="WHITE-SPACE: pre" class=Apple-tab-span></SPAN>It is
unfortunate that low carbon conversion gasifiers or pyrolyzers may have to
dispose of a major energy source, fixed carbon, in the use of bio char, as it
represents some 30% or more of the input energy as fixed carbon to a
conversion system. </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; CLEAR: both; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><FONT
class=Apple-style-span face=arial>Sincerely,</FONT><BR>
<DIV><FONT class=Apple-style-span face="'Comic Sans MS', sans-serif">Leland T.
"Tom" Taylor</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT class=Apple-style-span
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thermogenics
Inc. </FONT></DIV></DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>