<!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>Teddy, </DIV>
<DIV> I have read the article provided and found your
production levels with native acacia to be quite amazing. Correct me if I am
wrong. After doing some math with your numbers, am I
correct? 1 kg = 2.2 lbs, 1 short ton = 2000 lbs. Divide
acerage harvets production number by 6 years to get result. </DIV>
<DIV> You are
producing 2.2 short tons per acre/ per year of charcoal. </DIV>
<DIV> Reversing the equation. 2.2 tons charcoal at 30%
conversion rate = 7.3 tons of acacia produced per acre, per year, in 6 harvest
cycle. </DIV>
<DIV> Is this correct? </DIV>
<DIV> Wow. Here in Ohio USA we only figure on
1-2 tons wood per acre, per year, with typical hardwood scrub overgrowth
harvested for fireplace logs maybe every 20- 30 years. </DIV>
<DIV> I want to see what happens when we start to coppice
black locust like you do. My question is,will our numbers be as good? </DIV>
<DIV> If we use your numbers, a blast furance using 1000
tons of charcoal per day ( to use a round number) would need 165,000 acres
in charcoal production to keep up with demand. Still a lot of acerage to smelt
maybe 1000 tons of iron per day. When that production is first used as building
lumber, and then recycled into fuel, it does not seem so intimidating. In that
case the tranmsportation and harvesting costs are already paid for with the
first life cycle of the wood. </DIV>
<DIV> A study done 10 years ago, stated that we burry
1,000,000 tons of wood per year in landfills in only a 3 county area here around
Dayton, Ohio. That wood, converted to charcoal at 30% conversion rate,
would yield 300,000 tons of charcoal per year, Almost the same amount of
production figured above. Some fuel for thought. </DIV>
<DIV> Keep up the great work. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Dan Dimiduk </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </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>On Thu,
Nov 14, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Cookswell Jikos <SPAN dir=ltr><<A
title=mailto:cookswelljikos@gmail.com href="mailto:cookswelljikos@gmail.com"
target=_blank>cookswelljikos@gmail.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV class=im>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT face=Arial>OK.... as discouraging as
the facts may be, the facts are reality, and they must be dealt with to
avoid future problems.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT face=Arial>1: Can different species be
grown, that have higher Mean Annual Increments of growth?</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial>Yes - at least in East African drylands
- the traditional colonial methods of silviculture were focused on high land
pine and cypress plantations not indigenous dry land
adapted trees. (which now provides the feedstock for more of Kenyas
charcoal) Since 1994 we have been experimenting with different dryland
planting and agronomic techniques (please see <A
title=http://www.acts.or.ke/dmdocuments/PROJECT_REPORTS/PISCES_Sustainable_Charcoal.pdf
href="http://www.acts.or.ke/dmdocuments/PROJECT_REPORTS/PISCES_Sustainable_Charcoal.pdf"
target=_blank>http://www.acts.or.ke/dmdocuments/PROJECT_REPORTS/PISCES_Sustainable_Charcoal.pdf</A> pg.
7) and most of our findings so far have led us to belive that endimic tree
species managed in a holistic and permacutrual manner produce coppiced
'branch' charcoal with an excellent life cycle analysis
profile. </FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>