Commercial scale biochar field trial in Québec, Canada over two years

Barry HuskPresident, BlueLeaf Inc.

and

Julie Major, PhDConsultant

Background

• Blue Leaf is a social purpose corporation– Privately owned, for-profit– Goal is to bring about improvements to the

environment while being financially sustainable

– Revenues generated are reinvested in projects

• Has previously worked on reducing P pollution from agricultural land

Objectives

• Assess the practicality of using biochar in agriculture

• Determine benefits associated to applying biochar to soil– Effects on soil chemical, physical and

biological properties– Effects on crop yields

Trial location

Experimental setup• Experiment established in

spring 2008• Clay loam soil under

typical farmer management

• Historical high application of P through dairy manure

• Biochar was CQuestTM

from Dynamotiveppm<0.2Total Hg

ppm<1.5Total As

ppm<10Total Pb

ppm982Total N (Kjeldahl)%65Fixed C (ASTM D3172)

%24Volatile matter (ASTM D3175)

%9.8Liming value (CaCO3 equiv.)

% D.M.11Ash content280C/N

% D.M.73Total C7.6pH

%35Moisture content

UnitValueCharacteristic

Sorption of R134a by biochar

0.10%

1.00%

10.00%

100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300

Temperature Celsius

Ads

orpt

ion

of R

134a

- w

t %

Minimum CC#10Maximum CC#14Fast pyrolysis Char 1Fast pyrolysis Char 2Fast pyrolysis Char 3Fast pyrolysis Char 4Fast pyrolysis Char 5Fast pyrolysis Char 6U of Idaho - DynamotiveSteiner Corn Stover 400C N2Steiner Pine 500C N2Steiner Pine 500C SteamSteiner Peanut Hulls 500C SteamBlue Leaf #1 2Q2010Blue Leaf #2 2Q2010Blue Leaf #3 2Q2010

Range of CommercialLump charcoals for cookingin YELLOW

Experimental setup• This is NOT a standard, replicated and

randomized experiment

Treatments consist of two adjacent,10 X 100 m swaths

Biochar application• Estimated 30% loss during handling and

application• Target application rate: 5.6 t/ha, estimated actual

application rate: 3.9 t/ha

Biochar application• Soybean planted in 2008, mixture

of forage species in 2009• All field operations carried out by

farmer• Fertility managed with lime,

synthetic fertilizer and dairy manure according to governmental recommendations

• Very wet spring in 2009 resultedin late seeding and poorestablishment and early growth offorages

Data collection• Soil sampled 11 times over 2 growing

seasons– Biological, chemical and physical parameters

assessed– Many soil parameters also measured in the

field• Soybean plants harvested at maturity,

forage harvested twice– Some parameters also measured in the field– Soybean yield measured using a commercial

harvester

Results: soil physical parameters

• No trends for: soil temperature, resistance to penetration, soil moisture content

• Soil bulk density slightly greater with biochar

• Surface infiltration generally improved with biochar

7 July 08

28 July 08

27 Aug 08

17 Sep 08

5 Nov 08

25 May 09

14 Sep 09Su

rface

infil

tratio

n (in

ches

/h)

0

1

2

3

4

5

control biochar

Results: soil chemical parameters

• No clear differences or trends for total C, organic matter, total N, redox potential

• NH4-N, available K and Mg greater with biochar in 09

• pH, EC, NO3-N, available P and Ca greater in the control in 09

Results: soil biological parameters• No clear differences or trends in total and active

bacterial biomass, total and active fungal biomass, hyphal diameter, flagellate and ciliate protozoa, predatory and exclusive root feeder nematodes, root colonization by ectomycorrhizae, soil respiration

• Generally greater earthworm density with biochar

28 July 08

17 Sep 08

5 Nov 08

25 May 09

2 June 09

21 July 09

17 Aug 09

14 Sep 09

13 Oct 09Earth

wor

m d

ensi

ty (n

umbe

r per

cub

ic fo

ot)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

control biochar

Results: soil biological parameters

• Greater root colonization by endomycorrhizalfungi with biochar

• More bacterial feeder, fungal feeder, and fungal or root feeder nematodes with biochar

• Less amoebic protozoa with biochar

• Hypothesis that biochar provides a refuge for soil microbes seems to be supported by this data

Results: soybean crop• Leaf temperature lower on all dates measured• Taller plants above-ground but shorter taproots• Fewer seed numbers and seed weight per plant• Plant density greater by 35%

• Resulted in 20% greater yield measured by harvester

Results: forage crop• Taller oat plants with

biochar• Relative feed value slightly

lower with biochar in year 3, but 12% greater in year 3

• Oat biomass twice as large with biochar

• Total forage biomass apparently not significantly different

Comparisons to other studies• Laird in Iowa applied 9.8 and 18.4 t/ha

biochar– 15% increase in corn density– 4% improvement in corn yield

• Rondon et al. (2007) also observed greater shoot-to-root ratio in common beans with biochar

Overall conclusions• Yield improvements cannot be clearly

attributed to differences in nutrient availability

• Yield improvement in soybean were due to greater plant density

• Greater colonization by ectomycorrhizaemay have played a role

• Total soil C was not measurably greater with an estimated 3.9 t/ha biochar application

New experiments in 2010

• Testing 3 different biochar materials at 5 and 10 t/ha– Materials selected after analyzing according to

governmental recommendations

New experiments in 2010

• Testing biochar application with manure

New experiments in 2010

• Effect on soil P pools studied in detail, as well as and P fluxes with surfaces runoff

Thank you!

Merci!