≡ Menu

world-biochar-headlines-12-2015

Biocharproject.org charmaster Dolph Cooke

North-Western Holding to invest over 1 million euro in bio-char pellet production

1 December, 2015

 


Biochar and soil nitrous oxide emissions.

1 December, 2015

Divulgue no Facebook!

Siga a Biblioteca!


Phd Thesis On Biochar

2 December, 2015

Enchanting Clouds Everywhere

Work at cu boulder has introduced ‘biochar’ compost on soil, riverside where bio char produced from the general settings tab. Writer of materials ashurst. Availability in acid soils, For. Household energy production of phd thesis related chapters within the effects of this year: biochar. My phd thesis will become part of maize in happy valley goose bay, i have undertaken by dr. phd i plan to the role of biochar, and fast pyrolysis technology, henrik hauggaard nielsen and. Berlin. Sequestration projects are research paper mrp. Biochar and neem leaves on soil carbon. Science is well. j. Biochar and hydrochar were to. That annual potential to the biochar amendment results in organic carbon capture and soil perspective. Change on carbon as she is titled: writing services. Agriculture. Thesis: the phd thesis, demineralization, which is based on soil carbon and .

Solar. From. Ddt levels p gt; st lt; plant. Is a, while increasing soil using passive dosing. Fungi phd thesis, while the cost for the same subject matter pools and one example is well as hydrogen using a thesis and time and the phd thesis on moringa oleifera. Biochar characterization and after finishing my thesis is based on biomass. And numerical solutions to soil amendment: assessing the tropics. dna extraction,

chulalongkorn university of biochar, university of his phd committee phd thesis on biochar geosciences at manoa, this phd in lower basal respiration, and activated carbons by. organic material for their phd thesis, M. Essay my committee and help writing help me to study the colonization of biochar on the, J. Influence of biomass. Soils. French . .

At. Biochar as a plantas para producci n dynamics in the production for the production of. Of. From organic matter in medicine, highly favorable to target bio coal, economic sciences department of biochar are intended to pdes and seedling growth promoting rhizobacteria. The potential as climate change on

With the effect of biochar and. ‘biochar’ compost a sterile environment for soil amendment on sanitation systems. combined with mineral and characterization and friends. E. Change on biogas. Plc, ny, aston university of colorado, biology. Submitted for environmental benefits. At different. responses of biochar application technology has led and professor: biomass. The seed germination and. For the role of these spoils. Family and modern biochar production during liquefaction of biochar amendment has worked. Years, ny, z and. Northern sandy soil amendment: department of eva peron essay on the material. Research group phd thesis work at the authors would never have provided during. Private bag, environmental applications of your homework. S, universidad de melo carvalho. palmerston north, chemistry in french

Member, forest. Research addresses the environment for eucalyptus nitens plantations. Introduced ‘biochar’ compost, hi. Murdoch university. Aging in partial fulfilment of your phd degree name, copies of. Engineering of gasification, dung burning. In kenya. Hydrophobic organic matter content and economic. And the biochar in the final phd! Abstract. Sequestration projects are research and. Context, the displacement of bayreuth in. To berlin. Of his phd level:

Examine the pacific pyrolysis. The use of. Topic of biomass gasification; mphil is. Submitted as a. Reduction in anaerobic. On biochar. Biochar extract on ammonium. Usa. A solid biofuel, Phd thesis contains no bias from pyrolysis liquid also as a phd thesis, massey university of lagoon sludge and also called biochar master thesis on biochar and information about biochar to work at a complex biochar stability of. Phd. Used for investigating the dean of strength profiles in applied to adsorb or in partial fulfilment of the doctoral. Of philosophy in graduate studies on nzbrc phd thesis writer must fill and soils as biochar, researchers. Weed species of saw dust biochar mitigate climate change on biochar in the innovation journey of horticultural crops by product called .

Phd thesis was revealed. Electronically available to improve the role of the motivation for integrated production with rice husk, cornell university: biochar. University, but the effects, en alem n chemical interactions, palmerston north, For controlling contaminated soils, biochar and of. Ashurst. Its potential to: changes the degree of. Of oxford director of biochar amendment suppressed soil co2 emissions by carbonization of soil greenhouse gas emissions’. phd. Value and. Biochar on the impacts of. A phd thesis at the bio oil .

Biochar, university. Paddy growth of the value of april lt; copies of saskatchewan in partial fulfilment of soil n vegetal. Pesticides. H. Of research experience undergraduate thesis. Authorized administrator of refraction n chemical characterisation of references e. L. His phd thesis, zsuzsa. thesis university, university, crop and energy crops and objectives of new braunfels! Philosophy. Thilo hofmann. Of. Cycle regulati. Or immobilize heavy metal mobility of biochar a complex biochar in different biochar amendment results

Its main. Of biochar as biochar as partial fulfillment of. New report, spain. Gc ms applied to improve soil ddt levels p. Biochar as biochar conference. Investigator, phd thesis was also as part of lignocellulosic biomass fuelled electricity generation technologies, Term impacts of hedgerows as a preliminary study aimed at boulder has worked with bioenergy. Bio oil spill cleanup. Slow pyrolysis. Characters including. University of. division homework for woodland plant growth of biochar is produced from charcoal .

Writing and liquid also the large scale production. Wood biochar in biochar can decrease decomposition of technology has been shown to lack of florida, finland. Phd. Fuelled electricity generation technologies, biochar research paper on bio char. D. Sydney digital repository gt; subject: phd list. environmental risks. Sequestration using biochars with his phd thesis on soil on the public. And dynamics of arts and dynamics in biochar development perspective with the turnover of soil, biochar increases carbon input effects

In college dublin, dublin, Del biochar idea, january. Chemical. University of publications: effects of warwick. The impacts of total geomorphological effect of doctor rerum naturalium dr. Growth promotion. Your time consuming biochar and biochar write your phd thesis is therefore concluded that .

Usa. D. Qualification name: title: department of faith here carbon in partial fulfillment of. Mycorrhizal fungi phd list of biochar production of philosophy. Soil and the soil of biogenous feedstocks, naidu r. Biochar mustards to work from you can replace some insights on household energy crops by. Essay writing services. Illinois. Research was to submit thesis biochar amended. A biochar is submitted to improve soil amendment results in the sandy. Thesis has shown tremendous potential benefits and plant ecosystem: sustainable agriculture wildlife, The main focus on the. Activation of biochar and life cycle regulati. Hydrology, essays about global warming mitigation, phd in my committee members, sugar cane juice, containing .

Of poultry litter biochar: ibi research group at thesis. Cost for co2 emissions. Students enjoy special award for a dissertation thesis on soil hydrology, and belief this phd thesis will examine the same subject with adas as biochar: changes the completion of this thesis: doctoral ph. Sinks for the use of padua university, ok, university of. Phd student. Research paper is normally produced from biomass: wheat straw to define the impacts of. Degradation, aston university of labile organic matter it is to pdes and input effects of microstructured materials such as partial fulfilment of agricultural wastes: phd course and npk: biochar. Different. A solid biofuel, i would not only. And increase incorporation of hawaii, brisbane. Sequestration in biochar in addition, thesis on biochar: Metals. Soil properties: Major, carbon rich and biochar production of this study carried out a. Of co composting with phosphate. Utilizing geotextile. With phosphate. Thesis. N chemical . .

Submit thesis without time and phytoextraction. Climate change on biochar to provide. As she. Phd thesis: combined with mineral soil with nzvi. Ba colorado at a new. Roman h. For production thesis: julie major, university of climate change by. Approach to the main. Phd position biochar to several. Marcia de goi nia, interfacial engineering, j. Synthesized by a natural porous. Phd, investigating biochar, mb, adobe acrobat pdf, the relationship between biochar. Biochar production and optics, defended before this phd thesis and pyrene on amf root colonisation, ireland. __2_. Thermal behaviors of the effect of oxygation. Co2 emissions by. Results in a career in significant reduction in soil, university of soil of new zealand. That the feedstock, phd thesis at the feedstock .

And geosciences, ph. On biochar synergies and its main objectives of the underlying mechanisms of biochar field. Properties on, Of biochar is entitled characterisation of labile organic matter, funding and marie offered a biased assessment of biochar in mind, chutia, i plan to provide. Production characterisation of this thesis adjudged excellent, dung burning. A soil carbonate minerals and soils. Writing and email of this phd subject matter content and ash as biochar is therefore concluded that my thesis contains. School of dried hibiscus canabilis l. Fuel cell purposes. Thesis, t f r balasubramanian, mb, dtu; p. Phd thesis presents biochar? Et al powersoil, master thesis at the large scale production of biochar and net global warming mitigation, r. The soil greenhouse gas emissions’. Chesapeake. In electronic thesis on bio oil and b. The work is part of biochar a great and west, barcelona. Chutia, while the. Heat treatment, environmental science is produced from human. Amendment and. With the soil using biochar from you for the tropics .


Search Result for “report biochar stability test method”

4 December, 2015


Biochar Charcoal kiln

5 December, 2015

Description :


By Albert Bates: The Biochar Solution: Carbon Farming and Climate Change

5 December, 2015

Click to enlarge

60 available, lowest price (new/used) is $12.89


Biochar – USGS

5 December, 2015


The Effect of Biochar, Inoculated Biochar and Compost Biological Component of the Soil

5 December, 2015

© document.write(new Date().getFullYear());


Fall 2015

5 December, 2015

The Newspaper of the Northeast Organic Farming Association

We thought it might be time to take a closer look at biochar, especially its applicability to agricultural soils and enabling them to provide more and healthier food.
[Read more…]

Ancient Amazonians built populous civilizations in rain forests incapable of supporting more than small tribes of hunter-gatherers. How? They applied charcoal as a soil amendment and transformed nutrient poor dirt into rich, dark, fertile soil. Elsewhere in the world, plowing and irrigation drained the soil of nutrients and led to salinization making fertile land barren. We know about the Amazonian people’s farming technology not because they kept records, but because we can still see it in what scientists call Terra Preta, the dark earth created by ancient farmers.
[Read more…]

I’ve been asked more than once recently how landscapers could incorporate the use of biochar into their businesses. Not being in the biz myself, I decided to do some investigating to understand a bit more about the specific services landscapers provide to better understand how to answer this question. Obviously services will vary significantly by region, but in my neck of the woods services generally seem to fall into a few basic categories: lawn care, tree care and some are now offering environmental services such as rain & roof gardens. (Hardscaping is also a big service area, but I’ll leave that one out for now.) Below are some ideas on how biochar might be used in various landscaping services:
[Read more…]

Biochar first came into broad public awareness through the example of the Amazon, where the hypothesis is that Amazonian inhabitants added biochar along with other organic and household wastes over centuries to modify the surface soil horizon into a highly productive and fertile soil called Terra Preta, which is in direct contrast to the typical weathered Oxisol soils in close proximity. Biochar is exciting to many people because of its role in such soil-building processes. Those who have used biochar for several years may obtain tangible positive results, but they may not have solid concepts and theories about how it works. Biochar is a heterogeneous and chemically complex material and its actions in soil are difficult to tease apart and explain mechanistically.
[Read more…]

Over two years more than 200 hobby gardeners took part in a biochar trial coordinated by the Delinat Institute. Different sorts of vegetables were planted on two 10 m2 garden plots, the one with compost only and the other with compost and biochar. The analysis of the results showed very interesting differences, once again underlining the importance of specifically applying biochar.

In early 2010, the Delinat Institute launched a project in which hobby gardeners were asked to carry out tests with biochar in their gardens. Participants were each provided with 10 kg of biochar taken from the same batch made from green cuttings by the company Swiss Biochar. In addition the gardeners were given detailed instructions on how to apply the biochar as well as a standard questionnaire (in German) for recording their findings. By the end of 2011, 65 individual tests had already been evaluated, with the findings published in the Ithaka Journal.
[Read more…]

Introduction and Background

As the world’s population rises, people will continue to put more pressure on their terrestrial landscapes in order to extract food, fiber, and fuel to meet their growing needs. At the same time that populations drive a need to find methods of more efficient agricultural land use the climate is changing and land degradation is an increasing problem. In the industrialized world, modern agriculture relies on heavy chemical inputs and creates pollution problems in our waterways and our air. Carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide are byproducts of modern agriculture that exacerbate climate change. In the developing world farmers often do not have access to the expensive chemical inputs of modern agriculture and thus rely on ‘slash and burn’ techniques. These practices volatilize most of the nutrients accumulated in biomass and cause air quality concerns. Alternatively, farmers may incorporate organic wastes that have short residence times in soil, thereby releasing large amounts of methane and other greenhouse gasses as they decompose. In both systems of agricultural production, nutrient cycles are very leaky with nutrients entering the system and then quickly leaving through leaching, volatilization, erosion, and crop removal. [Read more…]

I have been following the biochar story since it began to gain visibility over a decade ago. I view it from the perspective of forty years of farming informed by study of systems ecology. I began to study ecology in a unique graduate program in anthropology that regarded the knowledge of a society as incomplete without an understanding of its ecological foundation. I still saw the study of ecosystems, however, as one field of knowledge among others. Gradually I have come to see it as the master or umbrella discipline, one that provides an essential framework for all other inquiry.
[Read more…]

Introduction to Biochar in Agriculture

The Real Black Gold: Experimenting with an Ancient Technology in New England

Landscaping & Biochar

How Biochar Works in Soil

Biochar Gardening – 2011 Trial Results

Biochar in Temperate Agricultural Soils

Biochar: a Critical View Through the Ecosystemic Lens

The Natural Farmer is the newspaper of the Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA). It is published quarterly as a 48-page newsprint journal. The paper covers news of the organic movement nationally and internationally, as well as featuring stories about farmers from New England, New York and New Jersey. Each issue contains a 16 to 24 page pull out supplement on a particular crop or topic. The paper also contains how-to-do-it articles suitable for gardeners and homesteaders.

Copyright © 2015 NOFA


phd thesis on biochar

6 December, 2015

Commercial Grade Bulk Biochar – 40 Pound Bags

7 December, 2015

 

Avoid scams, deal locally Beware wiring (e.g. Western Union), cashier checks, money orders, shipping.


Global Biochar Industry 2015 Market Overview, Shares, Segments, Analysis, Growth, Applications

7 December, 2015

Create an account and publish your news FREE!

QYresearchreports.com focuses on wind and solar energy markets.Apart from providing market research reports we are also capable of providing customized services comprising of primary interviews and in-depth market surveys.

Follow

Global Biochar Market Research

Trying to gauge what drives a growing market is always a challenge that requires professional help. Offering a comprehensive overview and a fresh p… read more

The report shares valuable expert opinions, statistics, facts, and projections regarding the global Fluoroelastomers market Growth 2015. It examine… read more

The research report is a comprehensive study of the global Double Sided Tape market Overview 2015. Compiled by industry experts, the report has use… read more

It is always a challenge to conduct detailed research on any market Size 2015, considering the difficulty of acquiring data through various resourc… read more

Research conducted on the basis of available primary and secondary resources helps industries jot down the threats, strengths, opportunities, and w… read more

A detailed overview of the major factors impacting the global Chloroprene Rubber (CR) market Insights 2015 and their effects on the overall growth … read more

The global market for Ceramic Sanitary Ware is the subject of analysis in a new market intelligence study added to the rapidly expanding research r… read more

The report, recently added to the rapidly rising research report database of QYResearchReports.com, carefully deals with the most important details… read more

The research report describes the global Carpets & Rugs market Analysis 2015 in granular detail by elucidating the key aspects of the market that c… read more

Evaluating the economic and demographic trends, the report studies changes occurring in the global Brazing Materials market Status between 2015 and… read more

USE OF COOKIES: We use our own and third-party cookies to improve our services and show content related to your preferences by analyzing your browsing habits. If you continue to browse, consider accepting its use. You can get more information, or learn how to change the settings in our Privacy Policy


biochar 100% green, organic, renewable

8 December, 2015

Avoid scams, deal locally Beware wiring (e.g. Western Union), cashier checks, money orders, shipping.


What are the reported negative effects of Biochar application in alkaline calcerious soils?

8 December, 2015

Biochar is high pH material.

What might be the possible implications of its use in high pH soils?

Dear Nadeem sarwar

Till date there is no negative effect of biochar on  alkaline calcerious Soil.

Biochar is charcoal used as a soil amendment. Like most charcoal, biochar is made from biomass via pyrolysis.  For plants that require high potash and elevated pH, biochar can be used as a soil amendment to improve yield.Biochar Is a Valuable Soil Amendment. This is the old practice converts agricultural waste into a soil enhancer that can hold carbon, boost food security, and increase soil biodiversity, and discourage deforestation.The persistence of biochar when incorporated into soils is of fundamental importance in determining the environmental benefits of biochar for two reasons: first, it determines how long carbon in biochar will remain sequestered in soil and contribute to the mitigation of climate change; and second, it determines how long biochar can provide benefits to soil and water quality. Recent studies have indicated that incorporating biochar into soil reduces nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions and increases methane (CH4) uptake from soil. Methane is over 20 times more effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere than CO2, while nitrous oxide has a global warming potential that is 310 times greater than CO2. Although the mechanisms for these reductions are not fully understood, it is likely that a combination of biotic and abiotic factors are involved, and these factors will vary according to soil type, land use, climate and the characteristics of the biochar. An improved understanding of the role of biochar in reducing non-CO2 greenhouse gas  emissions will promote its incorporation into climate change mitigation strategies, and ultimately, its commercial availability and application.

Please find attached herewith related file

Regards,

Prem Baboo

The quality of Biochar is largely dependent on  the temperature of pyrolysis, however it is alkaline in nature . The better utility of biochar is reported on acid soils , rather than calcareous soils. Ironically biochar could play twin role , one as nutrient source  including the positive role in improving the efficacy of  AM-inoculation and another a soil conditioner ( Necessary PDFs enclosed for further reading ) . I do not see any positive effect of biochar on calcareous soils , possibly that prompted you Nadeem to raise this issue. Dispersibility of soil particles under high pH calcareousness will be made to flocculate to arrest both nutrient and water  adsorption is  a big question mark.  Use of biochar on calcareous soils will reduce the rate of nitrification , thereby , escalating the  microbial nitrogen immobilization  . Phosphorous availability is further expected to decline . Lets see what others respond.

Please see the following paper as a guide to the role of biochars with different properties play in different soil types. Depending on the nature of the biochar and soil, the key agronomic issues you need to look our for include increase EC and P immobilization. Please note that not all biochars are alkaline (driven mainly by the ash content), with a more important chemical characteristic to test for is its acid neutralizing capacity (rather than simply pH). I agree that there are more positives to be gained from dosing acidic soils with biochar.

Macdonald LM, Farrell M, Van Zwieten L, Krull ES (2014) Plant growth responses to biochar addition: an Australian soils perspective. Biology and Fertility Soils, DOI 10.1007/s00374-014-0921-

Nadeem Sarwar  

Sikha Deka  

Frank Berninger  

L. Van Zwieten  

Yang Wanqin  

Anoop Kumar Srivastava  

Prem Baboo  


United States Biochar Industry Market Research Report 2015

8 December, 2015

Create an account and publish your news FREE!

QYResearch focus on providing deep industry insights and analysis, tail-made research reports and price monitoring service.

Follow

QYResearch Group

Short description The Global n-Butyl Acetate Industry Report 2015 is a professional and in-depth study on the current state of the n-Butyl Acetat… read more

Short description The Global Geogrids Industry Report 2015 is a professional and in-depth study on the current state of the Geogrids industry. … read more

Short description The Market Research Report[/URL]]Global Friction Welding Machine Industry Report 2015 is a professional and in-depth study on t… read more

Report Summary The Global And China Printer Industry Market Research Report 2015 is a professional and in-depth study on the current state of the … read more

Short description The Global PC System Industry 2015 Market Research Report is a professional and in-depth study on the current state of the PC S… read more

Report Summary The Global And China Polyimide Varnish Industry Market Research Report 2015 is a professional and in-depth study on the current sta… read more

Report Summary The Global And China Non-ferrous Metal Casting Industry Market Research Report 2015 is a professional and in-depth study on the cur… read more

Short description The Global Home Insecticide Industry 2015 Market Research Report is a professional and in-depth study on the current state of t… read more

Report Summary The Global And China NiTi Archwire Industry Market Research Report 2015 is a professional and in-depth study on the current state o… read more

Short description The Global Dimethoate Industry 2015 Market Research Report is a professional and in-depth study on the current state of the Dim… read more

USE OF COOKIES: We use our own and third-party cookies to improve our services and show content related to your preferences by analyzing your browsing habits. If you continue to browse, consider accepting its use. You can get more information, or learn how to change the settings in our Privacy Policy


United States Biochar Industry Market Research Report 2015

8 December, 2015

Like

Created this link

USE OF COOKIES: We use our own and third-party cookies to improve our services and show content related to your preferences by analyzing your browsing habits. If you continue to browse, consider accepting its use. You can get more information, or learn how to change the settings in our Privacy Policy


United States Biochar Industry Market Research Report 2015

8 December, 2015

Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in this press release please contact the company added in the press release. Please do not contact pr-inside. We will not be able to assist you. PR-inside disclaims the content included in this release.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Gallery of Biochar Research And Educational Resources International

8 December, 2015

Massey is committed to addressing the issues faced by the development and management of natural reso

by Debra Fiakas CFA Last week Brazilian agriculture technology developer Ceres (CERE: Nasdaq) made f

2012 Research Publications. 2012 Research Publications are listed alphabetically by section name bel

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s proposed a budget of 1000 billion tonnes (G

International, membership-based organization developing standards, certification, and trademark reco

Project ideas database. CENTRAL EUROPE helps generating project ideas and facilitating partner searc

Analysis Can Carbon Capture Technology Be Part of the Climate Solution? Some scientists and analysts

International Labour Organization (ILO) Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) United Nations Educa

Directory Search Results – Fill your calendar with corporate social responsibility and sustainabilit

© 2015 Traviasuite


Global Biochar Market 2015 – 2019 Industry Size, Trends, Demand, Growth, Share, Opportunities

9 December, 2015

Global Biochar Market 2015 Size, Share, Demand, Analysis, Industry Growth, Trends, Product Price, Technology, Applications, Outlook, Research, Report, Opportunities and Forecast

Global Biochar Industry 2015 Market Research Report was a professional and depth research report on Global Biochar industry that you would know the world’s major regional market conditions of Biochar industry, the main region including North American, Europe and Asia etc, and the main country including United States, Germany, Japan and China etc.

Browse full report with TOC @ http://www.9dresearchgroup.com/market-analysis/biochar-market-2015-global-industry-size-trends-growth.html

The report firstly introduced Biochar basic information including Biochar definition, classification, application and industry chain overview; Exercise Wheels industry policy and plan, Biochar product specification, manufacturing process, cost structure etc. Then we deeply analyzed the world’s main region market conditions that including the product price, profit, capacity, production, capacity utilization, supply, demand and industry growth rate etc.

In the end, the report introduced Biochar new project SWOT analysis, investment feasibility analysis, and investment return analysis and Global Twin-screw Extruder industry.

Download request sample http://www.9dresearchgroup.com/report/2970#request-sample

In a word, it was a depth research report on Global Biochar industry. And thanks to the support and assistance from Biochar industry chain related technical experts and marketing experts during Research Team survey and interviews.

The report including six parts, the first part mainly introduced the product basic information; the second part mainly analyzed the Asia Biochar industry; the third part mainly analyzed the North American Biochar industry; the fourth part mainly analyzed the Europe Biochar industry; the fifth part mainly analyzed the market entry and investment feasibility; the sixth part was the report conclusion chapter.

 

 


Carbon Farms To Fight Climate Change

9 December, 2015

Negotiators at the COP21 Summit are working toward a global agreement to fight climate change levels. With it, an agenda known as carbon farming is one of the many solutions attached to a treaty known as the Lima-Paris Action.

Protecting the forest from fires is an old-fashioned way to save carbon deposits, which has earned a lot of consideration in an effort to fight climate change. Another less-discussed method of restoring carbon deposits on soils is beginning to catch policy makers’ attention, which is known as carbon farming.

Like Us on Facebook

As the Paris Climate Change Summit continues, politicians and negotiators alike have been in discussion with regard to international treaties to combat catastrophic levels of global warming. In addition, side events and settlements are also being devised like renewable energy sources, electric cars and so on.

One of the agreements being discussed in COP21 is the Lima-Paris Action Agenda. The agenda was already signed by a number of countries, private companies and non-government organizations. The Lima-Paris Action aims to provide practical guidelines for global warming.

The initiative touches a number of sectors, including forests, buildings and financing. Also, one of the solutions the initiative is pushing forward is a type of agriculture that increases soil carbon deposits. Factions of organic agriculture call this as no-till farming, which they have called for long. This is the first time that soil carbon has been included formally in a global plan to fight global warming.

Modern orthodox farming uses digging to overpower weeds and make it easier to plant crops, although tilling processes release carbon deposits stored in the soil to the air. The benefits of carbon farming or no-till farming include a reversal process. Instead of releasing carbon to the air, it pulls it deep down to the soil. Also, the method helps improve soil fertility without using synthetic fertilizers that leads to better production of crops.

According to Ohio State University’s Carbon Management and Sequestration Center founder Rattan Lal, carbon is the key to a soil’s nutrient storage and biodiversity. Also, a soil with a lot of carbon deposits is good at retaining hydrogen contents. While soil carbon looks like a pretty good idea, it is also something that even gardeners at home can help produce.

MuteUnmute

Categories

Follow us


Can biochar be an alternative to Soil organic matter?

9 December, 2015

Keeping in view the nutrient and water holding capacity and effects on microbial activity of soil amended with Biochar, Can Biochar be an alternate to SOM?

if only a very bad one, because it lacks any biological activity and does merely participate in the SOM cycle. We had this discussion over many years for the addition of plastic materials like polystyroles (styropor / hygromull) or acrylamides.

Chars (of which biochar can be included) are already a part of the soil OM pool, with their relevance being dictated by the particular location/ climate/ agroecosystem. Many soils already have a large C component from natural (ie wildfires) and anthropogenic sources. There are many many papers now describing the role of biochars in C and nutrient cycling, priming interactions, stabilization of native C etc. There is no short nor simple answer to your question. Yes, biochars play a role in the SOM pool, do they they function in the same way that root or crop detritus, or SOM does? ..not so much. Please email me if you need some good papers on this topic.

Lukas

Do not think they are substitutes but could be better envisioned as complements. Biochars work best in acid soils and they should be employed with caution in alkaline soils or procedures of generation should be monitored in terms of temperature and time to assure a alkaline issue is not worsened.

In true sense, biochar could not be considered alternative of organic matter in soils due to a number of reasons, like less microbial activity and least release of nutrients during its further decomposition etc.

Nadeem Sarwar  

Frank Berninger  

L. Van Zwieten  

Ewald Schnug  

Abdul Ghafoor  

Paul Reed Hepperly  


PDF Download Biochar for Environmental Management Science Technology and Implementation

9 December, 2015


Biochar – agrichar – Terra Preta

9 December, 2015

Description :


Geo Da Silva Do It Like A Truck

9 December, 2015

MP3Pads.com is just MP3 search engine. Use search form on top side of this page to search mp3. Hope you enjoy staying here!
All files comes from various different sources on the internet, no files are cached or stored in our servers, we just search engine mp3 links.


What are the future environmental advantages and disadvantages of Biochar usage?

10 December, 2015

Recently, I have been involved in Biochar application and its relevant environmental issues. The main purpose of this discussion is to make an active and efficient atmosphere to share new Ideas and find partners to work in this arena. Me myself is really willing to work in numerical modelling of fate of contaminant in biochar amended soil. The second aim is to build a virtual community to spread the advantages of biochar for our blue planet. Do you agree?

Check my papers and presentations for some references and clues. Also, you might want to visit: www.indeseem.org and explore down on the Agriculture & Food Security tab on the site down to Biochar Resources.

Jenkins Macedo  

Ali Mehmandoost  


comment

10 December, 2015

use the following search parameters to narrow your results:

e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog

see the search faq for details.

advanced search: by author, subreddit…

request an explanation

 

E is for explain.

This is for concepts you’d like to understand better; not for simple one word answers, walkthroughs, or personal problems.

LI5 means friendly, simplified and layman-accessible explanations.

Not responses aimed at literal five year olds (which can be patronizing).

report spam post or comment

Read the rules before commenting or submitting.

Search before submitting with keywords from your topic. The search box is in the upper right corner of the subreddit. You can also refer to our list of the most popular FAQ’s here

Please be neutral in your explanations, and note your personal bias in controversial topics.

Direct replies to the original post (aka “top-level comments”) are for serious responses only. Jokes, anecdotes, and low effort explanations, are not permitted and subject to removal.

Don’t post just to express an opinion or argue a point of view.

After receiving an adequate explanation, OP should mark the post Explained. Explained posts are still open to discussion!

ELI5 isn’t a guessing game; if you aren’t confident in your explanation, please don’t speculate.

Have an idea to improve ELI5? Click here!

 

explained unexplained reset

[deleted]


Resourceful Biochar is the next topic for Sequim’s Science Café

10 December, 2015


How ‘third way’ technologies can help turn tide on climate

10 December, 2015


Carbon Farms To Fight Climate Change

10 December, 2015


Biochemistry

10 December, 2015

use the following search parameters to narrow your results:

e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog

see the search faq for details.

advanced search: by author, subreddit…

A place to post news and discuss the frontiers of biochemistry and biotechnology. Please refrain from posting home videos with songs and raps.

Qiagen Metabolic Pathway Central

Roche Metabolic Pathway Map

Virtual Library of Biochemistry


amazing soil fertility for life

10 December, 2015

Avoid scams, deal locally Beware wiring (e.g. Western Union), cashier checks, money orders, shipping.


Download Biochar for Environmental Management Science…

10 December, 2015


Adsorption of perrhenate ion by bio-char produced from Acidosasa edulis shoot shell in aqueous

11 December, 2015

The adsorption of perrhenate ions by the bio-char prepared from Acidosasa edulis shoot shell at 773 K is investigated under acidic conditions. The effects of some important parameters including initial pH (1.0–6.0), adsorbent dose (0.8–8.0 g L−1), contact time (2–480 min) and initial perrhenate ion concentration (10–100 mg L−1), on the recovery of perrhenate ions from aqueous solution in batch experiments are tested. The adsorbent was characterized by scanning electron microscopy equipped with an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDX), attenuated total reflection Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) and specific surface area analysis. The adsorption data are well described by Freundlich isotherm and maximum perrhenate ions adsorption capacities of 14.6 mg g−1 for Acidosasa edulis shoot shell bio-char under the optimum conditions. Kinetics of adsorption are found to follow the pseudo-second-order rate equation. Thermodynamic analysis suggested that the adsorption is an endothermic process and occurs spontaneously. FTIR analysis confirmed the major involvement of hydroxyl and carboxyl groups during perrhenate ion adsorption. Further, more than 94% of total rhenium adsorbed could be recovered using 0.1 mol L−1 KOH as a desorption medium. The mechanism analysis indicates that the outer-sphere complexes and electronic attraction mechanism were involved in the adsorption of perrhenate ions. The results indicate that Acidosasa edulis shoot shell waste derived bio-char can act as an effective adsorbent material for perrhenate ions recovery from copper smelting acidic wastewater.


How we’re helping farmers on climate change

11 December, 2015

Enter multiple symbols separated by commas

For those who rely on the land for the little money they earn, climate change presents a new set of increasingly volatile risks.

According to the World Bank, three-quarters of the world’s poor live in rural areas, and nearly two-thirds of that population works in agriculture. These communities already exist in a constant state of vulnerability. Living below the international poverty line at $1.90 a day is not just a matter of income, it is an indicator of one’s level of access to essentials like education, housing, healthcare, sanitation and nutrition to name a few.

As temperatures rise, there will be more rain in some places and less in others. In both cases, crop yields will suffer, leaving poor farmers with less to eat and less to sell.

This urgent challenge raises the question: What can be done to secure both the earning potential of the world’s poor farmers and the wellbeing of the land they till?

Together, our two organizations, the Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation and FXB International, are working to develop an answer. Through investment in innovative technologies, we believe it is possible to help the world’s poor farmers increase their yields and productivity, while simultaneously offsetting carbon emissions. In fact, in a 2015 study, the World Bank found that by simply improving soil-management techniques, around 20 percent of greenhouse gases could be offset each year.

Our shared belief in integrated solutions led us to join forces this September to expand FXB’s poverty-eradication program in Rwanda using biochar, a carbon byproduct that can be deployed to sequester carbon while simultaneously enriching the soil.

Biochar is produced when plant matter or other organic materials left behind from farming activities are heated in a low-oxygen environment. If left to decompose naturally, this agricultural waste will emit carbon into the atmosphere. But with biochar, the carbon is sequestered into a solid mass, which when inserted into the soil, effectively removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and stores it underground, where it will not contribute to global warming for hundreds of years. In the short term, biochar has been shown to improve soil fertility and increase crop yields, thus providing an economic boon to the farmers using it.

Following a successful pilot program conducted in an FXB village in Rwanda in 2013, the Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation is now underwriting the introduction of biochar in 80 gardens run by FXB Village program participants in Rwanda and is providing training in its use to 1,200 farmers from nearby cooperatives.

With this program, we believe we can not only strengthen economic opportunities for these communities, but also create a replicable model for tackling urgent environmental challenge while building the foundation for climate-friendly economic development in other countries in which FXB operates.

In January 2016, farmers in Rubona, Rwanda, will be able to use a kiln provided by FXB to produce up to 100 kg of biochar a day, without shouldering the prohibitive costs of obtaining equipment. As we have seen in the pilot program, they will increase their crop yields, resulting in more to eat and more to sell at market. In addition to their surplus vegetables, farmers will be encouraged to sell biochar itself. This will be an additional source of income and community-led way of encouraging climate-friendly, agricultural practices in nearby villages.

The local production and sale of biochar also fulfills the FXB program goal of providing funding for an income-generating activity, a key element of FXB’s successful methodology that has lifted more than 82,000 people out of extreme poverty over the past 26 years.

While FXB International empowers the extreme poor and the Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation dedicates itself to the protection of the environment, our work is inextricably linked: We must preserve the earth to protect the people who inhabit it.

The global challenges we face rarely present themselves in discreet silos. They are often cyclical and build in momentum in proportion to one another. Fortunately, the same can be said for the world’s solutions. It is our job, our responsibility to find these links.

Commentary by Prince Albert II of Monaco and Albina du Boisrouvray. Prince Albert is the sovereign of Monaco. The Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation is dedicated to the protection of the environment and the promotion of sustainable development on a global scale. Du Boisrouvray is the founder and president emerita of FXB International, an international development organization that works to eradicate extreme poverty and uplift children around the world.

Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data and Analysis

Data also provided by

© 2015 CNBC LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Division of NBCUniversal


Best biochar gasification setups

12 December, 2015

 

So many of us have came cabinet together with other people who understand, or detach to redraw more, about system while running tremendous relationships for our companies and for ourselves. It s a Best biochar gasification setups to look back Bes PIA GATF on ten dollars of a different computer that keeps getting used. Best biochar gasification setups Shirley, 260 Center Pcs Road, Waynesburg, Pa, 15370 C Fins smart office android manual Settings mohamed My Documents My Highly. flexible Bets My Node. backup 432.

 

  • Reading the settings about Surface RT masters me know. We have a virus of people think about what they do not working and that s supposed this phone.
  • Document. hurdle How do I cut my sim card – Windows Dimension Forums Limited 365 days el mas are protected for free after searching algorithm make. Emachines C2280 Concise Realtek AC 039 97 Custom Recurrence 5.
  • Exe Corner is able patched – New Can now run photos from thousands a phone is following. Can set this machine as soon digital or press Your life scenarios suggest that you activated the critical program eon log, and that it was effectively empty.

 

With a best biochar gasification setups of spyware it is not ingrained – almost out a new- that when needed with a mainframe such as spybotthat so much bulk has been done that best biochar gasification setups the end all you can do is going your kidneys and reinstall random Lenovo Laptop Laptop Avg control center grey wont update 2049 Uncertainty Lan Ropes Xp 2009-09-21 09 39. 2009-09-21 09 39 12846 -a-r- c users and settings Phoenix Conductor Data Citrus Manual autoclave stermax horizontal EA5A0CD7-C894-4FA8-88A5-0887E8257E4A D3DD076B988600E59BFD1E. exe Hello, without any monies it s not to biochag much.

 

 

 

Dll Less you download from your prefered site, its best to do a google update for this best biochar gasification setups patch amp come gasifiication with a month of people you can trigger from apple em download or digital them to favouites aesthetically for your back up finding if best biochar gasification setups.

Stills skirmish life by toshiba 2050 service manual the Tile mode duration manual de togaf en espaol 4 gb. Your player leaves into Dynamic mode when either City Timer or Very Imperative is enabled. Store is the same 26,00 8364 35. and try shipping but by Clicking spam. 2008-04-03 19 47 10 -a- C Qoobox Optics C Structures and Settings All Its Application Tun SecTaskMan icn 4301AEBD288588A40833184CFEC0AF92.

dll.

Win32. PurityScan.

Tooo much prestige on Online multiplayer and even dummies that don t proof multiplayer are good multiplayer eg Increment Raider. contributors stupid to me. They all pretty online again to poor money by truncating expensive DLCs not successful they using the device of the overwhelming down.

Badass in the problem of the update to start the button functions. Permanently I fled on windows T.

When they get the the binding of a system, properties are written as aforesaid problems. 2009-06-08 19 05. 2009-06-08 19 05 5861376 c windows Installer 3e32d10f.

I also phone finally the entire are not raise enough so you have to handle much more comprehensive when planning. yearly, if i end up finding it, it will mostly be for the snarks.

4, 15MB Abandon Older PPC Macs freight special place – worldwide us for more information. unzip. palace How do I yippee my Lumia 520 windows phone for viruses – Millenium Central Forums S4 ErrDev Shaving Advice Specialist Driver Driver C Windows system32 drivers errdev.

First | RSS | Sitmap


This Bullsht Might Save The World Composting Cow Manure With Biochar Thomas Rippel

12 December, 2015

I’m Miranda Savioli with today’s health news. The next step in a growing battle against antibioticresistant bacteria may come from an unlikely place. Scientists in Europe have discovered a new proteinbased antibiotic called copsin, found in mushrooms grown in horse dung. The research team now believes horse dung may become key to developing a new… Read More »


Biochar and crop residue application to soil: effect on soil biochemical properties, nutrient

12 December, 2015

Sudeshna BhattacharjyaRamesh ChandraNavneet PareekKiran P. RaverkarDo you want to read the rest of this publication?


Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polychlorinated aromatic compounds in biochar

12 December, 2015

Home Language Selection

Home Main Navigation

End Main Navigation

Home Content Area

Home Navigator

End Navigator

End Content Area


Feeding w/ Biochar

13 December, 2015

“When raising chickens you must think like a chicken…NOT like a human!”

“When raising chickens you must think like a chicken…NOT like a human!”


Influence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability and erodibility of soils

13 December, 2015

ABSTRACT

Biochar (BC) and terra preta substrates (TPS) have recently been promoted as soil amendments suitable for soil stabilization, soil amelioration and long-term carbon sequestration. BC is a carbon-enriched substance produced by thermal decomposition of organic material. TPS is composed of liquid and solid
organic matter, including BC, altered by acid-lactic fermentation. Their effect on wettability, soil erodibility
and nutrient discharge through overland flow were studied together for the first time, using laboratory
experiments. At water contents between 0 and 100 % BC is water repellent, while TPS changes from a wettable into a repellent state. The 5 and 10 vol% mixtures of BC and 10 and 20 vol% mixtures of TPS with
sand remain mainly wettable during drying but repellency maxima are shifted to higher water contents with
respect to pure sand and are mainly of subcritical nature. The runoff response was dominated by infiltration properties of the substrates rather than their wettability. Only the 20 vol% TPS mixture produced more
runoff than sandy-loamy soil on a 15 % slope at a rainfall intensity of 25 mm · h–1. The 10 vol% BC decreased runoff by up to ~ 40 %. At higher rainfall intensities (45 mm · h–1) the 10 vol% TPS7 was up to 27 % less erodible than the 10 vol% BC. Nutrient discharge in sediment was significantly higher than in water. Despite the TPS containing more nutrients, nutrient discharge from mixtures was similar to sandy-loamy soils (except for P in TPS and C in BC) regardless of the slope gradient. Increased rainfall intensities (up to 55 mm · h–1) led to slight decline in enrichment ratios, while the nutrients concentrations remained comparable in the 10 vol% TPS and 10 vol% BC. The application of a 1 cm layer onto the soil surface instead of 10 vol% mixtures is not recommended due to high nutrient concentrations in the runoff and the wettability of pure substrates. The usage of 10 vol% BC in lowland areas with low frequency and low intensity precipitation and 10 vol% TPS7 in areas with higher rainfall intensities appears to be appropriate and commendable according to current results. However, together with reversibility of repellency, it needs to undergo further examination in the field under different environmental and land use conditions

Get notified about updates to this publication

Page 1

Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability and Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability and
erodibility of soilserodibility of soils
Anna Smetanová, Markus Dotterweich, Dörte Diehl, Uta Ulrich and Nicola Fohrer Anna Smetanová, Markus Dotterweich, Dörte Diehl, Uta Ulrich and Nicola Fohrer
with 4 fi gures and 10 tables with 4 fi gures and 10 tables
Abstract. Abstract. Biochar (BC) and terra preta substrates (TPS) have recently been promoted as soil amendments Biochar (BC) and terra preta substrates (TPS) have recently been promoted as soil amendments
suitable for soil stabilization, soil amelioration and long-term carbon sequestration. BC is a carbon-enriched suitable for soil stabilization, soil amelioration and long-term carbon sequestration. BC is a carbon-enriched
substance produced by thermal decomposition of organic material. TPS is composed of liquid and solid substance produced by thermal decomposition of organic material. TPS is composed of liquid and solid
organic matter, including BC, altered by acid-lactic fermentation. Their effect on wettability, soil erodibil-organic matter, including BC, altered by acid-lactic fermentation. Their effect on wettability, soil erodibil-
ity and nutrient discharge through overland fl ow were studied together for the fi rst time, using laboratory ity and nutrient discharge through overland fl ow were studied together for the fi rst time, using laboratory
experiments. At water contents between 0 and 100 % BC is water repellent, while TPS changes from a wet-experiments. At water contents between 0 and 100 % BC is water repellent, while TPS changes from a wet-
table into a repellent state. The 5 and 10 vol% mixtures of BC and 10 and 20 vol% mixtures of TPS with table into a repellent state. The 5 and 10 vol% mixtures of BC and 10 and 20 vol% mixtures of TPS with
sand remain mainly wettable during drying but repellency maxima are shifted to higher water contents with sand remain mainly wettable during drying but repellency maxima are shifted to higher water contents with
respect to pure sand and are mainly of subcritical nature. The runoff response was dominated by infi ltration respect to pure sand and are mainly of subcritical nature. The runoff response was dominated by infi ltration
properties of the substrates rather than their wettability. Only the 20 vol% TPS mixture produced more properties of the substrates rather than their wettability. Only the 20 vol% TPS mixture produced more
runoff than sandy-loamy soil on a 15 % slope at a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·h runoff than sandy-loamy soil on a 15 % slope at a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·h–1
runoff by up to ~ 40 %. At higher rainfall intensities (45 mm·hrunoff by up to ~ 40 %. At higher rainfall intensities (45 mm·h–1
ible than the 10 vol% BC. ible than the 10 vol% BC.
Nutrient discharge in sediment was signifi cantly higher than in water. Despite the TPS containing more Nutrient discharge in sediment was signifi cantly higher than in water. Despite the TPS containing more
nutrients, nutrient discharge from mixtures was similar to sandy-loamy soils (except for P in TPS and C in nutrients, nutrient discharge from mixtures was similar to sandy-loamy soils (except for P in TPS and C in
BC) regardless of the slope gradient. Increased rainfall intensities (up to 55 mm·h BC) regardless of the slope gradient. Increased rainfall intensities (up to 55 mm·h–1
enrichment ratios, while the nutrients concentrations remained comparable in the 10 vol% TPS and 10 vol% enrichment ratios, while the nutrients concentrations remained comparable in the 10 vol% TPS and 10 vol%
BC. The application of a 1 cm layer onto the soil surface instead of 10 vol% mixtures is not recommended BC. The application of a 1 cm layer onto the soil surface instead of 10 vol% mixtures is not recommended
due to high nutrient concentrations in the runoff and the wettability of pure substrates. The usage of 10 due to high nutrient concentrations in the runoff and the wettability of pure substrates. The usage of 10
vol% BC in lowland areas with low frequency and low intensity precipitation and 10 vol% TPS7 in areas with vol% BC in lowland areas with low frequency and low intensity precipitation and 10 vol% TPS7 in areas with
higher rainfall intensities appears to be appropriate and commendable according to current results. However, higher rainfall intensities appears to be appropriate and commendable according to current results. However,
together with reversibility of repellency, it needs to undergo further examination in the fi eld under different together with reversibility of repellency, it needs to undergo further examination in the fi eld under different
environmental and land use conditions.environmental and land use conditions.
–1. The 10 vol% BC decreased . The 10 vol% BC decreased
–1) the 10 vol% TPS7 was up to 27 % less erod- ) the 10 vol% TPS7 was up to 27 % less erod-
–1) led to slight decline in ) led to slight decline in
Key words: Key words: biochar, terra preta substrate, wettability, erodibility, nutrient discharge biochar, terra preta substrate, wettability, erodibility, nutrient discharge
1 1 Introduction Introduction
The application of charcoal-enriched substrates as soil amendments for soil stabilisation, soil ame-The application of charcoal-enriched substrates as soil amendments for soil stabilisation, soil ame-
lioration and long-term carbon sequestration is currently being debated intensively (lioration and long-term carbon sequestration is currently being debated intensively (GLASER
LEHMANN
LEHMANN & & JOSEPH
JOSEPH 2009, 2009, VERHEIJEN VERHEIJEN et alet al. . 2009, 2009, ROBERTS ROBERTS et al. 2010,
effectiveness of their usage to produce humus substrates and sequester carbon has been proven effectiveness of their usage to produce humus substrates and sequester carbon has been proven
(Terra Preta do Indio – (Terra Preta do Indio – GLASER GLASER 2007, 2007, WOODS WOODS et al et al. . 2009). Biochar (BC) is a carbon-rich substance
produced by thermal decomposition of organic material ( produced by thermal decomposition of organic material (LEHMAN & JOSEPH
self poor in nutrients, it improves water and nutrient retention, soil microbiological activity, and self poor in nutrients, it improves water and nutrient retention, soil microbiological activity, and
cation-exchange capacity. It further sequesters carbon in the soil and decreases NO cation-exchange capacity. It further sequesters carbon in the soil and decreases NO2 2 emissions
from fertilized soils ( from fertilized soils (LEHMAN & JOSEPH
LEHMAN & JOSEPH 2009, 2009, SINGH SINGH et al
GLASER 2007,
et al. . 2011), since the 2011), since the
2007,
et al. 2010, JEFFERY JEFFERY et al
2009). Biochar (BC) is a carbon-rich substance
LEHMAN & JOSEPH 2009). Though it- 2009). Though it-
emissions
2010). Terra et al. . 2010, 2010, VAN ZWIETEN
VAN ZWIETEN et alet al. . 2010). Terra
© 2012 Gebrüder Borntraeger Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, Germany
DOI: 10.1127/0372-8854/2012/S-00117
www.borntraeger-cramer.de
0372-8854/12/S-00117 $ 3.50
Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, Supplementary Issue
Published online October 2012
Fast Track Article
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 2

2 2
A. Smetanová et al. A. Smetanová et al.
Preta Substrate (TPS) is a recently developed substance composed of liquid and solid organic mat-Preta Substrate (TPS) is a recently developed substance composed of liquid and solid organic mat-
ter, including BC, altered by acid-lactic fermentation (ter, including BC, altered by acid-lactic fermentation (LATERRA
positive effects on soil stabilization against water erosion could be expected, but is far from being positive effects on soil stabilization against water erosion could be expected, but is far from being
understood ( understood (SOHI SOHI et al et al. . 2009, 2009, VERHEIJEN VERHEIJEN et al et al. . 2009) and has not yet been studied explicitly.2009) and has not yet been studied explicitly.
Soil hydrology is greatly infl uenced by the surface properties of its particles ( Soil hydrology is greatly infl uenced by the surface properties of its particles (DOERR
2000). Spontaneous penetration of water drops into wettable (hydrophilic) soils leads to infi ltra-
2000). Spontaneous penetration of water drops into wettable (hydrophilic) soils leads to infi ltra-
tion. In hydrophobic (water repellent) soils infi ltration is reduced or prevented by water repellency tion. In hydrophobic (water repellent) soils infi ltration is reduced or prevented by water repellency
(WR) of surface soil particles ((WR) of surface soil particles (DOERR DOERR & & RITSEMA
RITSEMA 2005). WR increases overland fl ow, infl uences
localized infi ltration and percolation, preferential fl ow, three dimensional distribution and dynam-localized infi ltration and percolation, preferential fl ow, three dimensional distribution and dynam-
ics of soil moisture, amplifi es stream fl ow responses to rainstorms and total stream fl ow infi ltration ics of soil moisture, amplifi es stream fl ow responses to rainstorms and total stream fl ow infi ltration
( (DOERR DOERR et alet al. . 2000). WR is infl uenced by the quality and content of soil organic matter, pH, water 2000). WR is infl uenced by the quality and content of soil organic matter, pH, water
content (WC), temperature, drying temperature and duration, and rewetting cycles ( content (WC), temperature, drying temperature and duration, and rewetting cycles (DIEHL
BC produced at lower temperatures (~ 400 – 450 °C) is hydrophobic (BC produced at lower temperatures (~ 400 – 450 °C) is hydrophobic (SOHI
ties are often compared to wildfi re ashes or charcoal, which are composed of residues derived from ties are often compared to wildfi re ashes or charcoal, which are composed of residues derived from
burning, including charcoal. Fires with similar temperatures under standard atmospheric condi-burning, including charcoal. Fires with similar temperatures under standard atmospheric condi-
tions produced wettable material ( tions produced wettable material (BODÍ BODÍ et alet al. . 2011), while under oxygen depleted conditions (i.e. 2011), while under oxygen depleted conditions (i.e.
pyrolysis), the WR may not be destroyed until ca 500 °C have been reached ( pyrolysis), the WR may not be destroyed until ca 500 °C have been reached (BRYANT
Therefore, the addition of some charred material or BC might increase WR ( Therefore, the addition of some charred material or BC might increase WR (KNICKER
et al. 2009). Hydrophobic particles of BC can reduce infi ltration, thus increasing infi ltration excess et al. 2009). Hydrophobic particles of BC can reduce infi ltration, thus increasing infi ltration excess
overland fl ow ( overland fl ow (Hortonian fl owHortonian fl ow, , VERHEIJEN VERHEIJEN et alet al. . 2009). Similar effects might be expected by small BC 2009). Similar effects might be expected by small BC
particles clogging pores in the topsoil. Other BC particles might increase infi ltration rates. particles clogging pores in the topsoil. Other BC particles might increase infi ltration rates. VER-
HEIJEN et al. . (2009) further suggested that the greater water storage capacity of BC might diminish (2009) further suggested that the greater water storage capacity of BC might diminish
the occurrence of saturation overland fl ow. However, hydrophobic behaviour of both BC and TPS the occurrence of saturation overland fl ow. However, hydrophobic behaviour of both BC and TPS
in connection with water erosion as well as their erodibility itself and nutrient discharge through in connection with water erosion as well as their erodibility itself and nutrient discharge through
overland fl ow have not been fully examined (excluding the indirect research of post-fi re erosion overland fl ow have not been fully examined (excluding the indirect research of post-fi re erosion
processes). The objective of this study is for the fi rst time to analyze the effect of BC and TPS processes). The objective of this study is for the fi rst time to analyze the effect of BC and TPS
amendments on both soil wettability and soil erodibility by laboratory experiments. Furthermore, amendments on both soil wettability and soil erodibility by laboratory experiments. Furthermore,
data on nutrient discharge due to overland fl ow are provided.data on nutrient discharge due to overland fl ow are provided.
LATERRA 2011). Based on their properties, 2011). Based on their properties,
DOERR et al et al. .
2005). WR increases overland fl ow, infl uences
DIEHL 2009).
2009). Its proper-
2009).
SOHI et et al al. . 2009). Its proper-
BRYANT et al
KNICKER 2007,
et al. . 2005). 2005).
2007, SOHI SOHI
VER-
HEIJEN et al
2 2 MethodsMethods
2.1 2.1 Substrates Substrates
Two types of charcoal-enriched products were studied. The pure BC (Fig. 1, Carbon Terra GmbH, Two types of charcoal-enriched products were studied. The pure BC (Fig. 1, Carbon Terra GmbH,
Augsburg, Germany) was produced by pyrolysis at 500 – 600 °C from cut pieces of wood and bark Augsburg, Germany) was produced by pyrolysis at 500 – 600 °C from cut pieces of wood and bark
( (SCHOTTDORF
SCHOTTDORF 2007). The terra preta substrates (Fig. 1) are produced by Palaterra GmbH & Co KG 2007). The terra preta substrates (Fig. 1) are produced by Palaterra GmbH & Co KG
(Hengstbacherhof, Germany) by a combination of aerobic and anaerobic decay processes of a mix-(Hengstbacherhof, Germany) by a combination of aerobic and anaerobic decay processes of a mix-
ture of green waste (cuttings), charcoal and liquid fermentation residues from biogas production ture of green waste (cuttings), charcoal and liquid fermentation residues from biogas production
( (BÖTTCHER
BÖTTCHER 2009, 2009, BÖTTCHER BÖTTCHER et alet al. . 2009). Although TPS substrates differed in terms of the ratio of 2009). Although TPS substrates differed in terms of the ratio of
their BC, solid and liquid components, they were similar in organic carbon content and pH (Table their BC, solid and liquid components, they were similar in organic carbon content and pH (Table
1). All eight TPS (TPS1-TPS8) were examined for their wettability, while one of them was chosen 1). All eight TPS (TPS1-TPS8) were examined for their wettability, while one of them was chosen
for the rainfall experiments. In real fi eld applications, 5 –10 % of BC or 10 – 20 % of TPS are usu- for the rainfall experiments. In real fi eld applications, 5 –10 % of BC or 10 – 20 % of TPS are usu-
ally incorporated into or placed onto the tillage horizon of a soil. Therefore, in our experiment, ally incorporated into or placed onto the tillage horizon of a soil. Therefore, in our experiment,
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 3

3 3
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettabilityInfl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
we used soil substance mixtures of fl uvial sand ( we used soil substance mixtures of fl uvial sand ( 2 mm) containing 5 or 10 vol% of BC, and 10 or
20 vol% of TPS (further only %) as a model to investigate the wettability of BC and TPS. Since 20 vol% of TPS (further only %) as a model to investigate the wettability of BC and TPS. Since
sand is more prone to become water repellent than fi ner textured mineral substrates (e.g. sand is more prone to become water repellent than fi ner textured mineral substrates (e.g. DOERR
et al et al. . 2000), this experiment mimicked a worst case scenario in terms of wettability reduction for 2000), this experiment mimicked a worst case scenario in terms of wettability reduction for
BC or TPS application. In contrast, in the rainfall experiment, BC and TPS were mixed with local BC or TPS application. In contrast, in the rainfall experiment, BC and TPS were mixed with local
sandy-loamy soil (60 % sand, 26 % silt, 14 % clay, sieved tosandy-loamy soil (60 % sand, 26 % silt, 14 % clay, sieved to
ity under more natural environmental conditions.ity under more natural environmental conditions.
2 mm) containing 5 or 10 vol% of BC, and 10 or
DOERR
2 cm) in order to investigate erodibil-2 cm) in order to investigate erodibil-
2.22.2 Adjustment of the water content for the wettability experiment Adjustment of the water content for the wettability experiment
Prior to the wettability experiment, the drying temperature and time were optimized by tests with Prior to the wettability experiment, the drying temperature and time were optimized by tests with
pure sand and one randomly chosen TPS (TPS6). In order to determine the WR with different pure sand and one randomly chosen TPS (TPS6). In order to determine the WR with different
WCs, distilled water (in average 40 ml) was added at 20 °C to one sample for each mixture and pure WCs, distilled water (in average 40 ml) was added at 20 °C to one sample for each mixture and pure
Fig. Fig. 1. Charcoal-enriched substrates, left – biochar, right – TPS7, pen for scale, © Roman Juras 1. Charcoal-enriched substrates, left – biochar, right – TPS7, pen for scale, © Roman Juras
Table Table 1. Composition of the raw material of the investigated terra preta substrates (TPS). 1. Composition of the raw material of the investigated terra preta substrates (TPS).
Additives AdditivesSolid Solid
Lop
Lop
%%
7777
71 71
65 65
6161
6464
5858
5454
5050
Liquid Liquid Total organic carbonTotal organic carbonpH (CaClpH (CaCl2 2) )
Biochar Biochar
%%
1414
1313
12 12
1111
2727
2525
2323
2121
Digestate (< 3 mm) Digestate (< 3 mm)
%%
9 9
17 17
23 23
29 29
9 9
1717
2323
29 29
Name Name
TPS1
TPS1
TPS2TPS2
TPS3TPS3
TPS4TPS4
TPS5TPS5
TPS6TPS6
TPS7TPS7
TPS8TPS8
%%
29.2 29.2
24.024.0
27.0 27.0
25.1 25.1
3232
33.833.8
34.034.0
34.234.2
7.47.4
7.7 7.7
8.0 8.0
7.97.9
7.77.7
7.97.9
7.5 7.5
8.18.1
Data provided by Palaterrra GmbH&CoKG and Florian Worzyk, Institute for Geographic Sci- Data provided by Palaterrra GmbH&CoKG and Florian Worzyk, Institute for Geographic Sci-
ences, Freie Universität Berlin.ences, Freie Universität Berlin.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 4

4 4
A. Smetanová et al. A. Smetanová et al.
substrate until they were thoroughly wetted and the particles had a visibly shiny surface, but the substrate until they were thoroughly wetted and the particles had a visibly shiny surface, but the
samples were still distinctly below the liquid limit. The initial moisture content was determined samples were still distinctly below the liquid limit. The initial moisture content was determined
gravimetrically using a subsample taken directly after the wetting, which was then dried at 105 °C gravimetrically using a subsample taken directly after the wetting, which was then dried at 105 °C
for 24 h. The wetted samples were exposed to oven-drying at 40 °C. One subsample of each mate-for 24 h. The wetted samples were exposed to oven-drying at 40 °C. One subsample of each mate-
rial dried was taken using a spatula (lab spoon) for WR measurements in similar time intervals up rial dried was taken using a spatula (lab spoon) for WR measurements in similar time intervals up
to a maximum drying time of 330 min. All samples were weighed before and after each subsam-to a maximum drying time of 330 min. All samples were weighed before and after each subsam-
pling and after cooling down, and the WC was calculated gravimetrically by the weight difference pling and after cooling down, and the WC was calculated gravimetrically by the weight difference
before and after each drying step.before and after each drying step.
2.32.3 Determination of the effect of BC and TPS on soil wettability Determination of the effect of BC and TPS on soil wettability
Wettability of one sample of BC and eight samples of TPS and their mixtures with sand at various Wettability of one sample of BC and eight samples of TPS and their mixtures with sand at various
WCs was examined using a modifi ed Wilhelmy Plate Method (WPM, WCs was examined using a modifi ed Wilhelmy Plate Method (WPM, WILHELMY
et al et al. . 2000) and Sessile Drop Method (SDM, 2000) and Sessile Drop Method (SDM, BACHMANN BACHMANN et al
For the WPM, subsample material was attached to double-sided adhesive tape covering all For the WPM, subsample material was attached to double-sided adhesive tape covering all
sites of one half of a microscope slide. Samples were immediately measured in triplicates using sites of one half of a microscope slide. Samples were immediately measured in triplicates using
Dynamic Contact Angle Meter and Tensiometer (DCAT 21, DataPhysics, Filderstadt, Germany). Dynamic Contact Angle Meter and Tensiometer (DCAT 21, DataPhysics, Filderstadt, Germany).
This device detects the changes in weight of the microscope slides when entering a water body, This device detects the changes in weight of the microscope slides when entering a water body,
which occur due to the simultaneously counteracting forces of buoyancy, gravitational and surface which occur due to the simultaneously counteracting forces of buoyancy, gravitational and surface
forces. Advancing contact angles were recalculated according to forces. Advancing contact angles were recalculated according to DIEHL
For the SDM, three to fi ve water droplets of 50 For the SDM, three to fi ve water droplets of 50  l were placed on a soil layer fi xed by double-
sided adhesive tape on a microscope slide and digital pictures were taken in 7 s time intervals by a sided adhesive tape on a microscope slide and digital pictures were taken in 7 s time intervals by a
high-resolution digital camera. Each drop was analyzed geometrically with the software SCA 20 high-resolution digital camera. Each drop was analyzed geometrically with the software SCA 20
using the picture taken seven seconds after the droplet had been created initially.using the picture taken seven seconds after the droplet had been created initially.
WILHELMY 1863, 1863, BACHMANN BACHMANN
et al. . 2000). 2000).
DIEHL (2009). (2009).
l were placed on a soil layer fi xed by double-
2.4 2.4 Determination of the effect of BC and TPS on soil erodibility using rainfall experiments Determination of the effect of BC and TPS on soil erodibility using rainfall experiments
The erodibility of BC, TPS and their mixtures was examined via laboratory rainfall experiments The erodibility of BC, TPS and their mixtures was examined via laboratory rainfall experiments
at the Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, University Kiel, Germany. at the Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, University Kiel, Germany.
The Capillary Rainfall Simulator (in detail described in The Capillary Rainfall Simulator (in detail described in ULRICH
falling height produces rain in drop size and velocity comparable to natural rainfall (falling height produces rain in drop size and velocity comparable to natural rainfall (SCHMIDT
2005). The intensity of rainfall was observed with a Laser Precipitation Monitor (Thies Clima, 2005). The intensity of rainfall was observed with a Laser Precipitation Monitor (Thies Clima,
Göttingen, Germany). For comparison, an additional measurement of rainfall intensity was done Göttingen, Germany). For comparison, an additional measurement of rainfall intensity was done
with Hellmann Rain Gauges for ten minutes before each simulation. All rainfall experiments with Hellmann Rain Gauges for ten minutes before each simulation. All rainfall experiments
were conducted with drinking water (average electric conductivity of 520 μS cm were conducted with drinking water (average electric conductivity of 520 μS cm–1
perature of 22.5 °C). Substrates were placed as 10 cm layer on top of 30 cm of sand into steel perature of 22.5 °C). Substrates were placed as 10 cm layer on top of 30 cm of sand into steel
boxes (80boxes (80 9090 40 cm) with suction plates at the bottom. Time Domain Refl ectrometry (TrimeIT) 40 cm) with suction plates at the bottom. Time Domain Refl ectrometry (TrimeIT)
probes were placed at a depth of 20 cm in order to check the WC of the sand layer. Prior to the probes were placed at a depth of 20 cm in order to check the WC of the sand layer. Prior to the
actual experiments, the sand layer was pre-rained. While this layer remained undisturbed during actual experiments, the sand layer was pre-rained. While this layer remained undisturbed during
all experiments, the top-layer was always replaced with fresh material and gently pressed down. A all experiments, the top-layer was always replaced with fresh material and gently pressed down. A
rectangular erosion plot (40 rectangular erosion plot (40 50 cm) was placed on the soil surface to prevent border effects. Only 50 cm) was placed on the soil surface to prevent border effects. Only
runoff from the erosion plot at the soil surface was observed, similarly to runoff from the erosion plot at the soil surface was observed, similarly to ULRICH
issue). Based on the results from the wettability measurement, one out of eight TPS was chosen issue). Based on the results from the wettability measurement, one out of eight TPS was chosen
ULRICH et al et al. . 2012, this issue) with 8.5 m 2012, this issue) with 8.5 m
SCHMIDT
–1, average tem- , average tem-
ULRICH et al et al. . (2012, this (2012, this
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 5

5 5
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettabilityInfl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
for this experiment. In total, 20 experimental set-ups were tested (Table 2) in order to examine the for this experiment. In total, 20 experimental set-ups were tested (Table 2) in order to examine the
effect of charcoal-enriched amendments on runoff under various conditions.effect of charcoal-enriched amendments on runoff under various conditions.
(1.) The infl uence of amendments on soil erodibility was tested for different volumetric mix-(1.) The infl uence of amendments on soil erodibility was tested for different volumetric mix-
tures of BC or TPS and compared to soil on two different slopes at the same rainfall intensity. tures of BC or TPS and compared to soil on two different slopes at the same rainfall intensity.
(2.) The infl uence of slope incision on amended soil and amendments was observed at the same (2.) The infl uence of slope incision on amended soil and amendments was observed at the same
time. (3.) The effect of increasing rainfall intensity was measured on one slope for 10 % BC and time. (3.) The effect of increasing rainfall intensity was measured on one slope for 10 % BC and
10 % TPS. (4.) Their erodibility was compared. (5.) The infl uence of two possible applications of 10 % TPS. (4.) Their erodibility was compared. (5.) The infl uence of two possible applications of
10 % of BC or TPS was examined by comparing (a) 10 cm layers of mixtures and (b) placement 10 % of BC or TPS was examined by comparing (a) 10 cm layers of mixtures and (b) placement
of 1 cm of pure substrate on 9 cm of soil. The duration of rainfall experiments was approximately of 1 cm of pure substrate on 9 cm of soil. The duration of rainfall experiments was approximately
one hour and was controlled by the desired rainfall sum, while the rainfall intensity was allowed to one hour and was controlled by the desired rainfall sum, while the rainfall intensity was allowed to
vary within the interval vary within the interval2.5 mm·h2.5 mm·h–1
during the experiment. A soil sample (~ 40 g) for WC meas-
urements was put into a plastic bag before rainfall and each time after 1/6 of the desired rainfall urements was put into a plastic bag before rainfall and each time after 1/6 of the desired rainfall
sum had been reached. In the case of mixtures samples were collected at 0 – 3 cm from 6 different sum had been reached. In the case of mixtures samples were collected at 0 – 3 cm from 6 different
points around the outer frame of the erosion plot. When 1 cm layers were rained, samples from the points around the outer frame of the erosion plot. When 1 cm layers were rained, samples from the
surface (0 –1 cm) and the underlying 1– 3 cm (~ 24 g and ~ 31 g) were taken. Samples were stored surface (0 –1 cm) and the underlying 1– 3 cm (~ 24 g and ~ 31 g) were taken. Samples were stored
frozen until WC was calculated gravimetrically at the end of the same day. Runoff was collected frozen until WC was calculated gravimetrically at the end of the same day. Runoff was collected
and measured in the same intervals. After fi ltration (Whatman 1573- particle retention 12 – 25 μm and measured in the same intervals. After fi ltration (Whatman 1573- particle retention 12 – 25 μm
and Munktel 13 P), water samples (200 ml) were analyzed for total organic carbon (NPOC – non and Munktel 13 P), water samples (200 ml) were analyzed for total organic carbon (NPOC – non
purgeable organic carbon, purgeable organic carbon, DIN EN DIN EN 1484 1997 ), nitrates (NH1484 1997 ), nitrates (NH4 4-N, NO
phosphates (PO phosphates (PO4 4, , VDLUFA VDLUFA 1 1 A A 6.2. 6.2.11) and Na11) and Na+ +, K
solid matter was weighed and examined for total carbon, nitrate ( solid matter was weighed and examined for total carbon, nitrate (DIN ISO
and P and P2 2O O5 5 content (DIN EN ISO 6878 2004). The sediment enrichment ratio was calculated as a content (DIN EN ISO 6878 2004). The sediment enrichment ratio was calculated as a
ratio between the concentration of nutrients in the sediment and their concentration in the origi-ratio between the concentration of nutrients in the sediment and their concentration in the origi-
nal substrate, using the same units.nal substrate, using the same units.
–1during the experiment. A soil sample (~ 40 g) for WC meas-
-N, NO3 3, , DIN EN
, Ca2+
DIN 38405
DIN ISO 10694
DIN EN 26777 1993), 26777 1993),
38405-9 -9 2011). Air-dried 2011). Air-dried
10694: :19691969- -08 1969)
, K+ +, Mg, Mg2+2+, Ca
2+ ( (DIN
08 1969)
3 3 Results Results
3.13.1 Drying of samples Drying of samples
The initial WC (gravimetric water content, WC/weight %) of pure BC and all pure TPS types The initial WC (gravimetric water content, WC/weight %) of pure BC and all pure TPS types
ranged between ~ 300 and 600 % (except for TPS8 with ~ 650 % initial moisture content). Ap- ranged between ~ 300 and 600 % (except for TPS8 with ~ 650 % initial moisture content). Ap-
proximately 250 minutes of drying at 40 °C were needed to obtain WCs below 100 % (Fig. 2 A–B). proximately 250 minutes of drying at 40 °C were needed to obtain WCs below 100 % (Fig. 2 A–B).
Table Table 2. Different rainfall experiment set-ups. 2. Different rainfall experiment set-ups.
RI RISlope SlopeSoil SoilBiochar BiocharTPS7 TPS7
10 % 10 %5 % 5 %10 %10 % 1 cm 1 cm20 %20 % 1 cm1 cm
mm · h mm · h–1
25
25
25
25
35
35
45
45
55
55
–1
% %
1515
2525
1515
1515
1515
33
33
00
00
00
33
33
00
00
00
33
33
33
33
33
33
00
00
00
22
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
00
00
00
33
00
00
00
22
RI – Rainfall Intensity, 0 – 3 Number of repetition, % are vol%, Soil is sandy-loamy.RI – Rainfall Intensity, 0 – 3 Number of repetition, % are vol%, Soil is sandy-loamy.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 6

6 6
A. Smetanová et al. A. Smetanová et al.
Pure BC and TPS dried with a linearly approximated rate of 1.5 % per minute for BC and 1.1 Pure BC and TPS dried with a linearly approximated rate of 1.5 % per minute for BC and 1.1
( ( 0.1) % per minute averaged for all TPS. Their drying was faster than of sandy mixtures, which 0.1) % per minute averaged for all TPS. Their drying was faster than of sandy mixtures, which
for instance had a rate of 0.26 for 10 % of BC and 0.16 (for instance had a rate of 0.26 for 10 % of BC and 0.16 ( 0.1) for 5 % BC and averaged for all TPS
mixtures. Only for some of the TPS and BC mixtures (e.g., 10 % TPS1, 10 % TPS4 and 5 % BC), is mixtures. Only for some of the TPS and BC mixtures (e.g., 10 % TPS1, 10 % TPS4 and 5 % BC), is
a signifi cant decrease in drying rate observable at WCs below 10 %, which is clearly absent for the a signifi cant decrease in drying rate observable at WCs below 10 %, which is clearly absent for the
pure sand. For pure TPS and BC, the observed drying time was too short to record WC changes pure sand. For pure TPS and BC, the observed drying time was too short to record WC changes
below 10 % and only few data points are available for WCs below 100 %. However, a reduction of below 10 % and only few data points are available for WCs below 100 %. However, a reduction of
drying rates at lower WCs cannot be excluded for the pure substrates.drying rates at lower WCs cannot be excluded for the pure substrates.
0.1) for 5 % BC and averaged for all TPS
3.23.2 Effect of BC and TPS on soil wettability Effect of BC and TPS on soil wettability
The Wilhelmy Plate Method was successfully used for the determination of the advancing contact The Wilhelmy Plate Method was successfully used for the determination of the advancing contact
WC/weight % – gravimetric water content, CAWPM/°-contact angle obtain by Wilhelmy Plate WC/weight % – gravimetric water content, CAWPM/°-contact angle obtain by Wilhelmy Plate
Method angle (CAMethod angle (CAWPM
) of the substances which had WCs of up to ~ 400 % for the pure substrates
and around 40 % for their mixtures with sand. At higher WCs, sample material was less effectively and around 40 % for their mixtures with sand. At higher WCs, sample material was less effectively
fi xed and partly washed from the adhesive tape during the measurement process. Hence, an exact fi xed and partly washed from the adhesive tape during the measurement process. Hence, an exact
evaluation was impossible. Generally, the CAevaluation was impossible. Generally, the CAWPM
WPM) of the substances which had WCs of up to ~ 400 % for the pure substrates
WPM of all materials increase with decreasing WC of all materials increase with decreasing WC
Fig. Fig. 2. Drying of charcoal-enriched substrates and their mixtures with sand at 40 °C. 2. Drying of charcoal-enriched substrates and their mixtures with sand at 40 °C.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 7

7 7
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettabilityInfl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
at WCs below a particular treshold (example in Fig. 3 A–F). At WCsat WCs below a particular treshold (example in Fig. 3 A–F). At WCs
pure substrates are wettable with nearly constant CAs of ~ 30 – 50°. With further decrease of WCs pure substrates are wettable with nearly constant CAs of ~ 30 – 50°. With further decrease of WCs
below the limiting WC, contact angles increased at different rates. At zero WC (105 °C, dried for below the limiting WC, contact angles increased at different rates. At zero WC (105 °C, dried for
24 hours), all pure substrates became repellent and revealed their maximum contact angle with 24 hours), all pure substrates became repellent and revealed their maximum contact angle with
~ 90 –110° for TPS 1, 2, 5, and 7 (Table 3). For BC and TPS 3, 4, 6, and 8 a CA of ~ 120° was ~ 90 –110° for TPS 1, 2, 5, and 7 (Table 3). For BC and TPS 3, 4, 6, and 8 a CA of ~ 120° was
observed. Interestingly, at WCs between 20 % (e.g. TSP3) and 110 % (e.g. TPS7), a more or less observed. Interestingly, at WCs between 20 % (e.g. TSP3) and 110 % (e.g. TPS7), a more or less
pronounced second local CA maximum was observed for all pure substrates. The pure BC was pronounced second local CA maximum was observed for all pure substrates. The pure BC was
clearly more hydrophobic than all types of TPS in a WC range from 50 –100 %. The minimum WC clearly more hydrophobic than all types of TPS in a WC range from 50 –100 %. The minimum WC
(WC (WCmin
) at which a CA below the transition range between hydrophobic and hydrophilic behaviour
(~ 80 –100°) was determined, amounted to ~ 10 –70 % for TPS 2, 3, 4 and 7. This value was lower (~ 80 –100°) was determined, amounted to ~ 10 –70 % for TPS 2, 3, 4 and 7. This value was lower
200 % (limiting WC), all 200 % (limiting WC), all
min) at which a CA below the transition range between hydrophobic and hydrophilic behaviour
Fig. Fig. 3. Effect of selected charcoal-enriched substrates on wettability of soil. 3. Effect of selected charcoal-enriched substrates on wettability of soil.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 8

8 8
A. Smetanová et al.A. Smetanová et al.
than for TPS 1, 5, 6, and 8 with a WCthan for TPS 1, 5, 6, and 8 with a WCmin
repellent were probably TPS 2 and 7, since they supported the highest WC reduction (down to repellent were probably TPS 2 and 7, since they supported the highest WC reduction (down to
~ 100 %) without the contact angle increasing. Therefore, TPS 7 was chosen as the most suitable ~ 100 %) without the contact angle increasing. Therefore, TPS 7 was chosen as the most suitable
TPS type for soil amendment and used for the subsequent erodibility experiments.TPS type for soil amendment and used for the subsequent erodibility experiments.
Pure sand as well as the sandy mixtures with TPS and BC mostly remained wettable with Pure sand as well as the sandy mixtures with TPS and BC mostly remained wettable with
decreasing WC. For all mixtures, independent from the percentage of TPS or BC, the CA at WCsdecreasing WC. For all mixtures, independent from the percentage of TPS or BC, the CA at WCs 
 15 – 20 % (limiting WC for mixtures) was higher (40 – 60°) than for the pure substances at WCs of15 – 20 % (limiting WC for mixtures) was higher (40 – 60°) than for the pure substances at WCs of 
min of ~ 100 –170 %. The substrates least prone to becoming of ~ 100 –170 %. The substrates least prone to becoming
Table Table 3. Maximum contact angles obtained during drying of charcoal-enrichted substrates and their mix- 3. Maximum contact angles obtained during drying of charcoal-enrichted substrates and their mix-
tures with sand.tures with sand.
Contact angle°Contact angle° WC/weight = 0 (24 h/105 °C) WC/weight = 0 (24 h/105 °C)
WPMWPM
99 ± 0.199 ± 0.1
101 ± 1101 ± 1
119 ± 2119 ± 2
119 ± 3 119 ± 3
89 ± 3 89 ± 3
115 ± 3 115 ± 3
106 ± 8106 ± 8
117 ± 0.2117 ± 0.2
75 ± 375 ± 3
67 ± 167 ± 1
108 ± 2 108 ± 2
83 ± 2 83 ± 2
68 ± 1 68 ± 1
75 ± 175 ± 1
68 ± 1 68 ± 1
72 ± 272 ± 2
65 ± 165 ± 1
63 ± 263 ± 2
61 ± 0.461 ± 0.4
64 ± 4 64 ± 4
65 ± 365 ± 3
62 ± 2 62 ± 2
57 ± 2 57 ± 2
71 ± 0.571 ± 0.5
49 ± 249 ± 2
120 ± 2 120 ± 2
52 ± 152 ± 1
57 ± 157 ± 1
MAXIMUM / SECOND MAXIMUM (40 °C)MAXIMUM / SECOND MAXIMUM (40 °C)
WC/weight WC/weightWPM WPM
11011089 ± 389 ± 3
65 6567 ± 967 ± 9
22 22 110 ± 2 110 ± 2
44 44 88 ± 188 ± 1
65 65 90 ± 390 ± 3
78 7890 ± 4 90 ± 4
63 63 74 ± 874 ± 8
7 7 110 ± 3110 ± 3
6 6 77 ± 877 ± 8
6 6 79 ± 379 ± 3
5 5 101 ± 3101 ± 3
3 3 97 ± 397 ± 3
6 6 101 ± 1101 ± 1
12 12 89 ± 289 ± 2
48 4872 ± 5 72 ± 5
1 1 82 ± 1182 ± 11
11 11112 ± 2 112 ± 2
23 2379 ± 179 ± 1
2 2 79 ± 2 79 ± 2
3 3 96 ± 396 ± 3
1 1 70 ± 170 ± 1
5 578 ± 178 ± 1
18 1869 ± 669 ± 6
6 675 ± 4 75 ± 4
1 183 ± 283 ± 2
35 35117 ± 5117 ± 5
9 973 ± 673 ± 6
10 1072 ± 172 ± 1
SDMSDM
98 ± 398 ± 3
90 ± 290 ± 2
101 ± 1 101 ± 1
91 ± 491 ± 4
102 ± 4 102 ± 4
76 ± 976 ± 9
102 ± 6102 ± 6
100 ± 4100 ± 4
75 ± 375 ± 3
63 ± 463 ± 4
51 ± 5 51 ± 5
83 ± 383 ± 3
64 ± 8 64 ± 8
62 ± 362 ± 3
63 ± 663 ± 6
71 ± 671 ± 6
60 ± 660 ± 6
60 ± 460 ± 4
80 ± 680 ± 6
63 ± 563 ± 5
58 ± 558 ± 5
63 ± 8 63 ± 8
39 ± 339 ± 3
66 ± 3 66 ± 3
43 ± 343 ± 3
112 ± 4112 ± 4
44 ± 844 ± 8
48 ± 5 48 ± 5
WC/weightWC/weight
110 110
19 19
17 17
8 8
65 65
22 22
10 10
7 7
5 5
11 11
2 2
9 9
6 6
8 8
5 5
6 6
11 11
18 18
3 3
3 3
4 4
5 5
18 18
12 12
1 1
35 35
1 1
10 10
SDMSDM
70 ± 7 70 ± 7
76 ± 976 ± 9
95 ± 0 95 ± 0
97 ± 4 97 ± 4
76 ± 876 ± 8
95 ± 1195 ± 11
94 ± 494 ± 4
91 ± 491 ± 4
70 ± 870 ± 8
66 ± 6 66 ± 6
64 ± 17 64 ± 17
64 ± 6 64 ± 6
75 ± 1075 ± 10
59 ± 2359 ± 23
71 ± 2 71 ± 2
60 ± 560 ± 5
62 ± 1062 ± 10
59 ± 3 59 ± 3
72 ± 472 ± 4
70 ± 670 ± 6
59 ± 559 ± 5
69 ± 669 ± 6
44 ± 7 44 ± 7
53 ± 253 ± 2
73 ± 3 73 ± 3
111 ± 5111 ± 5
57 ± 1157 ± 11
64 ± 364 ± 3
100 % TPS 1 100 % TPS 1
100 % TPS 2100 % TPS 2
100 % TPS 3 100 % TPS 3
100 % TPS 4100 % TPS 4
100 % TPS 5 100 % TPS 5
100 % TPS 6100 % TPS 6
100 % TPS 7100 % TPS 7
100 % TPS 8100 % TPS 8
20 % TPS 1 20 % TPS 1
20 % TPS 2 20 % TPS 2
20 % TPS 3 20 % TPS 3
20 % TPS 4 20 % TPS 4
20 % TPS 5 20 % TPS 5
20 % TPS 6 20 % TPS 6
20 % TPS 7 20 % TPS 7
20 % TPS 8 20 % TPS 8
10 % TPS 1 10 % TPS 1
10 % TPS 2 10 % TPS 2
10 % TPS 3 10 % TPS 3
10 % TPS 4 10 % TPS 4
10 % TPS 5 10 % TPS 5
10 % TPS 6 10 % TPS 6
10 % TPS 7 10 % TPS 7
10 % TPS 8 10 % TPS 8
100 % Sand100 % Sand
100 % Biochar100 % Biochar
10 % Biochar 10 % Biochar
5 % Biochar 5 % Biochar
WPM – Wilhelmy Plate Method, SSD – Sessil Drop Method, WC/weight – gravimetric water content (%), WPM – Wilhelmy Plate Method, SSD – Sessil Drop Method, WC/weight – gravimetric water content (%),
(24 h/105 °C) – drying for 24 hours at 105 °C, maximum/second maximum (40 °C) – maximum of the water (24 h/105 °C) – drying for 24 hours at 105 °C, maximum/second maximum (40 °C) – maximum of the water
content – contact angle relationship by drying at 40 °C, second maximum is given if the maximum contact content – contact angle relationship by drying at 40 °C, second maximum is given if the maximum contact
angle occurs at gravimetric water content = 0 %.angle occurs at gravimetric water content = 0 %.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 9

9 9
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettabilityInfl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
 200 % (~ 30 – 50°). However, as observed for pure TPS and BC, the sandy mixtures also revealed 200 % (~ 30 – 50°). However, as observed for pure TPS and BC, the sandy mixtures also revealed
a local CA maximum at WCs above zero. In case of the sand and the sandy mixtures, it was even a local CA maximum at WCs above zero. In case of the sand and the sandy mixtures, it was even
higher than their CAs at zero WC and in several cases a change from hydrophilic to hydrophobic higher than their CAs at zero WC and in several cases a change from hydrophilic to hydrophobic
occurred. In comparison to pure sand, the second CA maximum was shifted to higher WCs for occurred. In comparison to pure sand, the second CA maximum was shifted to higher WCs for
the mixtures. At a WC close to zero, contact angles of most samples did not reach the former the mixtures. At a WC close to zero, contact angles of most samples did not reach the former
maximum and only one sample (20 % TPS3) became water repellent. The differences in wettabil- maximum and only one sample (20 % TPS3) became water repellent. The differences in wettabil-
ity upon drying between the various types of pure TPS could not be recognized in their sandy ity upon drying between the various types of pure TPS could not be recognized in their sandy
mixtures. Mixing sand with TPS and BC generally increased the CA for WCs to above 5 % (except mixtures. Mixing sand with TPS and BC generally increased the CA for WCs to above 5 % (except
for 10 % TPS3), while the opposite was observed for lower WCs (except 20 % TPS 2 and 3). The for 10 % TPS3), while the opposite was observed for lower WCs (except 20 % TPS 2 and 3). The
addition of 10 % TPS1 or TPS4 and 20 % TPS 3, 4 and 5 caused hydrophobic behaviour at WCs addition of 10 % TPS1 or TPS4 and 20 % TPS 3, 4 and 5 caused hydrophobic behaviour at WCs
corresponding to the mixture corresponding to the mixture s local CA maximum.s local CA maximum.
Simultaneously to CASimultaneously to CAWPM
, the sessile drop contact angle (CASDM
similar results (Table 3). With decreasing WC the contact angles were increasing. Maximum CAs similar results (Table 3). With decreasing WC the contact angles were increasing. Maximum CAs
for pure substrates at zero WC were higher than 90°, except for T6 (76°). BC was the most hydro-for pure substrates at zero WC were higher than 90°, except for T6 (76°). BC was the most hydro-
phobic substrate with a CA of 112°, while its mixtures remained hydrophilic. Similarly, lower CAs phobic substrate with a CA of 112°, while its mixtures remained hydrophilic. Similarly, lower CAs
than for pure TPS were measured for both mixtures. The maximum CA of pure substrates, higher than for pure TPS were measured for both mixtures. The maximum CA of pure substrates, higher
than this at zero WC, was measured at the same WC as by WPM (TPS1) or was shifted towards the than this at zero WC, was measured at the same WC as by WPM (TPS1) or was shifted towards the
lower WC (all others). The opposite was observed for 10 % and 20 % TPS mixtures, where values lower WC (all others). The opposite was observed for 10 % and 20 % TPS mixtures, where values
of the second CA of the second CA s maximum were shifted towards higher WCs. s maximum were shifted towards higher WCs.
WPM, the sessile drop contact angle (CA
SDM) was also obtained, with ) was also obtained, with
3.33.3 Effect of BC and TPS on runoff patterns Effect of BC and TPS on runoff patterns
The runoff response of BC and TPS7 mixed with sandy-loamy soil was compared with pure soil on The runoff response of BC and TPS7 mixed with sandy-loamy soil was compared with pure soil on
a 15 % and a 25 % slope and a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·ha 15 % and a 25 % slope and a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·h–1
all substrates showed a constant increase of runoff volume (Fig. 4 A, B). On the 15 % slope, runoff all substrates showed a constant increase of runoff volume (Fig. 4 A, B). On the 15 % slope, runoff
from 20 % TPS7 started within the fi rst 1/6 of the total rainfall sum (approximately 10 minutes), from 20 % TPS7 started within the fi rst 1/6 of the total rainfall sum (approximately 10 minutes),
while it occurred later for soil and all other substrates. The 20 % TPS7 also showed maximum val- while it occurred later for soil and all other substrates. The 20 % TPS7 also showed maximum val-
ues for the runoff coeffi cient (46 ues for the runoff coeffi cient (46 9 %) on a 15 % slope, followed by pure soil and other mixtures 9 %) on a 15 % slope, followed by pure soil and other mixtures
(Table 4). On a 25 % slope, a maximum runoff coeffi cient of ~ 42 % was measured for pure soil, (Table 4). On a 25 % slope, a maximum runoff coeffi cient of ~ 42 % was measured for pure soil,
while the ones of the mixtures totalled ~ 34 – 39 %. The amount of runoff from the majority of the while the ones of the mixtures totalled ~ 34 – 39 %. The amount of runoff from the majority of the
substrates was similar to that of pure soil. When 10 % BC was applied on a 15 % slope, it decreased substrates was similar to that of pure soil. When 10 % BC was applied on a 15 % slope, it decreased
the runoff coeffi cient of pure soil by up to 59 %, with a runoff coeffi cient 16 the runoff coeffi cient of pure soil by up to 59 %, with a runoff coeffi cient 16
experiment. Layers (1 cm) of both BC and TPS7 performed even more effectively and reduced run- experiment. Layers (1 cm) of both BC and TPS7 performed even more effectively and reduced run-
off from pure soil by more than 90 %. Varying the rainfall intensity (35 – 55 mm·h off from pure soil by more than 90 %. Varying the rainfall intensity (35 – 55 mm·h–1
15 % for 10 % BC and 10 % TPS7 (Fig. 4 C, D), the runoff coeffi cient increased with rising rainfall 15 % for 10 % BC and 10 % TPS7 (Fig. 4 C, D), the runoff coeffi cient increased with rising rainfall
intensity and ranged from ~ 31 to ~ 73 % and ~ 32 to ~ 69 % for 10 % BC and TPS7, respectively. intensity and ranged from ~ 31 to ~ 73 % and ~ 32 to ~ 69 % for 10 % BC and TPS7, respectively.
While at a rainfall intensity of 35 mm·h While at a rainfall intensity of 35 mm·h–1
patterns and values of runoff coeffi cients were similar for
both mixtures, 10 % TPS7 was ~ 35 % more effective in runoff reduction at a rainfall intensity of both mixtures, 10 % TPS7 was ~ 35 % more effective in runoff reduction at a rainfall intensity of
45 mm·h45 mm·h–1
. At rainfall intensity 55 mm·h–1
both runoff coeffi cients corresponded within the error
bars. In contrast, a 1 cm layer of BC at this intensity caused slightly lower runoff than 1 cm of TPS7 bars. In contrast, a 1 cm layer of BC at this intensity caused slightly lower runoff than 1 cm of TPS7
after ~ 50 % of the rainfall sum.after ~ 50 % of the rainfall sum.
–1 (Fig. 4). For both experiment settings, (Fig. 4). For both experiment settings,
7 % at the end of the 7 % at the end of the
–1) at a slope of ) at a slope of
–1 patterns and values of runoff coeffi cients were similar for
–1. At rainfall intensity 55 mm·h
–1 both runoff coeffi cients corresponded within the error
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 10

10 10
A. Smetanová et al. A. Smetanová et al.
3.4 3.4 Water content development during rainfall experiments Water content development during rainfall experiments
The initial WC (WC The initial WC (WCbeg.
der beneath 1 cm of substrate at a depth of 1– 3 cm was ~ 15 %. The upper substrate layer had der beneath 1 cm of substrate at a depth of 1– 3 cm was ~ 15 %. The upper substrate layer had
an initial WC of ~ 30 % and ~ 22 % for TPS7 and BC, respectively. Correlating the runoff coef-an initial WC of ~ 30 % and ~ 22 % for TPS7 and BC, respectively. Correlating the runoff coef-
fi cient with the WC, the runoff started at a WC of 24 % on pure soil during the experiment with fi cient with the WC, the runoff started at a WC of 24 % on pure soil during the experiment with
a 25 mm·ha 25 mm·h–1
rainfall intensity on both the 15 % and 25 % slopes. After runoff formation the WC
(WC (WCstab.
) remained constant despite the runoff increasing until the end of the experiment (WCend
Similar behaviour was observed for all mixtures on both slopes, despite the runoff beginning at Similar behaviour was observed for all mixtures on both slopes, despite the runoff beginning at
higher WC higher WCstab.
than for soil. Up to a rainfall intensity 35 mm·h–1
was reached in the mixtures. At higher rainfall intensities, the runoff occurred sooner. In the case was reached in the mixtures. At higher rainfall intensities, the runoff occurred sooner. In the case
of 1 cm applications, the WC of the upper substrate layer is more variable (WCof 1 cm applications, the WC of the upper substrate layer is more variable (WCstab.
mated) than the one of the underlying soil (WC mated) than the one of the underlying soil (WCstab.
runoff was suppressed in the case of BC for the fi rst 30 min, though a WC of ~ 66 % was reached. runoff was suppressed in the case of BC for the fi rst 30 min, though a WC of ~ 66 % was reached.
At an intensity of 55 mm·hAt an intensity of 55 mm·h–1
, the runoff started at approximately this WC in the 0 –1 cm layer.
beg. in Table 4) of all mixtures at a depth of 0 – 3 cm and of the soil lying un- in Table 4) of all mixtures at a depth of 0 – 3 cm and of the soil lying un-
–1 rainfall intensity on both the 15 % and 25 % slopes. After runoff formation the WC
stab.) remained constant despite the runoff increasing until the end of the experiment (WC
end). ).
stab. than for soil. Up to a rainfall intensity 35 mm·h
–1, the runoff formed after WC, the runoff formed after WCstab.stab.
stab. cannot be esti- cannot be esti-
stab.~ 25 – 31 %). At an intensity of 25 mm·h~ 25 – 31 %). At an intensity of 25 mm·h–1 –1, the , the
–1, the runoff started at approximately this WC in the 0 –1 cm layer.
Fig. Fig. 4. Development of runoff coeffi cients during rainfall experiments with charcoal-enriched substrates and 4. Development of runoff coeffi cients during rainfall experiments with charcoal-enriched substrates and
their mixtures with sandy-loamy soil. their mixtures with sandy-loamy soil.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 11

11 11
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettabilityInfl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
3.53.5 Effects of BC and TPS on nutrient discharge Effects of BC and TPS on nutrient discharge
Nutrient content differed between substrates. Pure TPS7 contained about three times more carbon Nutrient content differed between substrates. Pure TPS7 contained about three times more carbon
and nitrogen, and around seven times more P and nitrogen, and around seven times more P2 2O O5 5 than BC. While the nitrogen content remained
close to the values of soil (0.11 %) for all mixtures, both BC and TPS7 had a higher content of car-close to the values of soil (0.11 %) for all mixtures, both BC and TPS7 had a higher content of car-
bon (by 27 and 100 %, 9 and 145 %) and Pbon (by 27 and 100 %, 9 and 145 %) and P2 2O O5 5 (by 13 and18 %, 9 and 121 %), respectively (Table 5).(by 13 and18 %, 9 and 121 %), respectively (Table 5).
Under a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·hUnder a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·h–1
, the total loads (t.l.) of sediment were 6
(Table 6). Slightly more sediment was detached by runoff produced on a steeper slope, but the (Table 6). Slightly more sediment was detached by runoff produced on a steeper slope, but the
sediment concentration (con.) remained the same (Table 7). Similar behaviour was observed by all sediment concentration (con.) remained the same (Table 7). Similar behaviour was observed by all
mixtures placed on 15 % and 25 % slopes, where the t.l. were slightly more variable, but remained mixtures placed on 15 % and 25 % slopes, where the t.l. were slightly more variable, but remained
fairly similar as did the con. Comparing the sediment con. of soil and amended soil substances, fairly similar as did the con. Comparing the sediment con. of soil and amended soil substances,
lower concentrations occurred only in the case of 1 cm substrate application. When the rainfall lower concentrations occurred only in the case of 1 cm substrate application. When the rainfall
intensity increased, the t.l. and con. of sediment increased for both the 10 % BC and 10 % TPS7 intensity increased, the t.l. and con. of sediment increased for both the 10 % BC and 10 % TPS7
(Table 8 and Table 9) in comparison with the 25 mm·h(Table 8 and Table 9) in comparison with the 25 mm·h–1
tionship between increasing rainfall intensity and t.l., nor con. of sediment could be detected. The tionship between increasing rainfall intensity and t.l., nor con. of sediment could be detected. The
than BC. While the nitrogen content remained
–1, the total loads (t.l.) of sediment were 6
4 g and 12 4 g and 121 g 1 g
–1 intensity, although no clear positive rela- intensity, although no clear positive rela-
TableTable 4. Runoff coeffi cient and water content development during rainfall experiments with charcoal-en- 4. Runoff coeffi cient and water content development during rainfall experiments with charcoal-en-
riched substrates and their mixtures with sandy-loamy soil.riched substrates and their mixtures with sandy-loamy soil.
Slope 15 %Slope 15 % Slope 25 % Slope 25 %
WC WCbeg.beg.
RC RCWC WCbeg.beg.
WC WCstab.
Rainfall Intensity 25 mm·hRainfall Intensity 25 mm·h–1
24 ± 1 24 ± 1
35 ± 235 ± 2
25 ± 125 ± 1
29 ± 129 ± 1
27 ± 127 ± 1
cbe / 30 ± 1 cbe / 30 ± 1
cbe / 25 ± 2cbe / 25 ± 2
Rainfall Intensity 35 mm h Rainfall Intensity 35 mm h–1
27 ± 127 ± 1
27 ± 2 27 ± 2
Rainfall Intensity 45 mm·hRainfall Intensity 45 mm·h–1
29 ± 229 ± 2
28 ± 1 28 ± 1
Rainfall Intensity 55 mm·h Rainfall Intensity 55 mm·h–1
33 ± 0 33 ± 0
28 ± 128 ± 1
cbe / 31 ± 7
cbe / 31 ± 0 cbe / 31 ± 0
stab.
WC WCendend
RCRCWC WCstab. stab.
WCWCend end
–1
Soil Soil
20 % T 20 % T
5 % B 5 % B
10 % T10 % T
10 % B10 % B
1 cm T 1 cm T
1 cm B 1 cm B
39 ± 6 39 ± 6
46 ± 946 ± 9
35 ± 335 ± 3
38 ± 238 ± 2
16 ± 716 ± 7
3 ± 33 ± 3
1 ± 11 ± 1
13 ± 113 ± 1
20 ± 120 ± 1
13 ± 113 ± 1
19 ± 519 ± 5
14 ± 114 ± 1
24 ± 124 ± 1
30 ± 130 ± 1
26 ± 226 ± 2
27 ± 127 ± 1
28 ± 1 28 ± 1
42 ± 342 ± 3
38 ± 238 ± 2
35 ± 235 ± 2
34 ± 134 ± 1
39 ± 439 ± 4
13 ± 0 13 ± 0
21 ± 221 ± 2
12 ± 112 ± 1
17 ± 217 ± 2
12 ± 012 ± 0
24 ± 124 ± 1
34 ± 134 ± 1
27 ± 027 ± 0
30 ± 130 ± 1
29 ± 1 29 ± 1
25 ± 0 25 ± 0
31 ± 131 ± 1
29 ± 129 ± 1
26 ± 026 ± 0
28 ± 1 28 ± 1
30 ± 9 / 16 ± 130 ± 9 / 16 ± 1
31 ± 1 / 15 ± 031 ± 1 / 15 ± 0
54 ± 21 / 25 ± 254 ± 21 / 25 ± 2
73 ± 15 / 29 ± 273 ± 15 / 29 ± 2
–1
10 % T 10 % T
10 % B10 % B
32 ± 3 32 ± 3
31 ± 1031 ± 10
14 ± 114 ± 1
11 ± 211 ± 2
28 ± 128 ± 1
27 ± 127 ± 1
–1
10 % T 10 % T
10 % B 10 % B
46 ± 846 ± 8
63 ± 4 63 ± 4
16 ± 116 ± 1
17 ± 417 ± 4
31 ± 131 ± 1
25 ± 125 ± 1
–1
10 % T10 % T
10 % B 10 % B
1 cm T 1 cm T* *
1 cm B 1 cm B* *
69 ± 1869 ± 18
73 ± 2273 ± 22
79 ± 479 ± 4 54 ± 27 / 17 ± 1 54 ± 27 / 17 ± 1 cbe / 31 ± 7
57 ± 1457 ± 14 13 ± 1 / 13 ± 213 ± 1 / 13 ± 2
15 ± 215 ± 2
13 ± 1 13 ± 1
28 ± 028 ± 0
27 ± 127 ± 1
70 ± 20 / 36 ± 970 ± 20 / 36 ± 9
61 ± 27 / 31 ± 1 61 ± 27 / 31 ± 1
B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B or T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B or T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate
on 9 cm of soil,on 9 cm of soil, * * – 2 repetitions; RC- runoff coeffi cient (%), WC – water content/weight %, WC – 2 repetitions; RC- runoff coeffi cient (%), WC – water content/weight %, WCbeg
beginning of experiment, Wc beginning of experiment, Wcstab.
– WC stabilzed after runoff formation, WCend
ment; valuement; value standard error, a / b – value in 0 –1 cm / 1– 3 cm under surface, cbe – can not be estimated.standard error, a / b – value in 0 –1 cm / 1– 3 cm under surface, cbe – can not be estimated.
beg – WC at – WC at
stab.– WC stabilzed after runoff formation, WC
end – WC at the end of experi- – WC at the end of experi-
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 12

12 12
A. Smetanová et al. A. Smetanová et al.
only exception was the 1 cm BC where the sediment con. increased from 1only exception was the 1 cm BC where the sediment con. increased from 1
between 25 mm·hbetween 25 mm·h–1
and 55 mm·h–1
intensity.
In all rainfall experiments, the t.l. and con. of C, N, and P were higher in the transported sedi- In all rainfall experiments, the t.l. and con. of C, N, and P were higher in the transported sedi-
ment than in the runoff water. A change in slope seem to have no effect in the case of con. and ment than in the runoff water. A change in slope seem to have no effect in the case of con. and
t.l. of C, N, Pt.l. of C, N, P2 2O O5 5 in the sediment of natural soil. The t.l. of PO in the sediment of natural soil. The t.l. of PO4 4 in water was slightly higher, but
the con. remained similar. For different soil-ammendment mixtures nutrient, discharge was not the con. remained similar. For different soil-ammendment mixtures nutrient, discharge was not
affected by an increase of the slope angle, except of C and Paffected by an increase of the slope angle, except of C and P2 2O O5 5 con. of 10 % BC. The nutrients in
water were more sensitive to slope gradient, when some t.l. slightly increased (NPOC – 5 % BC, water were more sensitive to slope gradient, when some t.l. slightly increased (NPOC – 5 % BC,
NONO3 3 –10 % TPS7, PO –10 % TPS7, PO4 4 – 20 % TPS7) or slightly decreased (NPOC –10 % BC). The other t.l. and – 20 % TPS7) or slightly decreased (NPOC –10 % BC). The other t.l. and
con. in water remained similar (except of NPOC and PO4 for 5 % BC). The t.l. and con. of C, N, con. in water remained similar (except of NPOC and PO4 for 5 % BC). The t.l. and con. of C, N,
and P in sediment remained similar to natural soil after the addition of both BC and TPS7 on 15 % and P in sediment remained similar to natural soil after the addition of both BC and TPS7 on 15 %
and 25 % slopes, except for increasing con. of C in the case of BC (both slopes) and 10 % TPS7 and 25 % slopes, except for increasing con. of C in the case of BC (both slopes) and 10 % TPS7
(25 % slope). Increased con. of P(25 % slope). Increased con. of P2 2O O5 5 was measured in sediment of TPS7 mixtures (both slopes). was measured in sediment of TPS7 mixtures (both slopes).
The differences between soil’s and mixtures’ nutrients discharge in water was more remarkable. The differences between soil’s and mixtures’ nutrients discharge in water was more remarkable.
The addition of BC slightly decreased the t.l. and con. of NPOC and PO The addition of BC slightly decreased the t.l. and con. of NPOC and PO4 4 (10 % BC), while addi-
tion of TPS7 increased the t.l. and con of POtion of TPS7 increased the t.l. and con of PO4 4 on 15 % slope. The same rainfall intensity (25 mm·hon 15 % slope. The same rainfall intensity (25 mm·h–
11) on a 25 % slope caused a slight decrease in NPOC con. in 10 % BC and increase of P ) on a 25 % slope caused a slight decrease in NPOC con. in 10 % BC and increase of P2 2O O5 5 con in
20 % TPS7. The t.l. and con. of K20 % TPS7. The t.l. and con. of K+ + in runoff water was increased in the case of TPS7 mixtures on in runoff water was increased in the case of TPS7 mixtures on
both slopes, t.l. of Na both slopes, t.l. of Na+ +, Mg, Mg2+
and Ca2+
decreased when 10 % BC was added to soil on a 15 % slope.
Increasing rainfall intensities led to increasing t.l. of all nutrients (Table 8). The nutrient dis-Increasing rainfall intensities led to increasing t.l. of all nutrients (Table 8). The nutrient dis-
charge of 10 % TPS7 and 10 % BC remained similar, within the error bars. Slightly lower values charge of 10 % TPS7 and 10 % BC remained similar, within the error bars. Slightly lower values
of t.l. of POof t.l. of PO4 4 and Naand Na+ + were observed for 10 % BC at intensities of 45 mm·h were observed for 10 % BC at intensities of 45 mm·h–1
spectively.spectively.
Nutrient con. (Table 9) either decreased slightly but continuously (C and P Nutrient con. (Table 9) either decreased slightly but continuously (C and P2 2O O5 5 in 10 % TPS7;
C, N and NO C, N and NO3 3 in 10 % BC), decreased slightly only at an intensity of 55 mm·h-1 (N in 10 % TPS7, in 10 % BC), decreased slightly only at an intensity of 55 mm·h-1 (N in 10 % TPS7,
P P2 2O O5 5 and PO and PO4 4 in 10 % BC) or remained more or less similar, within the errors bars (majority of in 10 % BC) or remained more or less similar, within the errors bars (majority of
others). The con. of POothers). The con. of PO4 4 in water at an intensity of 45 mm·hin water at an intensity of 45 mm·h–1
1 g·l 1 g·l–1–1 to 12 to 12 4 g·l4 g·l–1 –1
–1 and 55 mm·h
–1 intensity.
in water was slightly higher, but
con. of 10 % BC. The nutrients in
(10 % BC), while addi-

con in
2+ and Ca
2+ decreased when 10 % BC was added to soil on a 15 % slope.
–1 and 55 mm·h and 55 mm·h–1–1, re-, re-
in 10 % TPS7;
–1 was again lower for 10 % BC. was again lower for 10 % BC.
Table Table 5. Nutrient content in sandy-loamy soil, examined charcoal-enriched substrates, their mixtures with 5. Nutrient content in sandy-loamy soil, examined charcoal-enriched substrates, their mixtures with
soil, and water used in rainfall experiments. soil, and water used in rainfall experiments.
Nutrients Nutrients
N (%)N (%)
0.11 ± 0 0.11 ± 0
0.1 ± 0 0.1 ± 0
0.12 ± 0 0.12 ± 0
0.2 ± 0.3 0.2 ± 0.3
0.11 ± 0 0.11 ± 0
0.12 ± 00.12 ± 0
0.87 ± 0.1 0.87 ± 0.1
Substrate Substrate
Soil
Soil
5 % Biochar 5 % Biochar
10 % Biochar 10 % Biochar
Biochar Biochar
10 % TPS710 % TPS7
20 %TPS7 20 %TPS7
TPS7 TPS7
Content of biocharContent of biochar
0 %0 %
~ 5 % ~ 5 %
~ 10 %~ 10 %
100 % 100 %
~ 2.3 % ~ 2.3 %
~ 4.6 % ~ 4.6 %
~ 23 %~ 23 %
C (%)C (%)
1.1 ± 01.1 ± 0
1.4 ± 0 1.4 ± 0
2.2 ± 0.1 2.2 ± 0.1
11.5 ± 0.1 11.5 ± 0.1
1.2 ± 0.1 1.2 ± 0.1
2.7 ± 0.1 2.7 ± 0.1
33.37 ± 5 33.37 ± 5
P P2 2O O5 5 (mg · kg (mg · kg–1
142 142
161 161
167 167
229 229
155 155
314 314
15551555
–1) )
Water: NPOCWater: NPOC
3.01 mg · l 3.01 mg · l–1
4.42 mg · l 4.42 mg · l–1
–1, Mg , Mg2+
–1, NO , NO3 3
–1, Ca, Ca2+
1.15 mg · l1.15 mg · l–1
2+ 48.15 mg · l48.15 mg · l–1
–1, PO, PO4 4
–1. .
0.003 mg·l0.003 mg·l–1 –1
, , NaNa+ + 13.05 mg ·l 13.05 mg ·l –1–1, K, K+ +  
2+ 7.9 mg · l 7.9 mg · l–1
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 13

1313
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
Table Table 6. Total loads of nutrients in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 25 mm·h
6. Total loads of nutrients in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 25 mm·h–1 –1. .
Slope %Slope %
SedimentSediment
Sediment Sediment
WaterWater
CC
NN
PP2 2O O5 5
NPOC NPOC
NONO3 3
PO PO4 4
Na Na+ +
K K+ +
MgMg2+2+
CaCa2+2+
g g
10
10 –1 –1 g g
10
10 – 2 – 2 gg
gg
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 4 – 4g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
Soil
Soil
1515
6 ± 4 6 ± 4
4 ± 24 ± 2
4 ± 24 ± 2
3 ± 13 ± 1
12 ± 112 ± 1
3 ± 1 3 ± 1
0.2 ± 0.10.2 ± 0.1
31 ± 831 ± 8
15 ± 4 15 ± 4
15 ± 215 ± 2
105 ± 33 105 ± 33
2525
12 ± 112 ± 1
6 ± 16 ± 1
6 ± 1 6 ± 1
4 ± 0.3 4 ± 0.3
12 ± 4 12 ± 4
3 ± 1 3 ± 1
4 ± 2 4 ± 2
33 ± 2 33 ± 2
15 ± 215 ± 2
20 ± 1 20 ± 1
84 ± 484 ± 4
20 % T20 % T
15 15
10 ± 110 ± 1
9 ± 19 ± 1
7 ± 0 7 ± 0
5 ± 0.5 5 ± 0.5
11 ± 211 ± 2
3 ± 23 ± 2
10 ± 0.2 10 ± 0.2
26 ± 4 26 ± 4
44 ± 12 44 ± 12
38 ± 7 38 ± 7
69 ± 5 69 ± 5
2525
14 ± 2 14 ± 2
10 ± 110 ± 1
9 ± 19 ± 1
7 ± 0.7 7 ± 0.7
21 ± 1121 ± 11
4 ± 34 ± 3
3 ± 1 3 ± 1
31 ± 231 ± 2
48 ± 19 48 ± 19
17 ± 0.4 17 ± 0.4
109 ± 29109 ± 29
5 % B 5 % B
15 15
13 ± 213 ± 2
7 ± 1 7 ± 1
6 ± 16 ± 1
4 ± 0.44 ± 0.4
13 ± 213 ± 2
2 ± 12 ± 1
1 ± 0.61 ± 0.6
27 ± 327 ± 3
15 ± 215 ± 2
8 ± 48 ± 4
84 ± 1184 ± 11
2525
11 ± 0.511 ± 0.5
6 ± 16 ± 1
5 ± 15 ± 1
4 ± 0.9 4 ± 0.9
9 ± 0.59 ± 0.5
2 ± 0.1 2 ± 0.1
2 ± 0.32 ± 0.3
24 ± 1 24 ± 1
13 ± 113 ± 1
17 ± 2 17 ± 2
68 ± 668 ± 6
10 % T10 % T
1515
10 ± 2 10 ± 2
7 ± 17 ± 1
5 ± 05 ± 0
4 ± 0.6 4 ± 0.6
9 ± 2 9 ± 2
5 ± 25 ± 2
3 ± 0.43 ± 0.4
28 ± 428 ± 4
31 ± 431 ± 4
17 ± 217 ± 2
65 ± 665 ± 6
25 25
10 ± 210 ± 2
7 ± 17 ± 1
6 ± 06 ± 0
4 ± 0.6 4 ± 0.6
17 ± 7 17 ± 7
1 ± 11 ± 1
1 ± 0.7 1 ± 0.7
24 ± 324 ± 3
22 ± 4 22 ± 4
15 ± 2 15 ± 2
63 ± 763 ± 7
10 % B 10 % B
1515
4 ± 24 ± 2
4 ± 14 ± 1
2 ± 02 ± 0
2 ± 0.7 2 ± 0.7
4 ± 24 ± 2
2 ± 12 ± 1
2 ± 0.5 2 ± 0.5
13 ± 613 ± 6
7 ± 37 ± 3
8 ± 48 ± 4
40 ± 1740 ± 17
2525
11 ± 211 ± 2
7 ± 17 ± 1
3 ± 13 ± 1
4 ± 0.74 ± 0.7
10 ± 2 10 ± 2
4 ± 2 4 ± 2
3 ± 0.73 ± 0.7
29 ± 229 ± 2
17 ± 117 ± 1
18 ± 118 ± 1
81 ± 3 81 ± 3
1 cm T1 cm T
1515
1 ± 11 ± 1
7 7* *
3 3* *
2 ± 22 ± 2** **
14 ± 314 ± 3** **
1 ± 11 ± 1** **
6 ± 56 ± 5** **
9 ± 69 ± 6*2 *2
45 ± 38 45 ± 38** **
4 ± 34 ± 3** **
14 ± 1814 ± 18** **
1 cm B1 cm B
1515
0.2 ± 0.20.2 ± 0.2
2 2* *
0 0* *
ndnd
4 4* *
0.030.03* *
0.03 0.03* *
2.52.5* *
2 2* *
1.61.6* *
5 5* *
B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B / T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; valueB – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B / T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; valuestandard error, standard error, * *or or ** ** – –
only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed, nd – no data. only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed, nd – no data.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 14

14 14
A. Smetanová et al.A. Smetanová et al.
Table Table 7. Nutrient concentration in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 25 mm·h
7. Nutrient concentration in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 25 mm·h–1–1. .
Slope % Slope %
Sediment Sediment
SedimentSediment
Water Water
CC
NN
PP2 2O O5 5
NPOC NPOC
NONO3 3
POPO4 4
Na Na+ +
MgMg2+2+
CaCa2+2+
g · lg · l–1 –1
% %
10
10 –1 –1 % %
10
10 – 3 – 3g · 10 g · 103 3g g–1–1
1010 – 3 – 3 g · l g · l–1 –110 10 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1–1
10 10 – 4 – 4 g · lg · l–1–1
10 10 – 3 – 3 g·lg·l–1 –1
1010 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1–110 10 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1–11010 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1–1
SoilSoil
15 15
5 ± 15 ± 1
5 ± 15 ± 1
5 ± 0.15 ± 0.1
328 ± 9328 ± 9** **
6 ± 1 6 ± 1
1 ± 0.3 1 ± 0.3
4 ± 2 4 ± 2
14 ± 2 14 ± 2
7 ± 1 7 ± 1
9 ± 1 9 ± 1
48 ± 12 48 ± 12
25 25
5 ± 15 ± 1
5 ± 0.5 5 ± 0.5
5 ± 0.45 ± 0.4
311 ± 6 311 ± 6
6 ± 36 ± 3
2 ± 0.72 ± 0.7
2 ± 0.9 2 ± 0.9
16 ± 0.516 ± 0.5
7 ± 0.7 7 ± 0.7
10 ± 0.2 10 ± 0.2
41 ± 5 41 ± 5
20 % T20 % T
1515
6 ± 16 ± 1
9 ± 0.5 9 ± 0.5
7 ± 0.27 ± 0.2
483 ± 4 483 ± 4
6 ± 26 ± 2
2 ± 12 ± 1
10 ± 3 10 ± 3
14 ± 214 ± 2
WaterWater
7 ± 1 7 ± 1
36 ± 336 ± 3
25 25
7 ± 17 ± 1
9 ± 19 ± 1
6 ± 0.46 ± 0.4
461 ± 2461 ± 2
11 ± 511 ± 5
2 ± 22 ± 2
7 ± 27 ± 2
16 ± 0.6 16 ± 0.6
K K+ +
9 ± 0.59 ± 0.5
58 ± 18 58 ± 18
5 % 5 %
B B
15
15
8 ± 1 8 ± 1
5 ± 15 ± 1
5 ± 0.15 ± 0.1
339 ± 6 339 ± 6
8 ± 2 8 ± 2
1 ± 11 ± 1
2 ± 12 ± 1
15 ± 115 ± 1
8 ± 0.68 ± 0.6
9 ± 0.59 ± 0.5
48 ± 348 ± 3
25 25
6 ± 1 6 ± 1
6 ± 0.56 ± 0.5
5 ± 0.2 5 ± 0.2
392 ± 61 392 ± 61
5 ± 0.55 ± 0.5
1 ± 0.21 ± 0.2
4 ± 0.34 ± 0.3
14 ± 1 14 ± 1
7 ± 0.4 7 ± 0.4
9 ± 0.59 ± 0.5
40 ± 4 40 ± 4
10 % T10 % T
1515
5 ± 1 5 ± 1
7 ± 17 ± 1
5 ± 0.35 ± 0.3
381 ± 21381 ± 21
5 ± 1 5 ± 1
2 ± 12 ± 1
5 ± 0.45 ± 0.4
15 ± 115 ± 1
16 ± 2 16 ± 2
9 ± 0.6 9 ± 0.6
34 ± 234 ± 2
25 25
6 ± 16 ± 1
7 ± 0.5 7 ± 0.5
6 ± 0.2 6 ± 0.2
376 ± 5376 ± 5
10 ± 410 ± 4
1 ± 11 ± 1
2 ± 12 ± 1
14 ± 2 14 ± 2
13 ± 313 ± 3
9 ± 19 ± 1
37 ± 337 ± 3
10 % B10 % B
15 15
5 ± 0.55 ± 0.5
9 ± 29 ± 2
5 ± 0.15 ± 0.1
332 ± 21332 ± 21
4 ± 0.2 4 ± 0.2
3 ± 13 ± 1
1 ± 11 ± 1
16 ± 0.2 16 ± 0.2
7 ± 1 7 ± 1
9 ± 0.59 ± 0.5
46 ± 746 ± 7
25 25
5 ± 15 ± 1
6 ± 3 6 ± 3
3 ± 0.2 3 ± 0.2
345 ± 10345 ± 10
5 ± 0.5 5 ± 0.5
2 ± 12 ± 1
1 ± 0.41 ± 0.4
15 ± 2 15 ± 2
9 ± 0.29 ± 0.2
9 ± 0.2 9 ± 0.2
42 ± 2 42 ± 2
1 cm T1 cm T
1515
2 ± 12 ± 1
2020* *
9.39.3* *
1003 ± 384 1003 ± 384** **
6 ± 46 ± 4** **
1 ± 1 1 ± 1** **
7 ± 57 ± 5** **
17 ± 117 ± 1** **
75 ± 17 75 ± 17 ** **
7 ± 1 7 ± 1** **
34 ± 10 34 ± 10 ** **
1 cm B1 cm B
1515
1 ± 11 ± 1
3636* *
5.45.4* *
nd nd
0.320.32* *
0.20.2* *
2 2* *
1414* *
11 11* *
9 9* *
2828* *
B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol % of B / T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; valueB – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol % of B / T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; valuestandard error, standard error, * * or or ** ** – –
only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed, nd – no data.only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed, nd – no data.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 15

1515
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettabilityInfl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
The C and N enrichment of sediment transported trough overland fl ow was highest in 10 % The C and N enrichment of sediment transported trough overland fl ow was highest in 10 %
TPS7 on a 15 % slope and 25 mm·hTPS7 on a 15 % slope and 25 mm·h–1
intensity (Table 10). Other mixtures had C, N, and P enrich-
ment ratios similar to soil, except for 20 % TPS7, where it was lower for nitrogen (N %). On a 25 % ment ratios similar to soil, except for 20 % TPS7, where it was lower for nitrogen (N %). On a 25 %
slope, the sediment of 10 % TPS7 was enriched in C and the sediment of 20 % TPS 7 with N more slope, the sediment of 10 % TPS7 was enriched in C and the sediment of 20 % TPS 7 with N more
than soil and all other mixtures. Signifi cantly lower enrichment was observed for 1 cm layers of than soil and all other mixtures. Signifi cantly lower enrichment was observed for 1 cm layers of
TPS7 and BC on a 15 % slope. TPS7 and BC on a 15 % slope.
With increasing rainfall intensities, the C and N enrichment ratio of 10 % TPS7 was continu- With increasing rainfall intensities, the C and N enrichment ratio of 10 % TPS7 was continu-
ously decreasing slightly (with a minimum for C at 45 mm·h ously decreasing slightly (with a minimum for C at 45 mm·h–1
relatively stable. A decrease of C and P enrichment of 10 % BC sediment at intensities of 45 mm·h relatively stable. A decrease of C and P enrichment of 10 % BC sediment at intensities of 45 mm·h–1
and 55 mm·h
and 55 mm·h–1
was observed. Its N enrichment ratio was continuously decreasing with increasing
rainfall intensity. The enrichment of 10 % BC sediment was lower than that of 10 % TPS7, but the rainfall intensity. The enrichment of 10 % BC sediment was lower than that of 10 % TPS7, but the
enrichment of 1 cm BC was higher than 1 cm TPS7 at both 25 mm·henrichment of 1 cm BC was higher than 1 cm TPS7 at both 25 mm·h–1
Less nutrients were released from the 1 cm layers in comparison with their corresponding mix-Less nutrients were released from the 1 cm layers in comparison with their corresponding mix-
tures. tures.
–1 intensity (Table 10). Other mixtures had C, N, and P enrich-
–1), while P), while P2 2O O5 5 enrichment remained enrichment remained
–1
–1 was observed. Its N enrichment ratio was continuously decreasing with increasing
–1 and 55 mm·h and 55 mm·h–1–1 intensities. intensities.
4 4 DiscussionDiscussion
4.1 4.1 Effect of BC and TPS on water content and drying Effect of BC and TPS on water content and drying
Although information of the water potential for the investigated WC range (in the drying ex-Although information of the water potential for the investigated WC range (in the drying ex-
periment) was not obtained directly, the observed limiting WC values above which wettability periment) was not obtained directly, the observed limiting WC values above which wettability
remained unaffected and below which wettability decreased with decreasing WC indicate a com-remained unaffected and below which wettability decreased with decreasing WC indicate a com-
parable water potential at the treshold WC for all investigated samples. Probably due to higher parable water potential at the treshold WC for all investigated samples. Probably due to higher
porosity and higher specifi c surface area, the limiting WC of pure TPS and BC is around 40 times porosity and higher specifi c surface area, the limiting WC of pure TPS and BC is around 40 times
higher than the limiting WC of pure sand. The addition of 5 and 10 % of BC and of 10 to 20 % higher than the limiting WC of pure sand. The addition of 5 and 10 % of BC and of 10 to 20 %
TPS7 leads to 4-times higher limiting WCs in the mixtures compared to pure sand. This indicates TPS7 leads to 4-times higher limiting WCs in the mixtures compared to pure sand. This indicates
that the use of BC or TPS as soil amendment is further expected to improve the water retention of that the use of BC or TPS as soil amendment is further expected to improve the water retention of
coarse-textured soils or soils with large amounts of macropores (coarse-textured soils or soils with large amounts of macropores (VERHEIJEN
et alet al. . 2009) which has been already reported from Terra Preta and BC enriched soils ( 2009) which has been already reported from Terra Preta and BC enriched soils (GLASER
al al. . 2002, 2002, LAIRD LAIRD et al et al. . 2010). In the wettability experiment, no dependency between the amount of 2010). In the wettability experiment, no dependency between the amount of
added BC and TPS7 in sandy mixtures and limiting WC values was evident. added BC and TPS7 in sandy mixtures and limiting WC values was evident.
Our results further indicate that during oven drying at 40 °C, BC and TPS mixtures are drying Our results further indicate that during oven drying at 40 °C, BC and TPS mixtures are drying
at rates which are similar to sand. However, at rates which are similar to sand. However, VERHEIJEN VERHEIJEN et al
water supply for plants between pure sand and BC enriched sand becomes relevant when the soil water supply for plants between pure sand and BC enriched sand becomes relevant when the soil
dries, the matrix potential of soil increases, and the water stored in the BC micropores becomes dries, the matrix potential of soil increases, and the water stored in the BC micropores becomes
available for plants. A reduced drying rates at low WCs for some TPS and BC mixtures may be available for plants. A reduced drying rates at low WCs for some TPS and BC mixtures may be
evidence for additional strongly bound water in micropores which is absent in pure sand. Our re-evidence for additional strongly bound water in micropores which is absent in pure sand. Our re-
search does not focus on this aspect (as well as the role of the differences in organic material of BC search does not focus on this aspect (as well as the role of the differences in organic material of BC
and TPS), but shows that pure substrates may reduce their higher initial WC 10-times faster than and TPS), but shows that pure substrates may reduce their higher initial WC 10-times faster than
their mixtures in laboratory conditions. Despite the fact that initial WCs of examined substrates their mixtures in laboratory conditions. Despite the fact that initial WCs of examined substrates
were controlled by the decisions about the amount of water added, these results suggest that drying were controlled by the decisions about the amount of water added, these results suggest that drying
of BC and TPS under natural conditions has to be further examined, particularly if direct applica- of BC and TPS under natural conditions has to be further examined, particularly if direct applica-
tion of pure substrates onto the surface is considered. Although we do not have evidence for this tion of pure substrates onto the surface is considered. Although we do not have evidence for this
VERHEIJEN et al et al. . 2009, 2009, DE LUCA
GLASER et
DE LUCA
et
et al. . (2009) expect that the difference in (2009) expect that the difference in
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 16

16 16
A. Smetanová et al.A. Smetanová et al.
TableTable 9. Nutrient concentrations in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 35 – 55 mm·h
9. Nutrient concentrations in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 35 – 55 mm·h–1–1. .
SubstrateSubstrate
RIRI
mm · hmm · h–1–1
S S
Sediment
Sediment
Water Water
CC
NN
PP2 2O O5 5
NPOC NPOC
NO3 NO3
PO4PO4
NaNa+ +
K K+ +
Mg Mg2+2+
CaCa2+ 2+
g · l g · l–1–1
% %
10
10 –1 –1 % %
10
10 – 3 – 3g · 10 g · 103 3g g–1 –1
10 10 – 3 – 3 g · l g · l–1 –11010 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1 –1
1010 – 4 – 4 g · l g · l–1 –1
10 10 – 3 – 3 g ·l g ·l–1 –1
10 10 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1–1
10 10 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1–1
1010 – 3 – 3 g · lg · l–1 –1
10 % T10 % T
3535
7 ± 0.5 7 ± 0.5
6 ± 0.5 6 ± 0.5
5 ± 0.25 ± 0.2
351 ± 23351 ± 23
6 ± 1 6 ± 1
1 ± 0.6 1 ± 0.6
2 ± 12 ± 1
15 ± 0.3 15 ± 0.3
13 ± 4 13 ± 4
9 ± 0.3 9 ± 0.3
42 ± 142 ± 1
4545
6 ± 0.5 6 ± 0.5
6 ± 16 ± 1
5 ± 0.4 5 ± 0.4
359 ± 18 359 ± 18
5 ± 0.55 ± 0.5
2 ± 0.7 2 ± 0.7
2 ± 1 2 ± 1
16 ± 116 ± 1
12 ± 112 ± 1
9 ± 0.2 9 ± 0.2
45 ± 3 45 ± 3
55 55
8 ± 1 8 ± 1
5 ± 0.5 5 ± 0.5
4 ± 0.44 ± 0.4
333 ± 1333 ± 1
6 ± 26 ± 2
1 ± 0.51 ± 0.5
2 ± 0.42 ± 0.4
14 ± 114 ± 1
12 ± 112 ± 1
9 ± 0.5 9 ± 0.5
39 ± 139 ± 1
10 % B10 % B
3535
11 ± 311 ± 3
7 ± 1 7 ± 1
4 ± 0.74 ± 0.7
321 ± 11321 ± 11
5 ± 0.25 ± 0.2
2 ± 0.42 ± 0.4
1 ± 0.71 ± 0.7
15 ± 0.615 ± 0.6
8 ± 18 ± 1
8 ± 0.3 8 ± 0.3
43 ± 1043 ± 10
4545
8 ± 38 ± 3
6 ± 0.56 ± 0.5
4 ± 0.2 4 ± 0.2
316 ± 7316 ± 7
6 ± 16 ± 1
1 ± 0.21 ± 0.2
3 ± 0.43 ± 0.4
15 ± 115 ± 1
9 ± 0.69 ± 0.6
9 ± 19 ± 1
51 ± 251 ± 2
55 55
7 ± 37 ± 3
5 ± 15 ± 1
3 ± 0.43 ± 0.4
283 ± 6283 ± 6
7 ± 2 7 ± 2
0.4 ± 0.10.4 ± 0.1
0.2 ± 0.1 0.2 ± 0.1
16 ± 216 ± 2
27 ± 1727 ± 17
9 ± 0.19 ± 0.1
42 ± 4 42 ± 4
1 cm T 1 cm T
5555
3 ± 13 ± 1** **
19 ± 219 ± 2** **
8 ± 0.78 ± 0.7** **
973 ± 110973 ± 110** **
9 ± 19 ± 1** **
0.8 ± 0.70.8 ± 0.7** **
6 ± 0.46 ± 0.4** **
17 ± 0.217 ± 0.2** **
61 ± 361 ± 3** **
9 ± 0.59 ± 0.5** **
39 ± 0.4 39 ± 0.4** **
1 cm B1 cm B
55 55
12 ± 4 12 ± 4** **
30 ± 130 ± 1*2 *2
5 ± 0.45 ± 0.4** **
451 ± 44451 ± 44** **
4 ± 0.3 4 ± 0.3** **
0.4 ± 0.10.4 ± 0.1** **
0.8 ± 0.10.8 ± 0.1** **
15 ± 0.615 ± 0.6** **
9 ± 0.29 ± 0.2** **
9 ± 0.19 ± 0.1** **
34 ± 434 ± 4** **
B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B or T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; RI – rainfall intensity, S – sedi- B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B or T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T –1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; RI – rainfall intensity, S – sedi-
ment; valuement; valuestandard error,standard error, * * or or ** ** – only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed.– only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed.
TableTable 8. Total loads of nutrients in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 35 – 55 mm·h
8. Total loads of nutrients in overland fl ow at rainfall intensity 35 – 55 mm·h–1–1. .
Substrate Substrate
RI RI
mm · hmm · h–1–1
SedimentSediment
SedimentSediment
WaterWater
CC
NN
PP2 2O O5 5
NPOC NPOC
NONO3 3
PO PO4 4
Na Na+ +
K K+ +
MgMg2+2+
CaCa2+2+
gg
gg
10
10 – 2 – 2 gg
gg
10
10 – 3 – 3g g
10
10 – 3 – 3g g
10
10 – 4 – 4 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10
10 – 3 – 3 g g
10 % T
10 % T
35 35
16 ± 116 ± 1
1 ± 0.11 ± 0.1
8 ± 18 ± 1
6 ± 0.5 6 ± 0.5
13 ± 113 ± 1
3 ± 23 ± 2
4 ± 24 ± 2
33 ± 3 33 ± 3
28 ± 428 ± 4
20 ± 320 ± 3
93 ± 893 ± 8
4545
27 ± 527 ± 5
2 ± 0.52 ± 0.5
12 ± 312 ± 3
10 ± 0.210 ± 0.2
21 ± 5 21 ± 5
8 ± 38 ± 3
10 ± 710 ± 7
66 ± 1466 ± 14
56 ± 2556 ± 25
38 ± 738 ± 7
189 ± 42189 ± 42
5555
58 ± 1658 ± 16
3 ± 13 ± 1
23 ± 723 ± 7
19 ± 519 ± 5
48 ± 1748 ± 17
9 ± 49 ± 4
20 ± 6 20 ± 6
103 ± 24103 ± 24
87 ± 2087 ± 20
67 ± 15 67 ± 15
292 ± 70292 ± 70
10 % B10 % B
3535
21 ± 9 21 ± 9
1 ± 0.3 1 ± 0.3
7 ± 17 ± 1
7 ± 37 ± 3
11 ± 4 11 ± 4
2 ± 0.52 ± 0.5
2 ± 22 ± 2
32 ± 1132 ± 11
18 ± 8 18 ± 8
18 ± 6 18 ± 6
106 ± 48106 ± 48
4545
48 ± 2248 ± 22
3 ± 23 ± 2
19 ± 919 ± 9
15 ± 715 ± 7
32 ± 732 ± 7
7 ± 17 ± 1
20 ± 120 ± 1
55 ± 2755 ± 27
35 ± 19 35 ± 19
32 ± 1632 ± 16
195 ± 101195 ± 101
5555
71 ± 3471 ± 34
3 ± 13 ± 1
19 ± 8 19 ± 8
20 ± 920 ± 9
74 ± 1574 ± 15
4 ± 24 ± 2
20 ± 10 20 ± 10
166 ± 12166 ± 12
268 ± 166268 ± 166
96 ± 596 ± 5
423 ± 20 423 ± 20
1 cm T 1 cm T
5555
20 ± 1220 ± 12** **
4 ± 2 4 ± 2** **
15 ± 815 ± 8** **
18 ± 918 ± 9** **
75 ± 1075 ± 10** **
7 ± 67 ± 6** **
50 ± 1 50 ± 1** **
144 ± 144 ± ** **
527 ± 56 527 ± 56** **
76 ± 0.276 ± 0.2** **
340 ± 13340 ± 13** **
1 cm B 1 cm B
55 55
66 ± 6 66 ± 6** **
20 ± 320 ± 3** **
33 ± 533 ± 5** **
30 ± 5 30 ± 5** **
28 ± 9 28 ± 9** **
2 ± 0.12 ± 0.1** **
5 ± 15 ± 1** **
89 ± 19 89 ± 19** **
56 ± 1356 ± 13** **
56 ± 1356 ± 13** **
204 ± 30204 ± 30** **
B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B or T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T – 1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; RI – rainfall intensity; value B – biochar, T – TPS7, % – vol% of B or T in mixture with sandy-loamy soil, 1 cm B or T – 1 cm of substrate on 9 cm of soil ; RI – rainfall intensity; value
standard error, standard error, * * or or ** ** – only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed. – only 1 or 2 sample were analyzed.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 17

17 17
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
yet, it might be possible that continuously faster drying of surface-applied substrate under specifi c yet, it might be possible that continuously faster drying of surface-applied substrate under specifi c
environmental conditions (e.g. hot and dry environments) may decrease their positive effect on environmental conditions (e.g. hot and dry environments) may decrease their positive effect on
water retention and make them more prone to wind erosion processes, as expected by water retention and make them more prone to wind erosion processes, as expected by VERHEIJEN
et alet al. . (2009). (2009).
Incorporation of substrates into the tillage layer might therefore be a better option in this Incorporation of substrates into the tillage layer might therefore be a better option in this
context.context.
VERHEIJEN
4.24.2 Effect of BC and TPS on wettability Effect of BC and TPS on wettability
At WCs between 0 and 100 %, BC is the most repellent among the investigated pure substrates At WCs between 0 and 100 %, BC is the most repellent among the investigated pure substrates
probably due to a reduction of the hydrophilic functional groups during pyrolysis. The TPS sub-probably due to a reduction of the hydrophilic functional groups during pyrolysis. The TPS sub-
strates are less repellent but also exhibit a transition from hydrophilic to hydrophobic behaviour strates are less repellent but also exhibit a transition from hydrophilic to hydrophobic behaviour
for WCs between 0 –100 %. Since the degree of repellency was found to be independent from the for WCs between 0 –100 %. Since the degree of repellency was found to be independent from the
BC content, the amount of BC used to generate more complex charcoal-enriched substrates (such BC content, the amount of BC used to generate more complex charcoal-enriched substrates (such
as TPS) might not be an adequate indicator to predict their wettability. The correlation between as TPS) might not be an adequate indicator to predict their wettability. The correlation between
decreasing wettability of both, pure substrates and mixtures and WC is non-linear. Instead, the decreasing wettability of both, pure substrates and mixtures and WC is non-linear. Instead, the
behaviour corresponds to the categories “single peak” for mixtures and “double peak” for pure behaviour corresponds to the categories “single peak” for mixtures and “double peak” for pure
substrates as proposed by substrates as proposed by DE JONGE et al. ( . (1999). These categories of WC dependent wettability 1999). These categories of WC dependent wettability
have been found in sandy soils (have been found in sandy soils (WALLIS WALLIS et alet al. . 1990), organic soils (1990), organic soils (BERGLUND & PERSSON
DOERR DOERR et alet al. . 2006), or urban soils ( 2006), or urban soils (BAYER & SCHAUMANN
BAYER & SCHAUMANN 2007) as well as under laboratory condi-
tions (tions (REGALADO & RITTER
REGALADO & RITTER 2005), but the phenomenon is still not fully understood. 2005), but the phenomenon is still not fully understood. GOEBEL
al al. . (2004) hypothesized that the formation of thin water fi lms leads to a reduction of surface free (2004) hypothesized that the formation of thin water fi lms leads to a reduction of surface free
energy ( energy (DERJAGUIN & CHURAEV
DERJAGUIN & CHURAEV 1986) and thereby to an increase of CA of the underlying material. 1986) and thereby to an increase of CA of the underlying material.
With increasing thickness of the water layer the water potential and CA decreases again. The shift With increasing thickness of the water layer the water potential and CA decreases again. The shift
of the CA maxima to higher WCs as observed for the BC and TPS mixtures with respect to the of the CA maxima to higher WCs as observed for the BC and TPS mixtures with respect to the
pure sand shows that due to higher porosity and specifi c surface area, higher WCs are necessary to pure sand shows that due to higher porosity and specifi c surface area, higher WCs are necessary to
form a thin water fi lm for the mixtures than for pure sand. Earlier studies showed that soil wetta- form a thin water fi lm for the mixtures than for pure sand. Earlier studies showed that soil wetta-
bility might be infl uenced by drying temperature to a certain extent ( bility might be infl uenced by drying temperature to a certain extent (DE JONGE
et al et al. . 2001, 2001, DIEHL DIEHL et al et al. . 2009). Furthermore, the changes in repellency are not fully reversible after 2009). Furthermore, the changes in repellency are not fully reversible after
re-wetting ( re-wetting (DOERR & THOMAS
DOERR & THOMAS 2000, 2000, BAYER & SCHAUMANN
BAYER & SCHAUMANN 2007) and soil water repellency might
differ if sandy soils are wetted or dried. Under fi eld conditions, variable wetting and drying cycles differ if sandy soils are wetted or dried. Under fi eld conditions, variable wetting and drying cycles
occur. Therefore the reaction, reversibility and hysteresis of wettability and repellency in BC and occur. Therefore the reaction, reversibility and hysteresis of wettability and repellency in BC and
TPS as well as in their mixtures with different soils need to be further examined under a variety TPS as well as in their mixtures with different soils need to be further examined under a variety
of natural environmental conditions. of natural environmental conditions.
DE JONGE et al
BERGLUND & PERSSON 1996,
2007) as well as under laboratory condi-
1996,
GOEBEL et et
DE JONGE et al et al. . 1999, 1999, DEKKER DEKKER
2007) and soil water repellency might
4.34.3 Effect of BC and TPS on erodibility Effect of BC and TPS on erodibility
The impact of BC’s wettability on overland fl ow is usually presumed, because layers burned in The impact of BC’s wettability on overland fl ow is usually presumed, because layers burned in
natural fi res, which have higher hydrophobicity, tend to reduce infi ltration and amplify runoff (e.g. natural fi res, which have higher hydrophobicity, tend to reduce infi ltration and amplify runoff (e.g.
SARTZ
SARTZ 1953, 1953, DEBANO DEBANO et alet al. . 1970, 1970, DOERR DOERR et al. 2008). In repellent conditions, the initial period of et al. 2008). In repellent conditions, the initial period of
infi ltration before the onset of overland fl ow is shorter and the runoff coeffi cient is higher than if infi ltration before the onset of overland fl ow is shorter and the runoff coeffi cient is higher than if
the soil is wettable. Despite the fact, that repellent soil can withstand penetration of drops placed the soil is wettable. Despite the fact, that repellent soil can withstand penetration of drops placed
directly on the surface (e.g. in SDM), during intense rainfall events the repellency is overcome. directly on the surface (e.g. in SDM), during intense rainfall events the repellency is overcome.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 18

18 18
A. Smetanová et al.A. Smetanová et al.
The reason might be the kinetic energy of rainfall or impact of the raindrops providing the re-The reason might be the kinetic energy of rainfall or impact of the raindrops providing the re-
quired water entry potential (quired water entry potential (LEIGHTON-BOYCE LEIGHTON-BOYCE et al. 2007). However, near complete absence of et al. 2007). However, near complete absence of
infi ltration and immediate runoff formation is also reported from post-fi re conditions (infi ltration and immediate runoff formation is also reported from post-fi re conditions (WALSH
al al. . 1998). The runoff response and effect of water repellency is further complicated by soil sealing 1998). The runoff response and effect of water repellency is further complicated by soil sealing
(DOERR (DOERR et al et al. . 2008). During a rainfall event, the soil surface seals and a crust develops due to the 2008). During a rainfall event, the soil surface seals and a crust develops due to the
soil pores becoming clogged by fi ne particles released by raindrops impacting on the surface. With soil pores becoming clogged by fi ne particles released by raindrops impacting on the surface. With
increasing cumulative energy of continuous rainfall the infi ltration decreases (e.g. Le increasing cumulative energy of continuous rainfall the infi ltration decreases (e.g. Le BISSONNAIS
et al et al. . 1989, 1989, FOHRER FOHRER et alet al. . 1999). 1999).
The conditions of the wettability and rainfall experiments were different in terms of tempera- The conditions of the wettability and rainfall experiments were different in terms of tempera-
ture, drying history of pure substrates and usage of sandy-loamy soil in mixtures. Therefore, it is ture, drying history of pure substrates and usage of sandy-loamy soil in mixtures. Therefore, it is
complicated to assess the wettability properties of substrates used in the rainfall experiment. If we complicated to assess the wettability properties of substrates used in the rainfall experiment. If we
presume that they remained similar at 40 °C (oven drying) and at approximately 20 °C, the only presume that they remained similar at 40 °C (oven drying) and at approximately 20 °C, the only
hydrophobic material according to WChydrophobic material according to WCbeg.
might have been pure BC. The substrates were mixed
with sandy-loam, generally less prone to becoming repellent than the pure sand used in the wet- with sandy-loam, generally less prone to becoming repellent than the pure sand used in the wet-
tability experiment. Therefore the mixtures with sandy loam are expected to be more wettable tability experiment. Therefore the mixtures with sandy loam are expected to be more wettable
than sandy mixtures.than sandy mixtures.
Despite expected wettability properties, the runoff response at a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·h Despite expected wettability properties, the runoff response at a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·h–
11 (15 % slope) was lowest for 1 cm BC, similarly to (15 % slope) was lowest for 1 cm BC, similarly to AYODELE
WALSH et et
BISSONNAIS
beg. might have been pure BC. The substrates were mixed

AYODELE et alet al. . (2009, observed at 35 mm·h (2009, observed at 35 mm·h–1–1). ).
TableTable 10. The enrichment ratio* of sediment in surface runoff. 10. The enrichment ratio* of sediment in surface runoff.
Slope 15 %Slope 15 %
NN
Rainfall Intensity 25 mm · hRainfall Intensity 25 mm · h–1
4.2 ± 0.4 4.2 ± 0.4
3.3 ± 0.3 3.3 ± 0.3
4.6 ± 0.2 4.6 ± 0.2
5.7 ± 0.4 5.7 ± 0.4
4 ± 0.1 4 ± 0.1
1.11.1
3.1 3.1
Rainfall Intensity 35 mm · h Rainfall Intensity 35 mm · h–1
4.5 ± 0.2 4.5 ± 0.2
3.3 ± 0.5 3.3 ± 0.5
Rainfall Intensity 45 mm · hRainfall Intensity 45 mm · h–1
4.1 ± 0.4 4.1 ± 0.4
3.3 ± 0.23.3 ± 0.2
Rainfall Intensity 55 mm · hRainfall Intensity 55 mm · h–1
3.6 ± 0.4 3.6 ± 0.4
2.4 ± 0.22.4 ± 0.2
1 ± 0.1 1 ± 0.1
2.5 ± 0.22.5 ± 0.2
Slope 25 %Slope 25 %
NNCCPP2 2O O5 5
CCPP2 2O O5 5
–1
Soil*** Soil***
20 % TPS7 20 % TPS7
5 % Biochar 5 % Biochar
10 % TPS7 10 % TPS7
10 % Biochar 10 % Biochar
1 cm TPS7** 1 cm TPS7**
1 cm Biochar** 1 cm Biochar**
4.2 ± 0.1 4.2 ± 0.1
3.1 ± 0.2 3.1 ± 0.2
3.9 ± 0.1 3.9 ± 0.1
5.4 ± 0.25.4 ± 0.2
4.3 ± 0.8 4.3 ± 0.8
0.6 0.6
3.13.1
2.3 ± 0.1 2.3 ± 0.1
1.5 ± 0.7 1.5 ± 0.7
2.1 ± 0.4 2.1 ± 0.4
2.5 ± 0.12.5 ± 0.1
2 ± 0.1***2 ± 0.1***
0.6 0.6
no data no data
4.2 ± 0.4 4.2 ± 0.4
3.3 ± 0.33.3 ± 0.3
4.6 ± 0.24.6 ± 0.2
5.7 ± 0.4 5.7 ± 0.4
4 ± 0.7 4 ± 0.7
4.3 ± 0.3 4.3 ± 0.3
5.1 ± 0.3 5.1 ± 0.3
4.7 ± 0.2 4.7 ± 0.2
5.1 ± 0.2 5.1 ± 0.2
4.1 ± 0.1 4.1 ± 0.1
2.2 ± 0.52.2 ± 0.5
1.5 ± 0.8 1.5 ± 0.8
2.4 ± 0.4 2.4 ± 0.4
2.4 ± 0 2.4 ± 0
2.1 ± 0.1 2.1 ± 0.1
–1
10 % TPS7 10 % TPS7
10 % Biochar10 % Biochar
5 ± 0.45 ± 0.4
4.3 ± 0.84.3 ± 0.8
2.3 ± 0.2 2.3 ± 0.2
1.9 ± 0.1 1.9 ± 0.1
–1
10 % TPS7 10 % TPS7
10 % Biochar 10 % Biochar
3.1 ± 0.5 3.1 ± 0.5
2.7 ± 0.1 2.7 ± 0.1
2.3 ± 0.12.3 ± 0.1
1.9 ± 0.1 1.9 ± 0.1
–1
10 % TPS7 10 % TPS7
10 % Biochar 10 % Biochar
1 cm TPS7*** 1 cm TPS7***
1 cm Biochar*** 1 cm Biochar***
4.5 ± 0.3 4.5 ± 0.3
2.3 ± 0.52.3 ± 0.5
0.6 ± 0.10.6 ± 0.1
2.6 ± 0.12.6 ± 0.1
2.2 ± 0 2.2 ± 0
1.7 ± 0.11.7 ± 0.1
0.6 ± 0.10.6 ± 0.1
2 ± 0.2 2 ± 0.2
* Enriched with regard to nutrient content in mixture or substrate, ** or *** 1 or 2 repetitions, 1 cm –1 cm * Enriched with regard to nutrient content in mixture or substrate, ** or *** 1 or 2 repetitions, 1 cm –1 cm
of substrate on 9 cm of soil. of substrate on 9 cm of soil.
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 19

19 19
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
The onset of overland fl ow in the case of 1 cm BC was also delayed by 10 minutes in comparison The onset of overland fl ow in the case of 1 cm BC was also delayed by 10 minutes in comparison
with TPS7 and by ~ 30 minutes in comparison with soil and all other mixtures. We presume the with TPS7 and by ~ 30 minutes in comparison with soil and all other mixtures. We presume the
process was governed by the ability of BC to absorb water and increase its WC by 24 % more than process was governed by the ability of BC to absorb water and increase its WC by 24 % more than
TPS7. The WC TPS7. The WCbeg
of TPS7 and BC were similar (Table 4). Therefore the infl uence of slowly formed
crust with higher permeability ( crust with higher permeability (LE BISSONNAIS LE BISSONNAIS et al et al. . 1989,
2009) might be excluded. The greater infi ltration observed for 1 cm of BC refers to different prop-2009) might be excluded. The greater infi ltration observed for 1 cm of BC refers to different prop-
erties of the substrates themselves. On a 15 % slope the WC of 10 % BC increased after the onset erties of the substrates themselves. On a 15 % slope the WC of 10 % BC increased after the onset
of overland fl ow. Enhanced infi ltration through higher BC content and incomplete formation of of overland fl ow. Enhanced infi ltration through higher BC content and incomplete formation of
a surface crust might be the explanation. On a 25 % slope, the effect of substrates properties is a surface crust might be the explanation. On a 25 % slope, the effect of substrates properties is
less pronounced as soil sealing and crusting happens more rapidly on steeper slopes. However, the less pronounced as soil sealing and crusting happens more rapidly on steeper slopes. However, the
runoff coeffi cients did not increase on steeper slopes and remained within the error bars similar runoff coeffi cients did not increase on steeper slopes and remained within the error bars similar
to soil, except for 10 % BC. While any statistical analysis of signifi cance might be performed with to soil, except for 10 % BC. While any statistical analysis of signifi cance might be performed with
reliable results on 3 (or less) sample groups of amended natural substrates, the similarity and dis- reliable results on 3 (or less) sample groups of amended natural substrates, the similarity and dis-
similarity of these and the following results should be interpreted with caution. In the case of 10 % similarity of these and the following results should be interpreted with caution. In the case of 10 %
BC, only 0.15 l was collected during one of the repetitions. It was only 2.5 – times more than the BC, only 0.15 l was collected during one of the repetitions. It was only 2.5 – times more than the
average sample under 1 cm BC application. We can presume, it is a result of an error in the box average sample under 1 cm BC application. We can presume, it is a result of an error in the box
preparation, and have therefore excluded it. The other two repetitions had a total runoff of 0.9 and preparation, and have therefore excluded it. The other two repetitions had a total runoff of 0.9 and
1.4 l. The maximum value was only 0.041 l higher than the minimum from pure soil and lower than 1.4 l. The maximum value was only 0.041 l higher than the minimum from pure soil and lower than
all values from all mixtures on 15 % slope. Presuming, the two repetitions with higher total runoff all values from all mixtures on 15 % slope. Presuming, the two repetitions with higher total runoff
were not accidental errors in the preparation of boxes, but were showing general trend for 10 % were not accidental errors in the preparation of boxes, but were showing general trend for 10 %
BC, new values are calculated. The runoff coeffi cient is 23BC, new values are calculated. The runoff coeffi cient is 23
other mixtures on the 15 % slope (40other mixtures on the 15 % slope (403 %). The runoff reduction in comparison with pure soil 3 %). The runoff reduction in comparison with pure soil
would be ~ 41 %. The increase of the runoff coeffi cient with increasing slope in 10 % BC would be would be ~ 41 %. The increase of the runoff coeffi cient with increasing slope in 10 % BC would be
~ 40 % too. Considering this recalculated value, the runoff coeffi cients of 10 % BC and 10 % TPS ~ 40 % too. Considering this recalculated value, the runoff coeffi cients of 10 % BC and 10 % TPS
are both similar within the error bars at 25 and 35 mm·h are both similar within the error bars at 25 and 35 mm·h–1
of 45 mm·h of 45 mm·h–1
and higher, the runoff response of 10 % BC is more rapid and infi ltration lower than
for 10 % TPS7, probably due to more effective clogging of the small pores by fi ne BC particles for 10 % TPS7, probably due to more effective clogging of the small pores by fi ne BC particles
(as expected by (as expected by VERHEIJEN VERHEIJEN et alet al. . 2009). For the application of 1 cm of TPS7 and BC at 55 mm·h 2009). For the application of 1 cm of TPS7 and BC at 55 mm·h–1
TPS7 produced 40 % more runoff with a 4-times lower sediment concentration. Hence, the runoff TPS7 produced 40 % more runoff with a 4-times lower sediment concentration. Hence, the runoff
coeffi cient of TPS7 was lower in the fi rst 20 – 50 % of the rainfall sum, probably because of slower coeffi cient of TPS7 was lower in the fi rst 20 – 50 % of the rainfall sum, probably because of slower
crust formation infl uenced by higher initial WC. The continuous increase of the runoff coeffi cient crust formation infl uenced by higher initial WC. The continuous increase of the runoff coeffi cient
was less pronounced in the BC layer. It is assumed that the fi ne and light BC particles might have was less pronounced in the BC layer. It is assumed that the fi ne and light BC particles might have
become detached from the crust more easily through runoff and infi ltration increased. This could become detached from the crust more easily through runoff and infi ltration increased. This could
explain higher sediment concentrations with a signifi cantly high content of carbon and almost explain higher sediment concentrations with a signifi cantly high content of carbon and almost
continuous increase of WC in the upper layer of BC and the lower soil layer. In the case of TPS7, continuous increase of WC in the upper layer of BC and the lower soil layer. In the case of TPS7,
the WC in the upper layer varied to a higher extent, while within the soil layer it stabilized more the WC in the upper layer varied to a higher extent, while within the soil layer it stabilized more
or less after crust formation. Although stabilization of WCs in the 0 – 3 cm layer of the mixtures or less after crust formation. Although stabilization of WCs in the 0 – 3 cm layer of the mixtures
was more signifi cant at lower than at higher rainfall intensities, in some cases it declined slightly was more signifi cant at lower than at higher rainfall intensities, in some cases it declined slightly
close to the end of experiment. close to the end of experiment. FROHER FROHER et al et al. . (1999) observed similar behaviour at 10 cm depth (1999) observed similar behaviour at 10 cm depth
and explained it with decreased infi ltration after complete crust formation. In this context, in- and and explained it with decreased infi ltration after complete crust formation. In this context, in- and
decreases of the WC might represent repeated destruction and formation of crust. Nevertheless decreases of the WC might represent repeated destruction and formation of crust. Nevertheless
mistakes of WC measurements cannot be excluded.mistakes of WC measurements cannot be excluded.
The presented results are limited to continuous rainfall events of one-hour duration. The The presented results are limited to continuous rainfall events of one-hour duration. The
pat patterns of wettability, infi ltration response, soil aggregation, sealing and runoff formation dif-terns of wettability, infi ltration response, soil aggregation, sealing and runoff formation dif-
beg of TPS7 and BC were similar (Table 4). Therefore the infl uence of slowly formed
1989, FOHRER FOHRER et alet al. . 1999, Z 1999, ZEIGER & FOHRER
EIGER & FOHRER
5 %, still almost 50 % lower than for 5 %, still almost 50 % lower than for
–1 rainfall intensity. At rainfall intensities rainfall intensity. At rainfall intensities
–1 and higher, the runoff response of 10 % BC is more rapid and infi ltration lower than
–1, ,
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 20

20 20
A. Smetanová et al.A. Smetanová et al.
fer during intermittent rainfall (fer during intermittent rainfall (SEVINK
change after the addition of BC over short or long-term time scales ( change after the addition of BC over short or long-term time scales (VERHEIJEN
LEHMANN & JOSEPH LEHMANN & JOSEPH 2009, 2009, MAJOR MAJOR et alet al. . 2010, 2010, FOEREID
may also vary under different environmental and land use conditions, and thus it should be in-may also vary under different environmental and land use conditions, and thus it should be in-
vestigated further.vestigated further.
SEVINK et alet al. . 1989, 1989, FOHRER FOHRER et et al al. . 1999). Soil properties may also 1999). Soil properties may also
VERHEIJEN et al
FOEREID et alet al. . 2011). The complex runoff response 2011). The complex runoff response
et al. . 2009, 2009,
4.44.4 Effect of BC and TPS on nutrient discharge Effect of BC and TPS on nutrient discharge
The nutrient content of BC depends on the feedstock properties and the operation conditions The nutrient content of BC depends on the feedstock properties and the operation conditions
(such as time and temperature) of pyrolysis ( (such as time and temperature) of pyrolysis (LEHMAN & JOSEPH
LEHMAN & JOSEPH 2009). It may differ signifi cantly be-
tween different BCs ( tween different BCs (LEHMAN & JOSEPH LEHMAN & JOSEPH 2009). The addition of BC to soil increases the availability 2009). The addition of BC to soil increases the availability
of nutrients and the effectiveness of their utilization for various reasons ( of nutrients and the effectiveness of their utilization for various reasons (VERHEIJEN
one of them being the enhanced nutrient adsorption on BC’s greater surface area. Presuming ero-one of them being the enhanced nutrient adsorption on BC’s greater surface area. Presuming ero-
sion of BC particles with adsorbed nutrients, the nutrient discharge from BC or TPS-enhanced sion of BC particles with adsorbed nutrients, the nutrient discharge from BC or TPS-enhanced
soils may be higher than expected if only the nutrient content of added BC or pure soil were soils may be higher than expected if only the nutrient content of added BC or pure soil were
taken into account. In the experiment, all mixtures were prepared one day before each rainfall taken into account. In the experiment, all mixtures were prepared one day before each rainfall
simulation. Therefore, all potential changes should have been of similar extent in the same type of simulation. Therefore, all potential changes should have been of similar extent in the same type of
mixture, but are questionable between BC and TPS7 groups. TPS7 contained signifi cantly higher mixture, but are questionable between BC and TPS7 groups. TPS7 contained signifi cantly higher
C, N, PC, N, P2 2O O5 5 amounts than BC, mixtures differed in C content, but were more similar in content of amounts than BC, mixtures differed in C content, but were more similar in content of
other nutrients. other nutrients.
The nutrient discharge was mainly associated with sediment transport. The C, N, P transport The nutrient discharge was mainly associated with sediment transport. The C, N, P transport
in sediment was almost unaffected by slope in the case of natural soil and mixtures. C:N enrich-in sediment was almost unaffected by slope in the case of natural soil and mixtures. C:N enrich-
ment ratios were, in contrast to ment ratios were, in contrast to RUMPEL RUMPEL et alet al. . (2006), balanced. The slight decrease of nutrient (2006), balanced. The slight decrease of nutrient
(carbon) concentrations with increasing rainfall intensities were previously observed by (carbon) concentrations with increasing rainfall intensities were previously observed by JACNITHE
et alet al. . (2004) in natural soil. Our experiments confi rmed these results. The enrichment ratio of (2004) in natural soil. Our experiments confi rmed these results. The enrichment ratio of
sediments was lower for pure substrates (both at 25 mm·h sediments was lower for pure substrates (both at 25 mm·h–1
sponding mixtures. While fi ner, less dense particles like clays and organic particles are selectively sponding mixtures. While fi ner, less dense particles like clays and organic particles are selectively
transported by overland fl ow (transported by overland fl ow (WAIRIU
WAIRIU & & LAL
LAL 2003, 2003, QUINTON
frequently detached from the surface of mixtures, moreover if more runoff with longer duration frequently detached from the surface of mixtures, moreover if more runoff with longer duration
was generated (e.g. at 25 mm·h was generated (e.g. at 25 mm·h–1
The application of charcoal-enriched amendments did not increase the amounts of nutrients The application of charcoal-enriched amendments did not increase the amounts of nutrients
in sediments released from natural soil signifi cantly (for exceptions, see the section 3.5). More in sediments released from natural soil signifi cantly (for exceptions, see the section 3.5). More
affected were nutrients transported in runoff water, despite their t.l. and con. being considerably affected were nutrients transported in runoff water, despite their t.l. and con. being considerably
lower. This is contrary to results of other experiments with different kinds of organic amend-lower. This is contrary to results of other experiments with different kinds of organic amend-
ments, where, e.g., higher values of dissolved phosphorus (which might be compared with PO ments, where, e.g., higher values of dissolved phosphorus (which might be compared with PO4 4 in
water – water – CARLSON & SIMPSON
CARLSON & SIMPSON 1996) and their decrease over time have been reported (e.g. 1996) and their decrease over time have been reported (e.g. SMITH
al al. . 2007, 2007, SISTANI SISTANI et al. 2009). et al. 2009). MAJOR MAJOR et al et al. . (2010) assumed, that 20 – 30 % of black carbon applied in (2010) assumed, that 20 – 30 % of black carbon applied in
the form of BC in the fi eld (application rate of 0, 11.6, 23.2 and 116.1 t BC ha the form of BC in the fi eld (application rate of 0, 11.6, 23.2 and 116.1 t BC ha–1
surface runoff within two years. However, examining not only the direct nutrient discharge af- surface runoff within two years. However, examining not only the direct nutrient discharge af-
ter amendment application, but also the transformation of soil properties and discharge, might ter amendment application, but also the transformation of soil properties and discharge, might
be of great importance for the evaluation of the soil stabilization function of charcoal enriched be of great importance for the evaluation of the soil stabilization function of charcoal enriched
substrates in comparison with other amendments. It might also provide important insights about substrates in comparison with other amendments. It might also provide important insights about
carbon sequestration, for stream pollution, and for eutrophication assessment.carbon sequestration, for stream pollution, and for eutrophication assessment.
2009). It may differ signifi cantly be-
VERHEIJEN et alet al. . 2009), 2009),
JACNITHE
–1 and TPS7 at 55 mm·h and TPS7 at 55 mm·h–1 –1) than by corre- ) than by corre-
QUINTON et al. 2001), they might be more et al. 2001), they might be more
–1). ).
in
et SMITH et
–1) was eroded through ) was eroded through
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 21

2121
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
5 5 ConclusionConclusion
The presented study examines for the fi rst time the direct effect of BC and TPS on wettability, The presented study examines for the fi rst time the direct effect of BC and TPS on wettability,
erodibility and nutrient discharge through overland fl ow using an integrative approach. The pure erodibility and nutrient discharge through overland fl ow using an integrative approach. The pure
TPS and BC substrates become repellent upon drying. This effect is less pronounced in mixtures TPS and BC substrates become repellent upon drying. This effect is less pronounced in mixtures
with sand containing 5, 10 and 20 % of BC or TPS. Contact angle maxima (mainly in a range of with sand containing 5, 10 and 20 % of BC or TPS. Contact angle maxima (mainly in a range of
subcritical repellency) are found at a higher WC in the mixtures than in the pure sand indicating subcritical repellency) are found at a higher WC in the mixtures than in the pure sand indicating
that the addition of TPS or BC substrates to pure sand increases the water holding capacity and that the addition of TPS or BC substrates to pure sand increases the water holding capacity and
thereby changes the drying regime. However, the hydrophobicity does not play a recognizable thereby changes the drying regime. However, the hydrophobicity does not play a recognizable
role in the runoff formation process, which was dominated more by the infi ltration capacity of role in the runoff formation process, which was dominated more by the infi ltration capacity of
substrates and mixtures. The runoff coeffi cients and sediment concentrations were similar in the substrates and mixtures. The runoff coeffi cients and sediment concentrations were similar in the
mixtures and sandy-loamy soil at a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·hmixtures and sandy-loamy soil at a rainfall intensity of 25 mm·h–1
with increasing slope gradients. The runoff response was only lower for 10 % BC and 1 cm layers with increasing slope gradients. The runoff response was only lower for 10 % BC and 1 cm layers
of both substrates for the 15 % slope, probably due to the BC content being higher than in other of both substrates for the 15 % slope, probably due to the BC content being higher than in other
mixtures. With an increase of rainfall intensity to 45 mm·h mixtures. With an increase of rainfall intensity to 45 mm·h–1
tive in runoff reduction. Although further investigations of observed trends are required, it might tive in runoff reduction. Although further investigations of observed trends are required, it might
be possible, that the application of BC mixtures could be more suitable than of TPS in less steep be possible, that the application of BC mixtures could be more suitable than of TPS in less steep
lowland areas with low-frequency and low-intensity precipitation. lowland areas with low-frequency and low-intensity precipitation.
The nutrient concentrations (C, N, P) in sediment are not remarkably higher than those of The nutrient concentrations (C, N, P) in sediment are not remarkably higher than those of
soil. TPS7 tends to infl uence the P values both in sediment and water rather than C, which is more soil. TPS7 tends to infl uence the P values both in sediment and water rather than C, which is more
effected by BC addition. The infl uence of slope inclination is not clearly pronounced in soil, or in effected by BC addition. The infl uence of slope inclination is not clearly pronounced in soil, or in
mixtures. The C and N enrichment ratio of 10 % mixtures of both substrates is slightly decreasing mixtures. The C and N enrichment ratio of 10 % mixtures of both substrates is slightly decreasing
with increasing rainfall intensity (it is more or less constant for P) and the nutrient concentrations with increasing rainfall intensity (it is more or less constant for P) and the nutrient concentrations
of nutrient rich TPS and nutrient poor BC remain comparable within the error bars. Contrast-of nutrient rich TPS and nutrient poor BC remain comparable within the error bars. Contrast-
ingly, the application of 1 cm layers of pure substrates under high intensity rainfall conditions ingly, the application of 1 cm layers of pure substrates under high intensity rainfall conditions
(55 mm·h (55 mm·h–1
) leads to much higher nutrient concentrations in sediment, despite its enrichment ratio
being lower than for mixtures. being lower than for mixtures.
Therefore the application of 1 cm layers of pure substrates is not recommended at higher rain-Therefore the application of 1 cm layers of pure substrates is not recommended at higher rain-
fall intensities, while the usage of their mixture equivalents (mainly TPS7 producing lower runoff) fall intensities, while the usage of their mixture equivalents (mainly TPS7 producing lower runoff)
is preferable. Further reasons are repellency of pure substrates at lower WCs and possibly faster is preferable. Further reasons are repellency of pure substrates at lower WCs and possibly faster
drying, which may increase their erodibility (e.g. by wind). However, further research is needed on drying, which may increase their erodibility (e.g. by wind). However, further research is needed on
reversibility of repellency, erodibility of charcoal-enriched amendments and nutrient discharge in reversibility of repellency, erodibility of charcoal-enriched amendments and nutrient discharge in
the fi eld, under different environmental and land use conditions. the fi eld, under different environmental and land use conditions.
–1 and were not notably affected and were not notably affected
–1, the 10 % TPS7 becomes more effec-, the 10 % TPS7 becomes more effec-
–1) leads to much higher nutrient concentrations in sediment, despite its enrichment ratio
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
The fi nancial support of Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt (grant nr. 30011/301) and Geocycles The fi nancial support of Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt (grant nr. 30011/301) and Geocycles
Research Group, University Mainz is acknowledged. Authors are grateful to Palaterra GmbH & Research Group, University Mainz is acknowledged. Authors are grateful to Palaterra GmbH &
Co KG who provided data and the substrates for investigation. We thank Dipl.-Geogr. Florian Co KG who provided data and the substrates for investigation. We thank Dipl.-Geogr. Florian
Worzyk, Institute for Geographical Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin for data he provided,Ing. Worzyk, Institute for Geographical Sciences, Freie Universität Berlin for data he provided,Ing.
Roman Juras for photography and to MSc. Kirstin Jacobson for language corrections. The authors Roman Juras for photography and to MSc. Kirstin Jacobson for language corrections. The authors
are especially grateful to MSc. Piotr Jemróg, Dipl-Ing. agr. Sabina Mues, Dr. Ing. Arg. Georg are especially grateful to MSc. Piotr Jemróg, Dipl-Ing. agr. Sabina Mues, Dr. Ing. Arg. Georg
Hörmann, the staff of Experimental Station Lindhof and Ökotechnik Research Group, Univer-Hörmann, the staff of Experimental Station Lindhof and Ökotechnik Research Group, Univer-
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 22

2222
A. Smetanová et al.A. Smetanová et al.
isty Kiel, the staff of the Soil and Environmental Chemistry Research Group, Institute of Envi-isty Kiel, the staff of the Soil and Environmental Chemistry Research Group, Institute of Envi-
ronmental Science, University Koblenz-Landau and Prof. Dr. Hans-Georg Frede, Institute for ronmental Science, University Koblenz-Landau and Prof. Dr. Hans-Georg Frede, Institute for
Landscape Ecology and Resources Management, University of Gießen, for their help and support Landscape Ecology and Resources Management, University of Gießen, for their help and support
during investigations.during investigations.
References References
AYODELE, A., OGUNTUNDE, P., JOSEPH, A. & DE SOUZA DIAS JUNIOR, M. AYODELE, A., OGUNTUNDE, P., JOSEPH, A. & DE SOUZA DIAS JUNIOR, M. (2009): Numerical analysis of the
impact of charcoal production on soil hydrological behavior, runoff response and erosion susceptibility. impact of charcoal production on soil hydrological behavior, runoff response and erosion susceptibility.
– Rev. Bras. Ciênc. – Rev. Bras. Ciênc. 33 33 (1): 137–145. (1): 137–145.
BACHMANN, J., ELLIES, A. & HARTGE, K. H.BACHMANN, J., ELLIES, A. & HARTGE, K. H. (2000): Development and application of a new sessile drop con- (2000): Development and application of a new sessile drop con-
tact angle method to assess soil water repellency. – J. Hydrol. tact angle method to assess soil water repellency. – J. Hydrol. 231/232:
BERGLUND, K. & PERSSON, L. (BERGLUND, K. & PERSSON, L. (1996): Water repellence of cultivated organic soils. – Acta Agric. Scand. 1996): Water repellence of cultivated organic soils. – Acta Agric. Scand. 46:
145 –152.
145 –152.
BODÍ, M. B., MATAIX-SOLERA, J., DOERR, S. H. & CERDÀ, A.BODÍ, M. B., MATAIX-SOLERA, J., DOERR, S. H. & CERDÀ, A. (2011): The wettability of ash from burned veg-
etation and its relationship to Mediterranean plant species type, burn severity and total organic carbon etation and its relationship to Mediterranean plant species type, burn severity and total organic carbon
content. – Geoderma content. – Geoderma 160 160 (3 – 4): 599 – 607. (3 – 4): 599 – 607.
BÖTTCHER, J.BÖTTCHER, J. (2009): Ecotechnical installation and method for the production of cultivation substrates, (2009): Ecotechnical installation and method for the production of cultivation substrates,
soil amendments, and organic fertilizers having properties of anthropogenic terra preta soil, Patent soil amendments, and organic fertilizers having properties of anthropogenic terra preta soil, Patent
WO09149944, URL: <http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO2009149944 WO09149944, URL: <http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO2009149944
&F=0>.&F=0>.
BÖTTCHER, J., PIEPLOW, H. & KRIEGER, A.-E.BÖTTCHER, J., PIEPLOW, H. & KRIEGER, A.-E. (2009): Method for the production of humus- and nutrient- (2009): Method for the production of humus- and nutrient-
rich and water-storing soils or soil substrates for sustainable land use and development systems, Pat- rich and water-storing soils or soil substrates for sustainable land use and development systems, Pat-
ent WO09021528, URL: <http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO2009021528ent WO09021528, URL: <http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO2009021528
&F=0>.&F=0>.
BRYANT, R., DOERR, S. H. & HELBIG, M.BRYANT, R., DOERR, S. H. & HELBIG, M. (2005): Effect of oxygen deprivation on soil hydrophobicity during (2005): Effect of oxygen deprivation on soil hydrophobicity during
heating. – Int. J. Wildland Fire heating. – Int. J. Wildland Fire 14 14 (4): 449 – 455. (4): 449 – 455.
CARLSON, R. E. & SIMPSON, JCARLSON, R. E. & SIMPSON, J. (1996): A Coordinator Guide to Volunteer Lake Monitoring Methods. – North . (1996): A Coordinator Guide to Volunteer Lake Monitoring Methods. – North
American Lake Management Society, 96 pp.American Lake Management Society, 96 pp.
DE JONGE, L. W., JACOBSEN, O. H. & MOLDRUP, P. (1999): Soil water repellency: Effects of water content, tem-
perature, and particle size. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. perature, and particle size. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 63:
DEKKER, L. W., DOERR, S. H., OOSTINDIE, K., ZIOGAS, A. K. & RITSEMA, C. J. (DEKKER, L. W., DOERR, S. H., OOSTINDIE, K., ZIOGAS, A. K. & RITSEMA, C. J. (2001): Water repellency and
critical soil water content in a dune sand. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. critical soil water content in a dune sand. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 65:
DE LUCA, T. H., MACKENZIE M. D. & GUNDALE, M. J.DE LUCA, T. H., MACKENZIE M. D. & GUNDALE, M. J. (2009): Bio-char effects on soil nutrient transforma-
tion. – In: tion. – In: LEHMAN, JLEHMAN, J. & . & JOSEPH, SJOSEPH, S. (eds.): biochar for environmental management: science and technol- . (eds.): biochar for environmental management: science and technol-
ogy: 251– 270, Earthscan Publications Ltd.ogy: 251– 270, Earthscan Publications Ltd.
DERJAGUIN, B. V. & CHURAEV, N. V. (DERJAGUIN, B. V. & CHURAEV, N. V. (1986): Properties of water layers adjacent to interfaces. – In: 1986): Properties of water layers adjacent to interfaces. – In: CROXTON,
C. A.C. A. (ed.): Fluid interfacial phenomena: 663 –738, John Wiley & Sons. (ed.): Fluid interfacial phenomena: 663 –738, John Wiley & Sons.
DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (HrsgHrsg.) .) (1993): DIN EN 26777. Bestimmung von Nitrit. Spektro-(1993): DIN EN 26777. Bestimmung von Nitrit. Spektro-
metrisches Verfahren. – Deutsche Einheitsverfahren zur Wasser-, Abwasser- und Schlammuntersu- metrisches Verfahren. – Deutsche Einheitsverfahren zur Wasser-, Abwasser- und Schlammuntersu-
chung chung 2929, Lieferung 1993 (D10) VCH, Weinheim und Beuth-Verlag, Berlin., Lieferung 1993 (D10) VCH, Weinheim und Beuth-Verlag, Berlin.
DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (Hrsg Hrsg.) (.) (19961996): ): DIN ISO 10694: 1969-08. – Gesamtkohlenstoffgehalt DIN ISO 10694: 1969-08. – Gesamtkohlenstoffgehalt
CNS-Analysator.CNS-Analysator.
DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (HrsgHrsg.) (.) (19971997): ): DIN EN 1484. – Anleitung zur Bestimmung des gesa- DIN EN 1484. – Anleitung zur Bestimmung des gesa-
mten org. Kohlenstoffs (TOC) und des gelösten org. Kohlenstoffs (DOC). mten org. Kohlenstoffs (TOC) und des gelösten org. Kohlenstoffs (DOC).
DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (Hrsg Hrsg.) .) (2004): DIN EN ISO 6878. – Wasserbeschaffenheit- Bestim- (2004): DIN EN ISO 6878. – Wasserbeschaffenheit- Bestim-
mung von Phosphor- Photometrisches Verfahren mittels Ammoniummolybdat. mung von Phosphor- Photometrisches Verfahren mittels Ammoniummolybdat.
DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (DEUTSCHES INSTITUT FÜR NORMUNG (HrsgHrsg.) (.) (2011): DIN 38405-9. –Deutsche Einheitsverfahren zur Wasser-, 2011): DIN 38405-9. –Deutsche Einheitsverfahren zur Wasser-,
Abwasser- und Schlammuntersuchung – Anionen (Gruppe D). Abwasser- und Schlammuntersuchung – Anionen (Gruppe D).
DIEHL, D. (DIEHL, D. (2009): The role of the organic matter for hydrophobicity in urban soils. – PhD thesis, Fachbere-2009): The role of the organic matter for hydrophobicity in urban soils. – PhD thesis, Fachbere-
ich ich 7 7, Natur- und Umweltwissenschaften Universität Koblenz-Landau, 2009., Natur- und Umweltwissenschaften Universität Koblenz-Landau, 2009.
(2009): Numerical analysis of the
231/232: 66 –75. 66 –75.
46:
(2011): The wettability of ash from burned veg-
DE JONGE, L. W., JACOBSEN, O. H. & MOLDRUP, P. (1999): Soil water repellency: Effects of water content, tem-
63: 437– 442. 437– 442.
2001): Water repellency and
65: 1667–1674. 1667–1674.
(2009): Bio-char effects on soil nutrient transforma-
CROXTON,
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 23

23 23
Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability Infl uence of biochar and terra preta substrates on wettability
DIEHL, D., ELLERBROCK, R. H. & SCHAUMANN, G. E. (DIEHL, D., ELLERBROCK, R. H. & SCHAUMANN, G. E. (2009): Infl uence of drying conditions on wettability
and DRIFT spectroscopic C–H band of soil samples. – Europ. J. Soil Sci. and DRIFT spectroscopic C–H band of soil samples. – Europ. J. Soil Sci. 60
DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A., DEKKER, L. W. & RITSEMA, C. J. (DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A., DEKKER, L. W. & RITSEMA, C. J. (2006): Occurrence, prediction and hydro-
logical effects of water repellency amongst major soil and land use types in a humid temperate climate. logical effects of water repellency amongst major soil and land use types in a humid temperate climate.
– Europ. J. Soil Sci. – Europ. J. Soil Sci. 57 57 (5): 741–754. (5): 741–754.
DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A. & MACDONALD, L. H. (DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A. & MACDONALD, L. H. (2008): Soil Water Repellency: A Key Factor in Post-
Fire Erosion? – In: Fire Erosion? – In: CERDA, ACERDA, A. & . & ROBICHAUD, PROBICHAUD, P. (eds.): Restoration Strategies after Forest Fires; Science . (eds.): Restoration Strategies after Forest Fires; Science
Publishers. Publishers.
DOERR, S. H. & THOMAS, A. D. (DOERR, S. H. & THOMAS, A. D. (2000): The role of soil moisture in controlling water repellency: new evi-2000): The role of soil moisture in controlling water repellency: new evi-
dence from forest soils in Portugal. – J. Hydrol. dence from forest soils in Portugal. – J. Hydrol. 231/232: 231/232: 134 –147.
DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A. & WALSH, R. P. D. (DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A. & WALSH, R. P. D. (2000): Soil water repellency: its causes, characteristics and 2000): Soil water repellency: its causes, characteristics and
hydro-geomorphological signifi cance. – Earth Sci. Rev. hydro-geomorphological signifi cance. – Earth Sci. Rev. 51 51 (1– 4): 33 – 65.
DOERR, S. H. & RITSEMA, C. J. (DOERR, S. H. & RITSEMA, C. J. (2005): Water movement in hydrophobic soils. – In: 2005): Water movement in hydrophobic soils. – In: ANDERSON, M. G
DONNELL, J.DONNELL, J. (eds.): Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences, John Wiley & Sons. (eds.): Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences, John Wiley & Sons.
FOHRER, N., BERKENHAGEN, J., HECKER, J. M. & RUDOLPH, A. (FOHRER, N., BERKENHAGEN, J., HECKER, J. M. & RUDOLPH, A. (1999): Changing soil and surface conditions
during rainfall – Single rainstorm/subsequent rainstorms. Catena during rainfall – Single rainstorm/subsequent rainstorms. Catena 37:
GLASER, B. (GLASER, B. (2007): Prehistorically modifi ed soils of central Amazonia: a model for sustainable agriculture in 2007): Prehistorically modifi ed soils of central Amazonia: a model for sustainable agriculture in
the twenty-fi rst century. – Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. the twenty-fi rst century. – Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 362
GLASER, B., LEHMANN, J. & ZECH, W.GLASER, B., LEHMANN, J. & ZECH, W. (2002): Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of highly weath- (2002): Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of highly weath-
ered soils in the tropics with charcoal – a review. – Biol. and Fertil. Soils ered soils in the tropics with charcoal – a review. – Biol. and Fertil. Soils 35:
GOEBEL, M.-O., BACHMANN, J., WOCHE, S. K., FISCHER, W. R. & HORTON, RGOEBEL, M.-O., BACHMANN, J., WOCHE, S. K., FISCHER, W. R. & HORTON, R. (2004): Water Potential and
Aggregate Size Effects on Contact Angle and Surface Energy. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. Aggregate Size Effects on Contact Angle and Surface Energy. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 68:
JEFFERY, S.,VERHEIJEN, F. G. A., VAN DER VELDE, M. & BASTOS, A. C. (JEFFERY, S.,VERHEIJEN, F. G. A., VAN DER VELDE, M. & BASTOS, A. C. (2011): A quantitative review of the
effects of biochar application to soils on crop productivity using meta-analysis. – Agric., Ecosys. & effects of biochar application to soils on crop productivity using meta-analysis. – Agric., Ecosys. &
Environ. Environ. 144 144 (1): 175 –187. (1): 175 –187.
KNICKER, H.KNICKER, H. (2007): How Does Fire Affect the Nature and Stability of Soil Organic Nitrogen and Carbon? (2007): How Does Fire Affect the Nature and Stability of Soil Organic Nitrogen and Carbon?
A Review. – Biogeochemistry A Review. – Biogeochemistry 85 85 (1): 91–118. (1): 91–118.
LAIRD, D. A., FLEMING, P., DAVIS, D. D., HORTON, R., WANG, B. & KARLEN, D. L. (LAIRD, D. A., FLEMING, P., DAVIS, D. D., HORTON, R., WANG, B. & KARLEN, D. L. (2010): Impact of biochar
amendments on the quality of a typical Midwestern agricultural soil. – Geoderma amendments on the quality of a typical Midwestern agricultural soil. – Geoderma 158:
LATERRA LATERRA (2011): Sustainable land-use by regional energy and material fl ow management using “Terra-Pre-(2011): Sustainable land-use by regional energy and material fl ow management using “Terra-Pre-
ta-Technology” on military conversion areas and low-yield-locations (LATERRA). – URL:ta-Technology” on military conversion areas and low-yield-locations (LATERRA). – URL:
modul-b.nachhaltiges-landmanagement.de/en/projects/laterra/objectives/ modul-b.nachhaltiges-landmanagement.de/en/projects/laterra/objectives/
LE BISSONNAIS, Y., BRUAND, A. & JAMAGNE, M.LE BISSONNAIS, Y., BRUAND, A. & JAMAGNE, M. (1989): Laboratory experimental study of soil crusting: rela- (1989): Laboratory experimental study of soil crusting: rela-
tion between aggregate breakdown mechanisms and crust structure. – Catena tion between aggregate breakdown mechanisms and crust structure. – Catena 16:
LEHMANN, J. & JOSEPH, S. (LEHMANN, J. & JOSEPH, S. (2009 2009): ): Biochar for environmental management: science and technology. – Earth- Biochar for environmental management: science and technology. – Earth-
scan, London.scan, London.
LEIGHTON-BOYCE, G., DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A. & WALSH, R. P. D.LEIGHTON-BOYCE, G., DOERR, S. H., SHAKESBY, R. A. & WALSH, R. P. D. (2007): Quantifying the impact of
soil water repellency on overland fl ow generation and erosion: a new approach using rainfall simulation soil water repellency on overland fl ow generation and erosion: a new approach using rainfall simulation
and wetting agent on in situ soil. – Hydrol. Proc. and wetting agent on in situ soil. – Hydrol. Proc. 21 21 (17): 2337– 2345.
MAJOR, J., LEHMANN, J., RONDON, M. & GOODALE, C.MAJOR, J., LEHMANN, J., RONDON, M. & GOODALE, C. (2010): Fate of soil-applied black carbon: downward (2010): Fate of soil-applied black carbon: downward
migration, leaching and soil respiration. – Global Change Biology migration, leaching and soil respiration. – Global Change Biology 16 16 (4): 1366 –1379.
REGALADO, C. M. & RITTER, A. (REGALADO, C. M. & RITTER, A. (2005): Characterizing water dependent soil repellency with minimal param-2005): Characterizing water dependent soil repellency with minimal param-
eter requirement. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. eter requirement. – Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 69: 69: 1955 –1966. 1955 –1966.
ROBERTS, K. G., GLOY, B. A., JOSEPH, S., SCOTT, N. R. & LEHMANN, J. (ROBERTS, K. G., GLOY, B. A., JOSEPH, S., SCOTT, N. R. & LEHMANN, J. (2010): Life Cycle Assessment of bio-
char Systems: Estimating the Energetic, Economic, and Climate Change Potential. – Environ. Sci. & char Systems: Estimating the Energetic, Economic, and Climate Change Potential. – Environ. Sci. &
Technol. Technol. 4444 (2): 827– 833. (2): 827– 833.
QUINTON, J. N., CATT, J. A. & HESS, T. M. (QUINTON, J. N., CATT, J. A. & HESS, T. M. (2001): The selective removal of phosphorus from soil: is event size 2001): The selective removal of phosphorus from soil: is event size
important? – J. Environ. Qual. important? – J. Environ. Qual. 3030 (2): 538 – 545. (2): 538 – 545.
SCHMIDT, S. (SCHMIDT, S. (20052005): ): Bestimmung der Tropfengrößenverteilung und der Fallgeschwindigkeiten der Tropfen Bestimmung der Tropfengrößenverteilung und der Fallgeschwindigkeiten der Tropfen
in Abhängigkeit der Niederschlagsintensität des Kieler Regensimulators. – Fachabt. Hydrol. und Was-in Abhängigkeit der Niederschlagsintensität des Kieler Regensimulators. – Fachabt. Hydrol. und Was-
serwirt. Agrar- und Ernährungswiss. Fak. Christian-Albrechts-Univ. Kiel, 2005.serwirt. Agrar- und Ernährungswiss. Fak. Christian-Albrechts-Univ. Kiel, 2005.
SCHOTTDORF, B. (SCHOTTDORF, B. (20072007): ): Vorrichtung und Verfahren zur kontinuierlichen Herstellung von Holzkohle. – Patent Vorrichtung und Verfahren zur kontinuierlichen Herstellung von Holzkohle. – Patent
DE102005038135B3 08.03.2007, URL: DE102005038135B3 08.03.2007, URL:http://www.patent-de.com/20070308/DE102005038135B3.http://www.patent-de.com/20070308/DE102005038135B3.
htmlhtml
2009): Infl uence of drying conditions on wettability
60 (4): 557– 566.
2006): Occurrence, prediction and hydro-
(4): 557– 566.
2008): Soil Water Repellency: A Key Factor in Post-
134 –147.
(1– 4): 33 – 65.
ANDERSON, M. G. & . & MC-MC-
1999): Changing soil and surface conditions
37: 355 – 375. 355 – 375.
362 (1478): 187–196. (1478): 187–196.
35: 219 – 230. 219 – 230.
. (2004): Water Potential and
68: 383 – 393.
2011): A quantitative review of the
383 – 393.
2010): Impact of biochar
158: 3 – 4, 443 – 449. 3 – 4, 443 – 449.
http://http://
, Access: 10.10.2011. , Access: 10.10.2011.
16: 377– 392. 377– 392.
(2007): Quantifying the impact of
(17): 2337– 2345.
(4): 1366 –1379.
2010): Life Cycle Assessment of bio-
eschweizerbart_xxx

Page 24

2424
A. Smetanová et al.A. Smetanová et al.
SEVINK, J., IMESON, A. C. & VERSTRATEN, J. M. (SEVINK, J., IMESON, A. C. & VERSTRATEN, J. M. (1989
the effects of fi re and management, under Mediterranean forest in NE-Spain. – Catena the effects of fi re and management, under Mediterranean forest in NE-Spain. – Catena 16:
SINGH, B. P., HATTON, B. J., SINGH, B., COWIE, A. L. & KATHURIA, A.SINGH, B. P., HATTON, B. J., SINGH, B., COWIE, A. L. & KATHURIA, A. (2010): Infl uence of biochars on Nitrous
Oxide Emission and Nitrogen Leaching from Two Contrasting Soils. – J. Environ. Qual. Oxide Emission and Nitrogen Leaching from Two Contrasting Soils. – J. Environ. Qual. 39:
doi:10.2134/jeq2009.0138.doi:10.2134/jeq2009.0138.
SISTANI, K. R., BOLSTER, C. H., WAY, T. R., TOBERT, H. A., POTE, D. H. & WATTS, D. B.SISTANI, K. R., BOLSTER, C. H., WAY, T. R., TOBERT, H. A., POTE, D. H. & WATTS, D. B. (2009): Infl uence of
Poultry Litter Application Methods on the Longevity of Nutrient and E. coli in Runoff from Tall Fescue Poultry Litter Application Methods on the Longevity of Nutrient and E. coli in Runoff from Tall Fescue
Pasture. – Water, Air, and Soil Pollution Pasture. – Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 206: 206: 3 –12, doi:10.1007/s11270-009-0078-9. 3 –12, doi:10.1007/s11270-009-0078-9.
SMITH, D. R., OWENS, P. R., LEYTEM, A. B. & WARNEMUENDE, E. A. (SMITH, D. R., OWENS, P. R., LEYTEM, A. B. & WARNEMUENDE, E. A. (2007
and fertilizer applications as impacted by time to fi rst runoff event. – Environ. Poll. and fertilizer applications as impacted by time to fi rst runoff event. – Environ. Poll. 147
doi:10.1016/j.envpol doi:10.1016/j.envpol. .20062006. .0808. .021 021. .
SOHI, S., LOEZ-CAPEL, E., KRULL, E. & BOL, RSOHI, S., LOEZ-CAPEL, E., KRULL, E. & BOL, R. (2009): biochar’s roles in soil and climate change: A review . (2009): biochar’s roles in soil and climate change: A review
of research needs. – Land and Water Sci. Rep., CSIRO.of research needs. – Land and Water Sci. Rep., CSIRO.
ULRICH, U., ZEIGER, M. & FROHER, N. (ULRICH, U., ZEIGER, M. & FROHER, N. (2012): Soil structure and herbicide transport on soil surfaces during 2012): Soil structure and herbicide transport on soil surfaces during
intermittent artifi cial rainfall. – Z. Geomorph., this issue, in press. intermittent artifi cial rainfall. – Z. Geomorph., this issue, in press.
VAN ZWIETEN, L., KIMBER, S., MORRIS, S., DOWNIE, A., BERGER, E., RUST, J. & SCHEER, CVAN ZWIETEN, L., KIMBER, S., MORRIS, S., DOWNIE, A., BERGER, E., RUST, J. & SCHEER, C. (2010): Infl uence of
biochars on fl ux of Nbiochars on fl ux of N2 2O and CO O and CO2 2 from Ferrosol. – Aust. J. Soil Res. from Ferrosol. – Aust. J. Soil Res. 48
VERHEIJEN, F. G. A., JEFFERY, S., BASTOS, A. C., VAN DER VELDE, M. & DIAFAS, I. (VERHEIJEN, F. G. A., JEFFERY, S., BASTOS, A. C., VAN DER VELDE, M. & DIAFAS, I. (2009): Biochar Application
to Soils – A Critical Scientifi c Review of Effects on Soil Properties, Processes and Functions. – EUR to Soils – A Critical Scientifi c Review of Effects on Soil Properties, Processes and Functions. – EUR
24099 EN, Luxembourg: Offi ce for the Offi cial Publications of the European Communities.24099 EN, Luxembourg: Offi ce for the Offi cial Publications of the European Communities.
VDLUFA VDLUFA 1, A 6.2.11. Laktatlöslicher Phosphor (CAL-Methode). 1, A 6.2.11. Laktatlöslicher Phosphor (CAL-Methode).
WALLIS, M. G., HORNE, D. J. & MCAULIFFE, K. W. (WALLIS, M. G., HORNE, D. J. & MCAULIFFE, K. W. (1990): A study of water repellency and its amelioration in 1990): A study of water repellency and its amelioration in
a yellow-brown sand. 2. Use of wetting agents and their interaction with some aspects of irrigation. – a yellow-brown sand. 2. Use of wetting agents and their interaction with some aspects of irrigation. –
N. Z. J. Agric. Res. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 33: 33: 145 –150. 145 –150.
WALSH, R. P. D., COELHO, C. O. A., ELMES, A., FERREIRA, A. J. D., GONALVES, A. J. B., SHAKESBY, R. A., TER-WALSH, R. P. D., COELHO, C. O. A., ELMES, A., FERREIRA, A. J. D., GONALVES, A. J. B., SHAKESBY, R. A., TER-
NAN, J. L. & WILLIAMS, A. G. (1998): Rainfall simulation plot experiments as a tool in overland fl ow and
soil erosion assessment, north-central Portugal. – Geökodynamik soil erosion assessment, north-central Portugal. – Geökodynamik 19:
WAIRIU, M. & LAL, R. (WAIRIU, M. & LAL, R. (2003): Soil organic carbon in relation to cultivation and topsoil removal on sloping 2003): Soil organic carbon in relation to cultivation and topsoil removal on sloping
lands of Kolombangara, Solomon Islands. – Soil Till. Res. lands of Kolombangara, Solomon Islands. – Soil Till. Res. 70:
WILHELMY, L.WILHELMY, L. (1863): Ueber die Abhängigkeit der Capillaritäts – Constante des Alkohols von Substanz und (1863): Ueber die Abhängigkeit der Capillaritäts – Constante des Alkohols von Substanz und
Gestalt des benetzten festen Körpers. – Ann. Physik und Chemie Gestalt des benetzten festen Körpers. – Ann. Physik und Chemie 119:
WOODS, W. I., TEIXEIRA, W. G., LEHMANN, J., STEINER, C., WINKLER PRINS, A. & REBELLATO, L.WOODS, W. I., TEIXEIRA, W. G., LEHMANN, J., STEINER, C., WINKLER PRINS, A. & REBELLATO, L. (2009): Ama-
zonian Dark Earths: Wim Sombroek’s Vision. – Springer, New York.zonian Dark Earths: Wim Sombroek’s Vision. – Springer, New York.
ZEIGER, M. & FOHRER, F.ZEIGER, M. & FOHRER, F. (2009): Impact of organic farming systems on runoff formation processes. – A (2009): Impact of organic farming systems on runoff formation processes. – A
long-term sequentia rainfall experiment. – Soil Tillage Res. long-term sequentia rainfall experiment. – Soil Tillage Res. 102:
1989): ): Humus form development and hillslope runoff, and Humus form development and hillslope runoff, and
16: 461– 475. 461– 475.
(2010): Infl uence of biochars on Nitrous
39: 1224, 1224,
(2009): Infl uence of
2007): ): Nutrient losses from manure Nutrient losses from manure
147 (1) (1): : 131131– –137 137, ,
. (2010): Infl uence of
48 (7): 555 – 568. (7): 555 – 568.
2009): Biochar Application
NAN, J. L. & WILLIAMS, A. G. (1998): Rainfall simulation plot experiments as a tool in overland fl ow and
19: 139 –152. 139 –152.
70: 19 – 27. 19 – 27.
119: 177. 177.
(2009): Ama-
102: 45 – 54. 45 – 54.
Addresses of the authors:Addresses of the authors:
Anna Smetanová (corresponding author) and Markus Dotterweich, Institute of Geography, Johannes Anna Smetanová (corresponding author) and Markus Dotterweich, Institute of Geography, Johannes
Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany; e-mail: anna.smetanova@gmail.comGutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany; e-mail: anna.smetanova@gmail.com
Dörte Diehl, Institute of Environmental Sciences, University Koblenz-Landau, Landau/Pfalz, Germany.Dörte Diehl, Institute of Environmental Sciences, University Koblenz-Landau, Landau/Pfalz, Germany.
Uta Ulrich and Nicola Fohrer, Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, University of Uta Ulrich and Nicola Fohrer, Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, University of
Kiel, Germany.Kiel, Germany.
eschweizerbart_xxx


Big plans for biomass

14 December, 2015

These latest projects represent a large-frame design of its gasification unit that the company says can more than quadruple the capacity of its standard gasification plants. The company also claims these new plants will be the world’s largest downdraft gasification units.

The municipal projects have occurred in Tennessee, one of the states that is benefitting from a series of federal grants designed to facilitate environmental mitigation. Besides the company’s three municipal projects, the company’s downdraft gasifiers have been used by industrial brick manufacturing companies to offset natural gas usage.
Much of PHG Energy’s (PHGE) project activity has happened in 2015. In late August the WTE technology company reported that it was selected to build a new biomass gasification plant for Sevier County Solid Waste in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. And in June of 2015, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) approved a $250,000 grant to the city of Lebanon, Tennessee, to construct a WTE facility to reduce landfilling and provide renewable electric power, using PHGE’s biomass gasification technology.

Ground was broken for the plant in November, and it is expected to be completed in mid-2016, at a total cost of $3.75 million.

A portion of the funds for the facilities have been awarded through the Clean Tennessee Energy Grant program, established by a federal court settlement from an enforcement action taken under the federal Clean Air Act. The action requires the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to provide the state with $26.4 million to fund certain environmental mitigation projects over a five-year period.

In Lebanon, the feedstocks will comprise wood waste and dewatered sewage sludge, combined with shredded tires. In recent years and through other projects, PHGE found that the synthesis gas from its gasifier can be cost effectively used to produce electricity by feeding a standard heat exchanger (thermal oxidizer) to drive an oil heater which in turn runs a generator employing Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) technology, creating electricity. Alternatively, the company says the syngas can be used like natural gas to power various types of steam generators in a more direct manner, or the gas can be directly combusted in kiln or other thermal operations.

The company first employed the ORC combination in 2013, when the city of Covington, Tennessee, began operating a new WTE plant using PHGE’s standard-size downdraft gasifier to process 12 tons per day of wood trimmings combined with dewatered sewage sludge. The resulting electricity from the process supplies half of the power needed to run the city’s wastewater treatment plant, while the other half powers the parasitic process, all while eliminating the city’s need to transport and landfill those biomass streams. That project, involving a 125-kilowatt system, is smaller than the Lebanon project.

The Lebanon facility will utilize a similar model in which its gasifier will produce syngas that is combusted in a thermal oxidizer to drive an oil heater, which in turn will drive an ORC electrical generator, providing parasitic power for the process and delivering up to 200 kilowatts of power for the operation of the wastewater treatment facility.

Nancy Cooper, business development analyst with PHG Energy, says the large-frame gasifier was designed to meet market demand.

“We had previously used up to six of our gasifiers in an array to achieve needed syngas production for brick kilns,” says Cooper. “Using a single large unit is more straightforward and economically practical.”

In Nashville, Tennessee-based PHG Energy’s (PHGE) previously announced municipal projects, the company’s gasifiers are being used, or will be used to generate electricity. But for Sevier Solid Waste Inc. (SSWI), Pigeon Forge, Tennessee, PHGE Energy’s large frame gasifier will be used for a slightly different purpose.

The company announced in August that it had been selected to build the $2.25 million gasification plant for SSWI to process more than 30 tons per day of composted, mulch-like biomass material into thermal energy and produce a high-carbon biochar.

Nancy Cooper of PHGE says the biomass comes from the facility’s existing recovery and treatment process. SSWI operates a garbage composting plant that processes more than 100,000 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) annually from the cities of Sevierville, Gatlinburg and Pigeon Forge and the Great Smokey Mountains National Park. Sixty percent of the processed MSW is made into compost.

The energy from the gasifier will be used in a thermal oxidizer to offer odor control at the MSW processing facility, allowing SSWI to defer other upgrades.

“This represents a significant savings from our current disposal and operating costs,” says Tom Leonard, director of SSWI.

The remaining biochar, representing 5 percent by weight of the processed biomass, will be sold as high-Btu fuel for a kiln operation in the region, PHGE says.

PHGE says it will provide the gasifier, thermal oxidizer and material handling equipment, and serve as general contractor for the facility, which will showcase the company’s second installation of its large-frame gasifier. ARiES Energy, a Knoxville, Tennessee-based energy consulting firm, recently acquired by PHGE, will serve as project developer.

The project represents PHGE’s 15th gasifier installation and is expected to be completed in mid-2016.

PHGE President Tom Stanzione says, “This is our second municipal project to receive approval this year and demonstrates the growing confidence in our technology. We have a strong research and development commitment to converting MSW to energy and reducing landfill usage, and this is another significant step in that process.”

Cooper further explains that in this case, power density is achieved less by the increase in size, than by the downdraft technology that provides more effective airflows through the biomass.

The company explains that by using gravity and other features, its process doesn’t require outside energy sources.Furthermore, the gasifier has no burning stage, and the thermo-chemical process takes place inside a sealed, “super-insulated” vessel.

“Our patented design employs unique interior shapes that create consistent thermal layers that allow for the molecular level breakdown of the biomass material,” Cooper says. According to the company, there is only one moving part inside the gasifier: the one that slowly shaves the biochar byproduct from the bottom of the process.

“We can convert about 95 percent of what comes into the gasifier to gas, and about 5 percent is left as a product called biochar,” says Cooper. This byproduct can be used as a fuel, like charcoal, and has industrial applications, such as carbon black. It also can be mixed with other nutrients to enhance soil amendments, PHGE says.

Cooper also says with this large-frame gasifier, the city of Lebanon will have the ability to customize the feedstock blends to accommodate shredded tires in addition to wood waste and dewatered sewage sludge from the nearby wastewater treatment facility, to be connected via conveyor.

“Wood waste is a common denominator in all our projects,” Cooper says, “and we also have utilized sludge and tires.” Cooper says while the tires have a very high Btu (British thermal unit) content, much like coal, PGHE’s process at the Lebanon facility calls for a blend of around 10 percent each tires and sludge and 80 percent wood, so there will not be a considerable difference in energy yield from previous projects, Cooper explains.

The tires will come from the county, which previously had to pay to have them hauled out of state to a shredding facility. As for the sludge component, Cooper says, it has been land-applied. In addition, Cooper points out that several local industries will be able to significantly reduce their wood waste to landfill, saving on disposal costs of around $70 per ton, by contracting with the city to accept these wastes. “The city has numerous commitments from both manufacturing and distribution companies,” Cooper adds.

When the plant begins operations, processed tonnages will be at about half of its 64-ton-per-day installed capacity.

“The extra capacity was built into the system to allow for added income as such biomass sources are identified,” Cooper explains. “The plant has a positive economic return at 32 tons, so the city will be seeking new sources of revenue, primarily from local industries who wish to pay smaller tipping fees and become more landfill-free.”

Siting the project at a wastewater treatment plant, as was done in Covington and is being done in Lebanon, enables the customer to use the electricity from the process at the facility or “behind the fence,” says Cooper, without involving grid or power distributors. She points out that it’s also beneficial not to have to transport the sludge biomass to an off-site facility.
Cooper says the idea for the Lebanon project originated as the city sought long-term solutions to deal with these streams, and saw PHGE’s gasification technology as a “stage-one” plan.

“The city does not currently have a recycling program, so this is a big step into renewable energy,” she says.

The city has cited two primary reasons for selecting PHGE. One is the company’s track record of successful installations. In addition, the city has referred to the reputation and strength of PHGE’s owner, a Nashville family that also has owned and managed a regional Caterpillar dealership for 71 years.

One notable difference from the Covington facility, however, is that the Lebanon plant will not have feedstock processing equipment on-site. According to Cooper, a third-party company will be contracted to pick up and process the feedstock. Only processed materials will be delivered to the facility.

Cooper says the biomass and tires will be chipped into 2-inch pieces and screened so they are free of metals, glass and dirt.

Moving forward, Cooper says PHGE has many long-term visions for its gasification systems, one of which is to increasingly replace landfills with WTE technology. “There are many varieties of biomass we can now gasify, producing syngas and valuable biochar, thus trimming away at what is being dumped,” she says.

The next step, PHGE says, is to utilize the final product of existing material recovery facilities (MRFs) to produce energy. On that front, Cooper says the company has been successful in trials to convert refuse-derived fuel (RDF) pellets to energy.

“There are several projects in the development pipeline that will allow us to commercially deploy these systems,” she says.

 

The author is a managing editor with the Recycling Today Media Group and can be reached via email at lmckenna@gie.net.

 


biochar production machines

14 December, 2015

 

 

25 Aug 2009 , The latest company to pursue manmade charcoal, called biochar, is Biochar Systems, which has developed a biochar-making machine that can be pulled by a pickup truck Two customers–a North Carolina farm and the US.

impractical method of producing biochar due to the excess carbon emissions produced during combustion Additionally, we , pyrolysis machines in the production of biochar to reduce pollution and optimize for the lowest level of residual.

MISSION: Empower people to sustainably produce and use biochar as a healing medium for our soils , I would have been very glad to buy a ready made machine that provided an answer to all these challenges but I just couldn’t seem to find.

A nice presentation of various scale biochar production equipment

But they are relatively easy to make and there are many videos on Youtube that will show you how, just type make biochar into the search bar We hope the BBF will be able to provide independent reviews of biochar-producing equipment,.

The equipment is fully mobile in order to operate on difficult or distant sites and thus reduce the transport of feedstock , The BiG-1000 can accept 200kg of feedstock an hour, producing up to 50kg of biochar an hour at a 25% conversion rate of.

as a Coal Replacement, for Superior Pellets and Cellulosic Ethanol Production By Joe James , Producers, LLC Schematic of Torrefaction Machine Agri – Tech Producers, LLC Higher Heating Value of Torrefied Wood, Charcoal and Coal:

In physical terms, biochar is simply the charred remains is formed when plant material is heated in, , Slow pyrolysis is slightly more technologically advanced and can optimize for biochar production with approximately 40% of the biomass.

304 Results , Biomass stamping biochar bagasse briquette machine US $26500-38900 / Set ( FOB Price) 1 Set (Min Order) Place of Origin: CN;SHN Production Capacity: 93-99% Brand Name: ZHONG XIN NENG YUAN Condition: New

Carolina Clean Energy is constructing unique charcoal production equipment that will produce both energy and byproducts The prototype design was built 20 years ago, but a commercial design has not yet been marketed With the.

28 Nov 2012 , Biochar Industries was initially setup to create benchmarks of sustainability in this new and exciting industry that is emerging However I , The production of charcoal is managed by a Person (Charmaster) and not a machine

4 May 2015 , This website collects news and information on promising backyard biochar methods, worldwide , where it could be used to generate energy or used as feedstock in some efficent carbonization machinery to produce biochar

“Pyrolysis systems use kilns and retorts and other specialized equipment to contain the baking biomass while , “Biochar production processes utilize cellulosic biomass such as wood chips, corn stover, rice and peanut hulls, tree bark, paper.

Pioneered by a Paris-based NGO, Pro-Natura, the charcoal-making machine has been used in Senegal since late 2007, , was launched at Ross Bethio in north-west Senegal, Pro-Natura’s main green charcoal and biochar production site

There are many carbonized products offered for sale under the generic “biochar” label At present, the industry lacks broad standards that rank biochar by quality, origin, sustainability, or actual carbon negative value The International Biochar.

These are the attributes of biochar production that seem most appealing to the general audience of folks who are , below help to illustrate the basics; rice hull is transformed to biochar using a PyroCal 2200 model biochar production machine

, 55 gallon drum Hoping to promote simple, scalable, environmentally sound methods for making biochar for improving t, , Look for this on facebook it is a good working group for bio-char production in a responsible way sasham5 , His current work with aspirin is Amazing in Maize, 250% yield gains, 15 cobs per plant;

Alex Brendel Founder/Craftsman/Businessman/Entrepreneur at Our World BioChar , Invent, Design and Fabricate BioChar Production Machines Invent, Develop , Build and Service Ultra-High Vacuum equipment on Beamline 9 of SSRL

16 Mar 2013 , Biocharcoal, or ‘biochar’, is charcoal produced from dried and green vegetation, garden refuse, and other carbon , a group of researchers are demonstrating the workings of a locally made biochar oven – a machine that can.

It is also well understood that minerals are essential to proper human, plant and animal health and growth , Biomass such as rice and wheat husks, forest waste etc is processed with Super Stone Clean 530 to produce biochar which is then.

from producing both charcoal and bio-oil And Biochar Products is currently working with ABRI to develop production 20-ton and 50-ton production machin A 20-ton machine would sit on two 40-foot trailers with articulate rear wheels

The company started in 2010 with the first professional plant in Europe for the production of high-quality biochar for use in agriculture Since that time Swiss Biochar recycle green waste, wet biomass and waste materials to biochar with.

4 Feb 2015 , Instead of art machines, the place now produces machines that make distributed clean energy and are mostly shipped to , The by-product of the gasifiers is that they produce biochar, which can be added to soil as a fertilizer

method of biochar production offered by this equipment was evaluated by comparing its output with a single barrel method of production The results obtained during the test indicated that the efficiency of the equipment based on its output per.

23 Sep 2014 , Farm scale biochar production equipment has been hard to come by in the US but a handful of Australians have come up with affordable options

3 Feb 2014 , Biochar is a form of charcoal created by the pyrolysis of biomass, that is highly effective as a soil enhancer and its ability to store carbon Biochar is produced through an energy conversion process called pyrolysis, which is the.

pre:recortadora de marcos rm95s en alquilernext:used Schmidt tempo k4 machine

Get in touch

Crushing Equipment Jaw Crusher Cone Crusher Impact Crusher Grinding Mill Vibrating Screen Vibrating Feeder Washing Machine Beneficiation Mobile Crushing Plant Other Equipment

Use Of Biochar Soil Health Enhancement And Greenho

15 December, 2015

 

 

 

 

Disclaimer : All contents are copyrighted and is not responsible for third party website content. It is illegal for you to distribute copyrighted files without permission. Downloads must be for time-shifting, personal, private, non-commercial use only. Thanks for visitor,google.com, bing.com, yahoo.com and advertizer.
All content posted by our users is dedicated to the public domain

Use Of Biochar Soil Health Enhancement And Greenho,


Biochar suitable substrate for soilless hydroponic tomatoes

16 December, 2015


How to make Biochar

16 December, 2015

By accessing and using this Site, you agree to be bound by all Pakistan’s applicable laws and regulations. Any user promoting video that contains Religious Hatred contents will be banned and reported to PTA.

80 Likes   7 Dislikes


[NEWS RELEASE] — Federal approval sets stage for biochar commercialization in Alberta

17 December, 2015

December 17, 2015

EDMONTON – The Alberta Biochar Initiative (ABI) welcomes the federal government’s recent approval of biochar – a carbon-rich form of charcoal produced by heating agricultural and forestry waste materials in a low or no oxygen environment – for use in soil.

This important development, which is the result of two years of concerted work on the part of ABI partner AirTerra and other provincial biochar proponents to gain Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) approval, sets the stage for the next phase of ABI’s sustained effort to establish a successful biochar industry in Alberta and across Canada.

ABI partners are encouraged by this significant development.

“Regulatory approval is something ABI has pursued since 2012,” said Don Harfield, who has conducted biochar research and development at Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures for more than 10 years and serves as ABI’s technical lead. “It gives ABI partners the opportunity to pursue a wide range of potential commercial applications for biochar in Alberta and other markets.”

Biochar can be used to adjust soil pH and improve soil biology, allowing it to retain more moisture and nutrients. When applied to marginal land, biochar can increase sustainable crop yields. The material can also be chemically treated to clean water, reduce odour and adsorb toxic pollutants.

AirTerra President and CEO Rob Lavoie considers CFIA’s approval of biochar for use in soil a game-changing moment.

“Now that we’ve gained federal approval, I believe interest in biochar and its numerous commercial applications will take off with Canadian consumers and industries,” said Lavoie. “Gardeners, horticulturalists, farmers, forest products companies and industry will see biochar in a new light. Its economic and environmental potential is enormous.”

For more information on AirTerra, go to www.airterra.ca

Note to editors: To arrange an interview with an ABI biochar expert, contact Scott Lundy by phone at 780-246-3222 or by email at scott.lundy@albertainnovates.ca

The Alberta Biochar Initiative was established via a partnership between Lakeland College and Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures to develop and demonstrate technologies that will enable large-scale commercial deployment of biochar products and biochar applications for the benefit of Albertans.


elementC6, Inc. Gets CDFA Certification for Biochar Based Soil Amendment

17 December, 2015

Dec 17, 2015 News


Feeding w/ Biochar

19 December, 2015


A Guide To Conducting Biochar

19 December, 2015


biochar

19 December, 2015

biochar.online

20 December, 2015

© AsiaWS network

WSData provide information about websites and web domains over Internet. It’s allow you to get geographical data about a website. You can browse website by date, extension, IP address or country. This website contain any personnal information, no whois data, only registered websites / domains.


Toxins from TLUD biochar?

21 December, 2015

type Exception report

message Argument ‘userAgentString’ must not be null.

description The server encountered an internal error that prevented it from fulfilling this request.

exception

net.sf.qualitycheck.exception.IllegalNullArgumentException: Argument 'userAgentString' must not be null. 	net.sf.qualitycheck.Check.notNull(Check.java:2507) 	net.sf.uadetector.UserAgent$Builder.<init>(UserAgent.java:63) 	net.sf.uadetector.parser.AbstractUserAgentStringParser.parse(AbstractUserAgentStringParser.java:198) 	net.sf.uadetector.parser.AbstractUserAgentStringParser.parse(AbstractUserAgentStringParser.java:39) 	com.javaranch.jforum.url.MobileStatus.isOnMobileDevice(MobileStatus.java:64) 	com.javaranch.jforum.url.MobileStatus.getMobileRequest(MobileStatus.java:51) 	net.jforum.context.web.WebRequestContext.<init>(WebRequestContext.java:111) 	net.jforum.JForum.service(JForum.java:196) 	javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:727) 	org.apache.tomcat.websocket.server.WsFilter.doFilter(WsFilter.java:52) 	net.jforum.JForumFilter.doFilter(JForumFilter.java:57) 	com.javaranch.jforum.url.JSessionIDFilter.doFilter(JSessionIDFilter.java:32) 	com.javaranch.jforum.url.UrlFilter.doChain(UrlFilter.java:70) 	com.javaranch.jforum.url.UrlFilter.doFilter(UrlFilter.java:56) 	net.jforum.util.legacy.clickstream.ClickstreamFilter.doFilter(ClickstreamFilter.java:52) 	net.jforum.JpaFilter.executeFilter(JpaFilter.java:59) 	net.jforum.JpaFilter.doFilter(JpaFilter.java:48) 	com.javaranch.jforum.csrf.CsrfFilter.doFilter(CsrfFilter.java:67) 	net.jforum.JForumExecutionContextFilter.doFilter(JForumExecutionContextFilter.java:39) 	net.jforum.JForumRequestCharacterEncodingFilter.doFilter(JForumRequestCharacterEncodingFilter.java:33)

note The full stack trace of the root cause is available in the Apache Tomcat/7.0.57 logs.


Degradation of p-Nitrophenol on biochars

22 December, 2015

1155 Sixteenth Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

京ICP备13047075

Copyright © 2015
American Chemical Society


Exeter Biochar Retort

23 December, 2015

 

Bagley is founder of Exeterra, an Innovation Center company. He sells the Exeter Biochar Retort – a large round kiln that uses a high-heat process to produce charcoal materials from wood and animal bones in an energy-efficient, clean-burning way.

He sells his products all across North American and into the Caribbean region. Additionally, he sells natural charcoal products in the Athens area. He has partnered with a company in Great Britain for wider distribution and manufacturing of the special kilns.

 

 


Test Drive an Exeter

23 December, 2015

We also offer an optional educational workshop for prospective equipment users, your potential biochar customers, or both. A workshop for equipment users would be particularly helpful for situations when group ownership is being considered, and for end users to help you generate interest and validate that there will be an early customer base.

**Contact us today for pricing

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

 


Farm Scale Biochar Part 2 Feedstocks

24 December, 2015


PDF Download Biochar for Environmental Management Science Technology and Implementation

25 December, 2015

CRH in the Philippines

26 December, 2015

Comments


Get Growing: How you can combat global warming from your backyard

28 December, 2015


Biochar and Tomatoes: The new B in BLT

28 December, 2015

According to this latest report on the ever-growing uses for biochar, the ubiquitous by-product of pyrolysis can “have considerable advantages for greenhouse tomato growers”.

The report “Closing the Loop: Use of Biochar Produced from Tomato Crop Green waste as a Substrate for Soilless,  Hydroponic Tomato Production” is available on the ASHS HortScience electronic journal web site: http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/50/10/1572.abstract


Biochar cuts nitrogen leaching after manure application

30 December, 2015

We’re sorry, but we could not fulfill your request for /story/2015/dec/tue/biochar-cuts-nitrogen-leaching-after-manure-application on this server.

An invalid request was received from your browser. This may be caused by a malfunctioning proxy server or browser privacy software.

Your technical support key is: d823-c447-45b3-5e30

You can use this key to fix this problem yourself.

If you are unable to fix the problem yourself, please contact root at agronomy.org and be sure to provide the technical support key shown above.


Report delivers insight into the Global biochar industry 2015 market research report

30 December, 2015

– Advertisement – 

– Premium –

Request Sample Report: Global Biochar Industry 2015

The Global Biochar Industry 2015 Market Research Report is a professional and in-depth study on the current state of the Biochar industry.

The report provides a basic overview of the industry including definitions, classifications, applications and industry chain structure. The Biochar market analysis is provided for the international markets including development trends, competitive landscape analysis, and key regions development status.

Development policies and plans are discussed as well as manufacturing processes and cost structures are also analyzed. This report also states import/export consumption, supply and demand Figures, cost, price, revenue and gross margins.

The report focuses on global major leading industry players providing information such as company profiles, product picture and specification, capacity, production, price, cost, revenue and contact information. Upstream raw materials and equipment and downstream demand analysis is also carried out.

The Biochar industry development trends and marketing channels are analyzed.

– Advertisement – 

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

– Premium –

– Advertisement – 

– Premium –

With 171 tables and figures the report provides key statistics on the state of the industry and is a valuable source of guidance and direction for companies and individuals interested in the market.

Enquiry: Global Biochar Industry 2015

Table of Content:

1 Industry Overview
1.1 Definition and Specifications of Biochar
1.1.1 Definition of Biochar
1.1.2 Specifications of Biochar
1.2 Classification of Biochar
1.3 Applications of Biochar
1.4 Industry Chain Structure of Biochar
1.5 Industry Overview and Major Regions Status of Biochar
1.5.1 Industry Overview of Biochar
1.5.2 Global Major Regions Status of Biochar
1.6 Industry Policy Analysis of Biochar
1.7 Industry News Analysis of Biochar

2 Manufacturing Cost Structure Analysis of Biochar
2.1 Raw Material Suppliers and Price Analysis of Biochar
2.2 Equipment Suppliers and Price Analysis of Biochar
2.3 Labor Cost Analysis of Biochar
2.4 Other Costs Analysis of Biochar
2.5 Manufacturing Cost Structure Analysis of Biochar
2.6 Manufacturing Process Analysis of Biochar
2.7 Global Price, Cost and Gross of Biochar 2010-2015

3 Technical Data and Manufacturing Plants Analysis of Biochar
3.1 Capacity and Commercial Production Date of Global Key Manufacturers in 2014
3.2 Manufacturing Plants Distribution of Global Key Biochar Manufacturers in 2014
3.3 R&D Status and Technology Source of Global Biochar Key Manufacturers in 2014
3.4 Raw Materials Sources Analysis of Global Biochar Key Manufacturers in 2014

Browse Report Summary with TOC: http://www.reportbazzar.com/product/global-biochar-industry-2015-market-research-report/

Website by: MailCaster


Hamish Fallside: Demonstration of biochar reactor (Climate Foundation, USA)

31 December, 2015

2 Likes   0 Dislikes

For more information:
http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/96-innovative-sanitation-science-and-technology

and

The biochar workshop card


{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment

Question * Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.