The argument for encouraging biochar use as a ubiquitous household practice is compelling: Improved garden soil will increase food production where it has the most impact on energy demand. Implementing charcoal manufacture at a household level draws in a supply of yard prunings and workbench scraps that otherwise would be lost to non-charcoal alternatives. Unfortunately, finding even the most basic information on how to implement biochar use as a personal sustainability practice is discouragingly time consuming. In response I have started up a FAQ

Charcoal cannot replace the need for adding mineral nutrients.

Application of the charcoal to soils may be key to sustainability. Application of charcoal to soils is hypothesized to increase bioavailable water, build soil organic matter, enhance nutrient cycling, lower bulk density, act as a liming agent, and reduce leaching of pesticides and nutrients to surface and ground water. The half-life of C in soil charcoal is in excess of 1000 yr. Hence, soil-applied charcoal will make both a lasting contribution to soil quality and C in the charcoal will be removed from the atmosphere and sequestered for millennia.

Redox: soil pH's energetic dance partner. When pH changes, pE must also change in response. The reverse is true also. In soil, that response departs from simple mirroring. So much so that it can seem to be two separate dances. Soil pH and pE have different causes of change and different effective buffering agents. The term 'buffering' is replaced in a pE context - it is called poise. A stabilized soil pE system is referred to as a well poised system, differences in soil buffering versus soil poise account for the departure from 1:1 mirroring. Now for the exciting stuff. To many of us, what makes soil different than geologic material is that it is in an excited state, excited mostly by solar energy as facilitated by living processes. Unlike soil pH, soil pE is directly influenced by these energy fluxes.

Very informative

Following the Kyoto protocol with respect to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases emissions, and EU energy policy and sustainability in waste management, there has been an increased interest in the reduction of emissions from waste disposal operations. From the point of view of nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, waste incineration and waste co-combustion are very acceptable methods for waste disposal. In order to achieve very low N2O emissions from waste incineration, particularly for waste with higher nitrogen content (e.g. sewage sludge), two factors are important: temperature of incineration over 900°C and avoiding the selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) de-NOX method based on urea or ammonia treatments. The more modern selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems for de-NOX give rise to negligible sources of N2O.

plant diversity and low input biomass for biofuel

The North Dakota Farmers Union has successfully started a national Carbon Credit Program. It allows ag producers and landowners to earn income by storing carbon in their soil through no-till crop production and longterm grass seeding practices. There are also forestry (tree planting) and methane offset (manure digester) contracts. Forestry and methane contracts are available nationwide and have no enrollment date. Soil offset contracts are limited to established enrollment areas. (article includes map). Soil carbon characterization studies are needed to expand the enrollment areas.

The Godfather of Terra Preta, soil scientist Wim Sombroek (1934 - 2003) enjoyed a lifelong fascination with enhanced soil. The importance of plaggen soil in his native Netherlands impressed him at an early age, and early in the 1960's, he recognized in the Amazonian Dark Earths something familiar and precious. Before his passing, he assembled specific soil scientists challenged them to discover the process for making and sustaining a modern equivalent of the bio-char enhanced terra preta, what he termed terra preta nova. A great opportunity in answering Sombroek's challenge lies is surmounting the opacity of mutualistic rhizospheric species to traditional analytical approaches: only 1% of rhizospheric species are cultureable ala petri dish. We don't have a robust body of culture-independent studies against which to compare Terra Preta, so we are doubly challenged to reverse-engineer the phenomenon. Considering Wim Somboek's many noteworthy accomplishments, the perspective of his international leadership, and the late-in-life timing of his challenge, one senses he is pointing us to a mystery fundamental to understanding soil in new and exciting ways. This happens at a time when the soil science profession is in dynamic transition and sorely in need of a unifying vision. Wim Sombroek has given soil scientists a most welcome and worthy quest.