California Department of Food and Agriculture ENVIRONMENTAL FARMING ACT SCIENCE ADVISORY PANEL

MEETING AGENDA

December 19, 2014 10 AM to 4 PM

Room 133 California Department of Food and Agriculture

1220 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814

Call in information: Please call 1-877-238-3903

Participant passcode - 6655460#

GoToMeeting Information

Meeting ID: 921-143-141 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/921143141

Don Cameron, Member and Chair

Mark Nechodom, PhD, Member Jocelyn Gretz, MSc, Member

Mike Tollstrup, Member Jeff Dlott, PhD, Member Luana Kiger, MSc, Subject Matter Expert Doug Parker, PhD, Subject Matter Expert

1. Introductions Mr. Cameron

2. updates

Minutes from previous meetings Dr. Gunasekara

State Water Efficiency and Enhancement Program (SWEEP) Mrs. Cook Mr. Whatmore Mrs. Cook

GEELA update

AB 32 Scoping Plan activities

3. Biochar Mr. Cameron

Speaker 1 – Steve McIntyre, Monterey Pacific

Speaker 2 – Jim Boyd, Clean Tech Advocates

Speaker 3 – Peter Hirst, New England Biochar LLC

Speaker 4 – Dr. Johannes Lehmann, Chairman of International Biochar Initiative (1-2 pm)

Discussion Mr. Cameron

4. Public comment

5. Next meeting and adjournment Mr. Cameron

Amrith Gunasekara, PhD, CDFA Liaison to the Science Panel

All meeting facilities are accessible to persons with disabilities. If you require reasonable accommodation as defined by the American with Disabilities Act, or if you have questions regarding this public meeting, please contact Amrith Gunasekara at (916) 654-0433.

More information at: http://cdfa.ca.gov/Meetings.html and http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/EnvironmentalStewardship/Meetings_Presentations.html

1

I Monterey Pacific Inc

Biochar

Why Use of Biochar is Attractive for Farming

• Increases water holding capacity of soil, increasing crop tolerance to drought by increasing the ability of soils to retain water and nutrients.

• Increases soil capacity to absorb chemicals and minerals, providing nutrients to plants rather than being lost to groundwater (eg. absorbs phosphate)

• Biochar still contains most of the nutrients in the feedstock and will release these nutrients over time

• Biochar is a relatively low density material that helps to lower the bulk density of heavy soils, increasing drainage, aeration, and root penetration.

• Biochar is a liming agent that will help off set the acidifying effects of N fertilizers, thereby reducing the need for liming.

• Soil incorporation improves resource use by soil biota, creating healthier soils

Current Drawbacks to Increased Biochar Use in Agriculture

• Limited availability • High cost (due to biochar scarcity and transport of

feedstocks) • Lack of comprehensive knowledge re biochar benefits • Similar manufacturing methods can still produce a

variable product • Farmers grow their own carbon, so are reticent to

purchase carbon as a fertilizer • Sometimes advertised as such, but not a silver bullet

How Biochar use in Ag can reduce GHG

• Avoiding the emissions from biomass decomposition at land fill sites.

• Avoiding emissions from burning of ag waste

• Biochar is a stable form of carbon and will remain in the soil for many hundreds of years (effective sequestration).

• N2O and CH4 emissions from soil can be reduced by biochar application.

• Reduced emissions associated with fertilizer usage, less N and P lost

• The energy produced in the pyrolysis process is 2-4x what it takes to make it

How to Increase Biochar Use in Ag

• Utilize abundant local sources of carbon for pyrolysis – agricultural and woody waste

• Focus on high value crops with a long-term payback • Develop biochar standards and testing (IBI) • Develop standardized trials to test feedstocks/pyrolysis

so benefits can be confirmed

• Credits of some kind for biochar use? • Bring biochar production to the local level

Solution: Mobile Pyrolysis Plant that follows the feedstock

I .~•~- 1~---1 -

Immediate applications for use of mobile pyrolysis

½ mile long, 80 year old eucalyptus windbreak along Hwy 101 to be removed by CALTRANS in 2015 (alongside ranch managed by MPI)

Salinas River channel removal of invasive woody weeds for improved flow and flood control 2015-?

Nitrogen Management Carbon Sequestration

Soil Management Biochar Reduced Water Use

More Efficient Conventional Biofuel Production and Organic Systems

Biochar for Water Conservation

Environmental Farming Act Science Advisory Panel Meeting - December 19, 2014

Peter Hirst Sonoma Biochar Initiative New England Biochar LLC

Triple Adam Retort at

Living Web Farm, NC

13-Foot tall tomatoes in

second set: 22lbs per plant to date,

Nov 12, 2013

2012 US Biochar Initiative National Conference - Sonoma State University

CAFF Workshop at Santa Rosa Junior College Shone Farm

SBI Workshop Circle Bar Ranch

Carneros

Swallow Valley Farm Valley Ford

Green String Farm Petaluma

Oak Hill Farm Glen Ellen

NASA calculates that it will take

11 trillion gallons of water to turn this red patch blue again.

“Field trials are a potentially powerful communication tool . . .”

--Field Trials as an Extension Technique: David G. Abler, Ganesh P.

Rauniyar, and Frank M. Goode, 1992

Rick Green, 3d generation family

rice farmer, WIllows

Biochar compost trials finding faster rates of

maturation

n

CA Suppliers/Consultants • Greenleaf Energy, Scotia Biomass Plant • New England Biochar LLC, Valley Ford • Pacific Biochar, Willows • Blue Sky Biochar, Thousand Oaks • Phoenix Energy, Merced, Modesto, Cabin Creek • Cool Planet Energy, Camarillo • Charborn, Santa Barbara • BioCharm, San Rafael • Full Circle Biochar, San Francisco • Sonoma Compost, Petaluma

CA Labs- Biochar Dr. Sanjai Parikh, Environmental Soil Chemistry, UCD Dr. David Smart, Oakville Station, UCD Frank Shields-Soil Control Lab, Watsonville reNUWit Research Center, Stanford University Dr. Gerardo Diaz, Dept. of Engineering, UC Merced

• SBI-Sonoma County Biochar Project

• Southern CA Biochar Initiative, Thousand Oaks

• Rick Green, 3d gen family rice grower, Willows

• City of Manteca & MUSD - Teaching Farm

• Steve McIntyre - Monterey Pacific

• Bob Cannard/Alice Waters- Green String Farm

• Redwood Forest Foundation Inc., Usal Forest,

Mendocino

• Randall Grahm, Bonny Doon Vineyards

• Regenerative Design Institute, Penny Livingston,

Bolinas

• Dixon Ridge Farms, Winters

"As most biochar research has been conducted at the laboratory- or bench-scale, large-scale field applications of biochar practices and technologies are needed..."

Eric Byous, Physical Scientist, Water Efficiency Sustainable Infrastructure Office, USEPA, Region 9

"The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it: If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something."

-Franklin Delano Roosevelt-

Oglethorpe University Commencement Address

22 May 1932

RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICTS

SONOMA C O U T Y

WATER

SONIOMA IE C- 0 L -0 G Y 1CENIT IER

~ A G E N Y

__ • • • _ Redirecting Carbon DltJatJVe Building Healthy oil

Biochar Systems: Climate Mitigation and Soil Fertility Management

Johannes Lehmann Cornell University International Biochar Initiative

300 ~------------------------~ 120 (]) (.) C (]) ·o U) 250 4-0 .c (])

S 200

U)

C

en 150 C 0 ...... ~ .c 100 ::J Q_ -0

m 50 .c E ::J z

0

Biochar Charcoal Biochar+charcoal (% of compost)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

100

80

60

40

20

0

cu 0 (.) I....

cu .c (.) ....--...

-o'#-c-cu u5 I.... 0 cu Q_

-5 E 0 8 .c C C 0 0 Cf) (])

C en 0 0 ·- .c ............ cu 0 -~ ...... .c -0 ::J (]) o.. rn

- Q_ o E C 0 .Q (.) t 0 Q_

0 I....

a..

Biochar Science over the Past Decade

WB Study

CRC

NRDC CAR

EU-JRC DEFRA

CSIRO

Biochar book (Earthscan)

Biochar research has accelerated over the past 5 years

Lehmann and Joseph, 2015, Earthscan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

········ ............. .

..• .. .. .. .. .. .. • .. · .. ·

BIOCHARSYSTEM

BiomassSource Production

Technology

Soil Application

AgriculturalWaste

UrbanWaste

DedicatedFeedstock

Fast/SlowPyrolysis

Gasification

EnergyCapture

SoilCharacteristics

FarmingSystem

Climate

Biochar Systems

WB Report

BIOCHAR SYSTEM

BiomassSource Production

Technology

Soil Application

Agricultural Waste

Urban Waste

Dedicated Feedstock

Fast/Slow Pyrolysis

Gasification

Energy Capture

Soil Characteristics

Farming System

Climate

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BIOCHARSYSTEM

BiomassSource Production

Technology

Soil Application

AgriculturalWaste

UrbanWaste

DedicatedFeedstock

Fast/SlowPyrolysis

Gasification

EnergyCapture

SoilCharacteristics

FarmingSystem

Climate

Biochar ≠ Biochar

Biochar system ≠ Biochar system

BIOCHAR SYSTEM

BiomassSource Production

Technology

Soil Application

Agricultural Waste

Urban Waste

Dedicated Feedstock

Fast/Slow Pyrolysis

Gasification

Energy Capture

Soil Characteristics

Farming System

Climate

Key Biochar Properties Other organic amendments

Biochars Persistence (MRT) weeks to years

years to millenia

Water retention

Nutrient retention (after oxidation)

Plant diseases

Nutrient additions to to

Liming effect to

Pollutant remediation to to

“Tunable” Not fully combinable (trade-offs)

~ I. I/ 11' .:: I I ·:-:: I I .·• I .. ·

Ash (% w/w)(b)

Optimum pH range cow manure annual biomass woody biomass high-ash waste

Biochar Properties 12 Arrows from lowest to highest

temperature within a given feedstock

10

pH K

Cl

8

6

4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Ash (% w/w)

Example pH: biochars can be generated with pH above or below optimum soil pH – opportunity for tuning biochar to soil needs (within limits) Slow pyrolysis

Enders et al.,2012, Bioresource Technology 114, 644-653

----------5.1-5.5

------ -----4.1-4.5

-----------------------<4.0

---------4.6-5.0

-"""""~-,Grand Mean

---------------------8.1-8.5

--a-------------------------------7.1-7.5

---------6.1-6.5

-------------6.6-7.0

----------5.6-6.0

--------------7.6-8.0

-20 0 20 40 60

Change in Crop Productivity (%)

• ggggg

Yield Effects of Biochars

Meta-analysis

Soil pH values

(n=60 studies)

Jeffery et al, 2015, Earthscan

-u -::::, 5.0 a. --C: --u Decomposition

"<I' ..... 4.0 rate '+-0

= 6.8 · 104 % day·1 ~ 0 - 3.0 C: 0 -+- Soil+BC Under optimal .:; (/J - tr · Loess+BC conditions: 0 2.0 M RT = 402 years a. E T ½ = 278 years 0 0 a,

1.0 "C

u m

Incubation time (days) 0.0

0 365 730 1095 1460 1825 2190 2555 2920

Biochar Persistence in Soil Mean residence time of 400 years under optimum water and temperature (calculated to 4,000 years in the field)

Kuzyakov et al, 2014, SBB 70, 229-236

Lignin etc.

• '

0/C 0.7 H/C 1.5 Temperature

Amorphous Carbon

0.5 1.0

~200°C

0.3 0.5

-400°C

-------- Pyrolysis Intensity --------~

:;u (D -a < (D

""D 0

"tJ 0 a 0 ::::J

What happens during Pyrolysis?

Lehmann et al., 2010, in: Imperial College Press, London

0

~ 00

0 0

0 •

R

Com-350-BC '-cH,

o....._

Com-600-BC

.............. 0

OH

R R R R

H/Corg as a Proxy for Fused Aromatic C

12

Published data Unpublished data

8

6

4

10

Pyrolysis temperature

-Del

ta d

elta

2

0

-2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6

H/Corg

Nguyen et al. 2010, ES&T McBeath and Smernik, 2009, OG McBeath et al., 2011, OG Sydney Expert meeting 2014, unpubl.

• - • • • •

Biochar Persistence in Soil

10000 100 (a)

0.48

MRT=6439 e-2.8(H/Corg)

r2=0.12 n=47, p<0.05

BC

100

(%)

(c)

Regression: BC100=-30.1(H/Corg) +105 r2=0.44 n=47, p<0.01

Threshold: BC100=-73(H/Corg) +116

80

60

40

20

1000

100 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

H/Corg ratio H/Corg

Biochars with low H/Corg ratios have high persistence Biochars made at >500ºC from wood have H/Corg <0.48 Biomass has H/Corg >1.4 Very conservative, includes field and laboratory experiments

MR

T (y

ears

)

Lehmann et al, 2015, Earthscan

1.2

• ••• •

•

..... •

>< :J

-+= C: 0 ..0 ,_ co u...-... _ .... co ,,_ u co ·-e Q) Q) >, ><';I -o E ~u :J 0) -c­c:

C: .Q

-100 -50 0

Lateral carb 50 on flux (g C m-2 yea(1)

100

Movement ≠ Mineralization BC (%C) / BC (%C) of topsoil

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Dep

th (m

)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.5

1.0

Van Oost et al., 2007, Science 318:626-629 Disaggregated from Lehmann et al., 2008, Nature Geo. 1: 832–835

Biochar Recommendations

Soil

Biochar

Crop

Ecosystem

• M1nera lComposUan • pH/CEC/Nw,onts • Soll Tuturt • TOl)Olfaphiallposlt,on

• fttdrtock • Pyrol'156Cond,t,ons • Post•PraducbanAct abc><v'Pracess,rc • Nutt,tnt "Chars.,,• (Lt loadon1 tht b,achar nuttltnts)

• Plant Spt<,os • lrrielltiOn Cord ,ons • Ytt ldGoals • SaltToltranct

• Chemic tnhib ors

• Cllmatt (Gtocraphit PO<lt,on) • Surfac~ Water • Ground WICtr

Biochar Decision System

Jeffery et al, 2015, Earthscan

Carbon storage classes

Fertiliser classes

Particle size classes

Suitability for soilless

agriculture

sBC+ioo = 240 g kg-1

p3t Mg9t

Limingeq 15.1 %

Kernel particle size

Not tested

FERTILISER GRADE

Total N = 1.66% Avail. N/total N = 4.6%

Total P2O5 = 11.60% Avail. P/total P = 36.4%

Total K2O = 0.84%

Total S = 0.21%

Total MgO = 0.52%

Total Cao= 3.22%

Avail. K/total K = 53.6%

Avail. S/total S = 34.9%

Avail. Mg/total Mg= 79.3 %

Avail. Ca/total Ca= 84.5 %

Subtextural classes> 16 mm: 0% (w/w)

FJffi:lon:,.SOmm ("; w/w)

Subtextural classes < 2 mm: 21.4% (w/w)

FrKtion 1-2 mm i"; w/w)

•

Fraction > 16 mm (%; w/w)

Biochar Decision System Example: Biochar from biosolids mixed with eucalyptus wood produced at 550°C

Camps et al., 2015, Earthscan

4S

40

4,0

3,5

3,0

2,5

2,0

1,5

1,0

HP· Ho.,._nd Pine (g,.,,fiution) HW • M><od hom,ood (~•t py,oiysis) LLP • Lodgepole p;ne (mod om "°" py,oly,5) COM - Diges1ed dawy runu~ (modem slow pyrolysis} FW- Food Wllte (modem sJow pyrolysis) PMW - Paper mil wate (modem slow pyrolysis) CS • Com sllli:IWf' (modem slow pyrolys.is) EfB VESTO - empty frui bunches (VESTO me;hod) EFB NTS - empty fn,:t bunches (Ma.Jaysl;m tradition.al siove) EFB TUJO • empty fruit bunches (lop lit up d<aft) CCS TLUO - cooonu1 shell (u:,p Ii up draft) CCS 3 stone - coconut shell (tradi1iON11I 31.tone fn) WS -Whit.it s~w {microwave) RWSO • Rubber ......t ,.-st (modem slow py,olysis) 0 - 0.11k (modem 5k>W pyrolysis. muffle f\.lm~e) P • Pin• (mode.m slow pyrolysis, mu& fumaee) G - Grass (modem slowPYfOlysis..mufflefumace) 0A - O..i aged (modem slow pyrolysis followed by luching with cf.IS ed w.aw} PA- Pin• aged (mod•m olow py,-olysh;-d by leach,ng- d51illed wal«) GA-~ss~ (modemslowpyrolyMS.folowedby achingwith · ed~ter) PW - Pfle wood (modem slow pyn>ly5is) SG - 5,.,c1, Gms (modem olow pyn,iysi>) Zambia ~rc.iol dust - mixed s.anMah vegetition {tradiSon.a.l km. sJow p~) ZamN slOWr- com (\r.ld:tionll kiln, slow ~is) Indonesia mind - forut {~ditional kiln. sklw pyrolysis) lndonesl.11 hu.H - rice (drouble drum. slow pyrolysis) Kenp corncob. coms10ver ~ s.iwdust ~:lion~ 3 stone fire)

Biochar Toxins Heavy metal in = heavy metal out, but for PAH:

PAH (mg kg-1):

Australian regulation on soil amendments: 300

Cattle manure slurries: 87−309 Pig slurries: 66−339 Sewage sludge: 1.7−126 Compost: 0.8−2.7

16 U

S-E

PA P

AH

(mg

kg-1

)

Hale et al, 2012, ES&T 46, 2830−2838

A. Basic Ut ility Properties

Measures the most basic

B. Basic Toxin Assessment C. SupplementalToxin

Assessment

Analyzes potential toxins that are Tests for add it ional toxins and parameters required to assess the not feedstock-dependent that can elements that may be found in

utility of biochars for use in soil. be produced by the processed feedstocks - heavy

thermochemica l processes used to meta ls, other meta ls and PCB. make biochar - Polycyclic Aromatic

Hydrocarbons {PAH), dioxin and

furan. Tests for vegetative and

invertebrate vigor are a lso

required.

Required for all biochars Required for all biochars

Required for Processed

Feed stocks

D. Advanced Analysis and Soil

Enhancement Properties

Tests for addit iona l biochar characteristics. Biochar advanced

ana lysis characteristics are the

e lectrical conductivity, porosity

and surface area of biochars.

Biochar so il enhancement

properties identify plant nutrients

contained in the biochar.

Optional. Producers may report

on all, some or none.

Guidelines and Certification

Direct Effects I Indirect Effects : Net Balance ________________ L __________________ J ______ _

Pyrolysis emissions

Vl

' 0 0 a, ...

:, Cl) a. 3 C

"' iii" Cl) "' (') a· ::r :, a, "' :, a, Oil :, -i Cl) a. ...

a, a, :, CT "' ? -0

Labile C Cl) 0 a. ;::i. 0

)> 0 < " m ... 0 ii, :, ::r

)> a: ::r Cl)

)> :, ... < Cl) ... a, "' 0 a. < iil

:, a: Q. (') z "' Cl) Cl) N

a. -0 3 a. (1)

0 a. 0 (1) n (1)

:, :, I "' ... ~

:, Cl) 0 (1) Stable C - ... a, -0 ~

:, Vl In biochar 3

a. 0 C < :s: ? (') "' ro·

0 (1) a: 3 "' -0 0 "' ...

Photosynthesis

Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions

World Bank Report, 2014

a I I

~ I I I I I I I I

i---------1----1 I I I I I I I I

~

0 Lab studies (210)

6 Field studies (32)

□ Mean (242)

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40

Effect size(% change N20 emissions)

C 0 < 1 % (14)

I I I I I

~ 6 1- 2 % (14) I I I I I I

I 2-5 % (4)

I I I I

r---{D-l 0 Mean (32}

-100 -50 0 so 100

Effect size (% change N20 emissions)

b

100

d

I

f--0-1 0 Crop residues (85) I I I I I

f---6.{i 6 Woody material (102) I I I I I I 0 Other (55) I I I I I I

.-lb-, □ Mean (242)

-50 0 so 100

Effect size (% change N20 emissions)

i----k----i I I

◊ I I I I I

1-{!}-i

0 < 1 % (33)

6 1 - 2 % (35)

2-5 % (62)

6 5- 10 % (38)

◊ > 10 % (42)

□ Mean (210)

-100 -50 0 so 100

Effect size (% change N20 emissions)

Soil Nitrous Oxide Emissions with Biochar

Application rate in field studies : in incubation studies:

Average reduction 55%

(n=30 studies)

Van Zwieten et al. 2015, Earthscan

2.0

X

- 1.5 ";' X ~ u 0 X X .... VI X "C a, 1.0

J!! .6 00 X ~ ~ X

a, X I N 0.5

0 X ~ 00 ♦ ~ • .... ♦ C 0.0 a, E a, .... n, .c <t -0.5

X

-1.0 Woody residues Straw Manure Woody crop Grass crop

X Slow pyrolysis, including co-products ♦ Co-products excluded 6. Gasification □ Fast pyrolysis

Biochar Systems Effects on GHG

ˣ

∆ ˣ

n=16 studies with 51 scenarios

Cowie et al., 2015, Earthscan

Red: WB Report, 2014

  

      

  

      

 

    

   

      

 

              

        

     

    

      

   

            

   

Biochar Offset Protocols/Carbon Market Registry/ Voluntary or Region of Status Notes Market Compliance Applicability or

Market Use

American Voluntary N. America ACR Internal Undergoing 2nd

Carbon Market (registry); Anonymous round of two Registry global Peer Review anonymous

applicability Process peer reviews

CAPCOA GHG Voluntary Placer County Final review Anticipated Rx Market CA; can be completed; adoption by

adopted by any submission to Placer County CA Air Districts Placer County in January 2015

in preparation.

Verified Carbon Voluntary Global Inactive No response Standard Market submitted to

peer reviewers

The Way Forward?

• Development of biochar platforms • Systems energy, GHG balance and economics