Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.environment > #97887 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-14 07:53 -0500 |
| Last post | 2016-06-21 18:34 -0500 |
| Articles | 4 on this page of 24 — 6 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.environment
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-14 07:53 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-14 11:12 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-14 17:59 +0000
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-14 15:25 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-14 23:52 +0000
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-14 19:41 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-15 01:29 +0000
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-14 21:44 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-15 03:28 +0000
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-15 09:49 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-15 17:17 +0000
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-16 09:44 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone cowbird <user@domain.invalid> - 2016-06-16 10:12 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-16 10:43 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone cowbird <user@domain.invalid> - 2016-06-16 13:28 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-17 08:02 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-17 12:27 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-16 13:54 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-16 20:54 +0000
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone cowbird <user@domain.invalid> - 2016-06-16 16:16 -0500
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-16 21:57 +0000
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2016-06-17 11:47 +1200
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2016-06-16 11:50 -0400
Re: Scientists Turn Carbon Dioxide Emissions into Stone jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> - 2016-06-21 18:34 -0500
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 21:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2vjb3d-hbq.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #97909 |
In sci.physics cowbird <user@domain.invalid> wrote: > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> wrote: >>> Sergio wrote: >>>>> >>>>> dummy. >>>>> >>>>> Ah I think you better look that one up. >>>>> When you apply the process to coal it is >>>>> the product is called "coke" >>>> >>>> and you get your charcoal by burning wood ? >>> >>> You get bio-char by pyrolysis of any organic matter. >> >> "bio-char"? >> >> How new age. >> >> > > It is astonishing how one person > can be so proud of being ignorant Perhaps you meant "biochar", no hyphen, coined by Peter Read in 2009? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 11:47 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <q3e6mb51edgptirvmgfbkmma3amotvm04a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #97904 |
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 10:43:41 -0500, Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >On 6/16/2016 10:12 AM, cowbird wrote: >> Sergio wrote: >>> On 6/15/2016 9:49 AM, jim wrote: >>> . Living plants get their carbon from >>>> the atmosphere and exude carbon from their roots. >>> >>> WRONG. >> >> First he claims its wrong >> >> >> as soot ? as graphite ? as charcoal ? >>> as CO2 ? as carbon atoms ? >>> >> >> And then he reveals he doesn't have a clue >> of its right or wrong. >> Does nobody believe in honesty anymore??? > >honesty not problem, good information is. > >> >> Plant roots exude a wide range of carbon >> based compounds. Some of them are natural >> herbicides and pesticides. > >name them. > >What carbon based substances come out of a living plants roots...... > >the clock is ticking........ > >> >> But the most important root exudation for >> building soil carbon are carbohydrates that >> feed beneficial organisms that in return >> deliver nutrients to the roots. Without >> those beneficial organisms and the carbon >> compounds they build in the soil, the plants >> require much higher inputs of fertilizer and >> water and are much more susceptible to disease >> and pests. And of course the stupid response >> to that problem is to dump enormous amounts >> of toxic chemicals on the plants which adds >> to the problem of soil carbon depletion by >> killing the beneficial organisms. >> >>>> >>>> Carbon in the form of charcoal is actually the >>>> most valuable soil amendment. >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta >>> >>> and charcoal comes from Coal, >> >> dummy. >> >> Ah I think you better look that one up. >> When you apply the process to coal it is >> the product is called "coke" > >and you get your charcoal by burning wood ? > >why you think they call it char-coal ? >Comes from coal, after you roast the volitates out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coke_(fuel) (The brackets and the word 'fuel' are part of the URL) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charcoal > >> >> And don't sign your name "dummy" >> dummies will be offended by your ignorance >> > >google "activated charcoal", gummy, fummy, qummy, or pummy. So, what have you found about activated charcoal? -- Regards, Eric Stevens
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | songbird <songbird@anthive.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 11:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nfua3d-ca2.ln1@anthive.com> |
| In reply to | #97903 |
cowbird wrote: ... > Plant roots exude a wide range of carbon > based compounds. Some of them are natural > herbicides and pesticides. > > But the most important root exudation for > building soil carbon are carbohydrates that > feed beneficial organisms that in return > deliver nutrients to the roots. Without > those beneficial organisms and the carbon > compounds they build in the soil, the plants > require much higher inputs of fertilizer and > water and are much more susceptible to disease > and pests. And of course the stupid response > to that problem is to dump enormous amounts > of toxic chemicals on the plants which adds > to the problem of soil carbon depletion by > killing the beneficial organisms. over the longer term, feeding the bacteria population by such compounds is only a part of the picture. for humus it is the plant parts that decay which last longer. if you have some fires going through at times to form some chars then you get carbon in a more stable form (often with vastly more surface area for bacterial populations). btw, terra preta is composed of more than just carbon. it is also evidence of a complicated society and large population... songbird
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m@mwt.net"> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-21 18:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nkciub$dp3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #97905 |
songbird wrote: > cowbird wrote: > ... >> Plant roots exude a wide range of carbon >> based compounds. Some of them are natural >> herbicides and pesticides. >> >> But the most important root exudation for >> building soil carbon are carbohydrates that >> feed beneficial organisms that in return >> deliver nutrients to the roots. Without >> those beneficial organisms and the carbon >> compounds they build in the soil, the plants >> require much higher inputs of fertilizer and >> water and are much more susceptible to disease >> and pests. And of course the stupid response >> to that problem is to dump enormous amounts >> of toxic chemicals on the plants which adds >> to the problem of soil carbon depletion by >> killing the beneficial organisms. > > over the longer term, feeding the bacteria > population by such compounds is only a part > of the picture. for humus it is the plant > parts that decay which last longer. Sorry but that's not even close to being right if we are talking about healthy soil that is rich in carbon. It might be true for soils that are depleted in carbon. But relying in dead plant parts for the soil's carbon is a major reason those soils are depleted. The half life of dead plant material buried in soil tends to be less than a year while the half life of glomalin is more than a decade. http://agresearchmag.ars.usda.gov/2002/sep/soil The reason conventional agriculture has destroyed so much carbon in the soil is because it does not support the natural process of carbon creation by organisms that have symbiotic relationships with plant roots. The plants supply the carbon through their toots and the organisms turn it into more stable compounds that eventually make up a significant part non-living organic components of healthy soil. > > if you have some fires going through at > times to form some chars then you get carbon in > a more stable form (often with vastly more > surface area for bacterial populations). turning plant organic matter into char does appear to create a more stable form of soil carbon, but there also appears to be soil organisms involved > > btw, terra preta is composed of more than > just carbon. it is also evidence of a > complicated society and large population... > > > songbird >
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | sci.environment
csiph-web