"when put in the soil it sequesters carbon for thousands of years"...
There is no source for this.
Biochar is less than 100 yrs old; how could anyone possibly know what it does after 1000 years? and with the diversity of soil microorganisms it would be climate dependent.
Anyways this 1000 years thing might be true just because it is so toxic and aromatic and phenolic contaminated, but there is no evidence. This is pseudoscience and pseudoengineering.
Look at the viscous lies here (0:45)
"when put in the soil it sequesters carbon for thousands of years"...
There is no source for this.
Biochar is less than 100 yrs old; how could anyone possibly know what it does after 1000 years? and with the diversity of soil microorganisms it would be climate dependent.
Anyways this 1000 years thing might be true just because it is so toxic and aromatic and phenolic contaminated, but there is no evidence. This is pseudoscience and pseudoengineering.
ThereAreNoUnionThugs 1 month ago
@ThereAreNoUnionThugs the idea of biochar has been used for centuries. Pre-columbian Amazonians used a form of biochar called terra preta
TeteateteMN 4 hours ago
Biochar is poisonous byproduct of pyrolysis.
It is cacinogenic and contains aromatics, instead of solving the problem they market it as pesticide/fertilizer.
It is the biggest whitewash and greenwash at taxpayer expense. No way it is carbon neutral after you consider the massive BOD of the effluent.
Pyrolysis is a process to turn trees to "bio-oil"-more phenolic and toxic than regular oil. Worst capitalist engineers in the world working on this.
Wait till it hits the rainforest.
ThereAreNoUnionThugs 1 month ago