Draft Report on The First International Biochar Training Course held at Nanjing Agricultural University (NJAU) in Collaboration with IBI, University of New South Wales and Newcastle University (Australia)
Top left; group exercise; top right and middle left lab practical; middle left testing drum oven emissions; left bottom testing stove emissions; bottom rght field visit to salt stressed low lands.
Stephen Joseph 21-9-2012
1.0 Introduction
This training course was a joint effort by Nanjing Agricultural University, IBI, University of NSW and University of Newcastle. Inputs from Marta Camps (training materials), Johannes Lehmann, Saran Sohi and Ken Latham from Newcastle University (lectures), Prof Pan and Prof Li from NJAU were greatly appreciated. Evaluation and course proceedings were developed implemented and transcribed by Helen Gould.
A range of peer reviewed papers and various chapters + IBI guidelines on testing biochars and pyrolysis kilns were sent to participants before the course commenced.
Participants were also sent a draft schedule and asked for input. A participatory training methodology was used whereby formal lectures were interspersed with presentations by participants, discussions on key topics with groups and practical exercises and a field trip to a working biochar and energy factory and a site where field experiments have been carried out for 3 years.
Aims
1) To provide an overview of what is known and what is not known about;
a) properties of biochars as a function of feedstock, process conditions and technology and
b) crop responses of different biochars, incorporated at different application rates and different pre and post treatments in different eco-systems.
2) To provide an understanding of the principles and practice of pyrolysis and biochar production
3) To provide a framework that allows the development and implementation of sustainable and self sustaining biochar projects and/or establishment of biochar businesses.
4) To develop training materials and practical exercises and have them evaluated by the participants
5) To provide an interactive environment where participants can exchange information and experiences.
Participants
Over 40 people applied to come to the course. 30 people found finance to attend
The participants came from China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, Brazil, Australia, Kenya, Nigeria, USA, Spain and France.
Another 6 people registered but were unable to attend at the last minute.
2. Course Content
The following activities and lectures were undertaken
1. Traditional practices of biochar manufacture and characterisation of these biochars. Agronomic data from one traditional practice in the Cameroons was also presented.
2. The physical, chemical and electrical properties of different biochars and wood vinegar. A review of the scientific literature and assessment of areas of uncertainty. Emphasis was placed on the effect of feedstock and process conditions/technology on properties.
3. Biochar stability and how do we measure it.
4. A review of the literature of different crop responses of different biochars applied at different application rates. A meta-analysis of the data was also presented as well as data from specific studies.
5. The role of biochar in land remediation, plant resistance to disease and other stresses and animal health and growth
6. Characterisation and testing of biochars. Participants spent one afternoon in the laboratories at NJAU.
7. A framework for choosing biochars for specific soils and plants. This topic was presented by Saran Sohi and there was considerable discussion afterwards on how the participants may choose specific biochar mixes to provide a range of benefits to plants and soils.
8. Undertaking field trials. A visit was paid to a field trial on degraded land; the trial had been started approximately 3 years ago.
9. The science of pyrolysis and the principles involved in the design of efficient low emissions pyrolytic stoves, ovens and kilns.
10. A brief summary of the biochar reactor designs in operation and a review of the IBI guidelines for evaluating kilns.
11. How to operate biochar stoves, ovens and kilns safely. An afternoon was spent operating a TLUD drum oven and two stoves brought from Vietnam. Emissions measurements were carried out and discussion on how to reduce emissions was undertaken around the stove and drum oven.
Meeting with local village Women
12. How to develop and build a biochar business? A field trip was undertaken to Sanli New Energy company to see the production of biochar from mixed farm residues, the production of electricity from the syngas and the refinement of wood vinegar. A visit to a field trial was undertaken and participants had an opportunity to meet people from the local village. Following this field trip participants spent an afternoon developing an outline business plan in groups of five people. The outline plan was presented in a group session.
13.Presentation of participants, experiences in either developing and field testing biochar production technology and the biochar that was produced using it, or producing a fuel charcoal from briquette
14. Biochar Systems and how we analyse them to determine possible projects that can result in carbon negative, sustainable and profitable outcomes.
15. Developing integrated biochar projects. Participants split into groups and developed 5 different projects. Individuals were then going to write specific project proposals when they returned home.
16. Presentation and discussions of the work being undertaken by participants.
17. Cultural and social activities.
3.0 Evaluation
The Participants were given an evaluation form on the second last day and asked to hand it in on the last day. The form had a series of questions. Helen Gould has collated and transcribed these.
What were people’s expectations, and were they met? People expected a course providing information for students, researchers and business people, on Biochar: its characteristics, its uses, and its applications, and in a range of countries. In general people said that these expectations were met. People expressed appreciation for opportunities to meet with others with similar interests in and experience with BC.
People were very happy with the course content and delivery. Some wanted to know more about low-tech production and application, some wanted to know about high-tech large-scale production and application, and generally people appreciated learning something about both low- and high-tech BC methods.
Responses to the question, “What would you like more information about?” were so varied that it is impossible to generalise. For just about every component of the course, somebody wanted more information. Similarly, no-one wanted less information about any part of the course. One interesting comment was, “I did not see anything should be less…I do not need to understand everything, that is sufficient I learn to start work with.”
The Field Trip. Everyone was enthusiastic about the factory visit plus visit to experimental plots. Several people commented on how long the trip took. There were useful comments on how to improve the field trip in the future, such as: “tell the students to be with proper clothes and shoes.” “ A pre-trip talk about where and what would have been useful.” “Field trip was great although an explanation of what we will see / map of the plant would have made the trip more interesting.” “Awesome! Got in real touch with BC production and use. Opportunity to travel to another province. Good reception.”
The course length. Most people thought the course was the right length. The few who didn’t were equally divided between “too short” and “too long”. Someone wrote that one day guided tourism would have been appreciated, another that “ 9am to 3pm would have been easier to manage”
What would you want done differently? More notice so that people had longer to organise visas. Receiving the schedule earlier, and have a clearer logic behind the succession of presentations. “Some paper templates to fill in for every group during Business plan practical.” More opportunities for participation eg questions and answers. More hands-on lab, production and application exercises. “Off course… build international network for exchange of knowledge and technology transfer” and “Keep contact!”
Without exception participants said that they would recommend the course to others: employees, students, farmers, NGOs and small business people were all mentioned.
Other comments. Many people expressed thanks, both for the course and for new friends made. Several spoke of facilitating similar courses in their own countries/ organisations. One asked course organisers “to help the participants out on their first day of visit. It was quite difficult communicating in China.” The business people were particularly interested in economic issues, and in more practical work on combining BC with NPK.
To summarise: People expected and got a high quality course providing information for students, researchers and business people, on Biochar: the science, characterisation issues, its uses, and its applications both low- and high-tech, in a range of countries. Those people who already have businesses in this or related areas, are keen for more practical experience of producing BC. However, the course increased the scientists’ awareness of issues of practical application and of economic factors. People are keen to learn more and some would like to facilitate similar courses in their own countries.
