[dcarch]

Unfortunately, my limited scientific knowledge only helps me to ask questions and not find answers:

• Carbon is one of the most inert elements. It does not normally react or interact well with other elements, therefore how is it going to help plants? That’s why carbon can stay in soil unchanged for thousands of years. I have not found any organism which can digest and turn pure carbon into carbon compounds.
• Activated charcoal has a great ability to lock-in other chemicals. If activated charcoals can lock-in nutrients, do plants have stronger pull to get the nutrients out? The pores in activated charcoal is so incredibly small, (atomic size) How can the relatively large roots get in to get the nutrients?
• Porous carbon or activated charcoal can never retain more water than its physical size. Can it retain more moisture than compost? Which can be 95% water.
• I don’t seem to be able to find any organism which can turn CO2 into pure carbon, charcoal or activated charcoal. Pure carbon is mined, produced by incomplete combustion or chemical extraction by strong sulfuric acid.
• Plants turn CO2 into carbon compounds thru photosynthesis. I am trying to understand how CO2 can penetrate soil, interact without photosynthesis, with charcoal in the soil and microorganisms and turn CO2 into biomass better than plants. I cannot understand the claim that it can solve global warming.
• Activated charcoal, while extremely absorptive, gets used up very quickly and becomes not activated. How can it benefit, assuming it can, plants for thousand of years?
• “----- and it has been shown to retain its fertility for thousands of years.”Assuming carbon is 100% nutrient, which it is not, it still would be used up after a few plantings. How can it last almost forever?
• “In university trials, terra preta has increased crop yields by up to 800%.” Comparing with?

dcarch