# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
~The New DImension In Renewable Energy~ “We believe waste isn’t the end of the story — it’s the beginning of transformation.”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Registry for high quality carbon removals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Puro Registry is the world's first registry for engineered carbon sequestration projects where all new issuances and retirements can be viewed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Puro.earth122 w•Open for Climate Dialogue™

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Puro.earth facilitated the purchase of CORCs from Swedish biochar producer Biokol, by outdoor wear manufacturer Haglöfs to assist with the company’s 2030 net zero target 🌎♥ Watch 👁‍🗨 this video to hear about the carbon removal journey from both buyer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Read the full post on We Don’t Have Time | Together we are the solution to the climate crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Spreading biochar, spring 2019 Hjelmsäter Sweden

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Impact of Pyrolysis Temperature on Pine Wood Biochar Properties

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A study on pine wood biochar reveals that higher pyrolysis temperatures enhance carbon content, surface area, and porosity while reducing yield. These changes improve adsorption properties, making …

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Now roots play some key roles in the life of plants they; anchor plants in the soil, are the engine for plant growth, provide access to water and nutrients, as well as storing energy and carbon ...so what effect does biochar have on tomato root systems?

Observations from our Tomato Trial

As our tomato growing experiment came to an end we extracted the roots from the beds to see if the improvements we had seen above ground were somehow repeated underground. To our pleasant surprise, there were major differences. The roots of the biochar grown plants were substantially bulkier than the controls.

Looking more closely we noticed that what appeared to be biochar particles adhered to the root system.

We think it's a thing of beauty and weren't expecting such striking images.

The roots form quite a tangle but we could see examples where the root is growing directly into the particles of biochar.

We are not the first to see this. Lehmann and others have published photos showing roots interacting with biochar particles, see References below.

The Test - Are these particles Biochar?

The root system is decorated with particles, black particles. At first glance they look like the biochar we had incorporated into the compost used in our growing beds. To be sure we tested a section by crushing some of the particles under a small screwdriver blade ca 2mm width. The clear give-away for char is that it crushes with, often, a small "crack" before breaking into a pile of fine particles or dust - a brittle failure.

Among the pieces of char we did find some fragments, black on the outside brown and wood-like on the inside. These particles did not show the brittle failure of biochar but rather a plastic deformation under the pressure of the blade. The soil we used in the trial was created from garden compost sieved to 12.5 mm to remove larger material such as pieces of wood and stones. Woody fragments smaller than this were still present in our growing media.

Reflection - Root Systems Love Char

These tomato plant roots have formed an extensive network decorated with biochar and some woody fragments. Both biochar and these wood fragments are clearly not phyto-toxic. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that these "roots love biochar". Reference 1 below includes the comment: "Our results indicate that roots are attracted towards biochar, resulting in its (N & P*) partitioning between bulk and rhizosphere soil. Biochar thus controls plant root nutrient acquisition directly as a nutrient source and indirectly by altering soil nutrient content." Their reference* in the quote above is to nitrogen and phosporous.

It is difficult to draw too much from this small scale experiment but it deserves follow up in later trials.

References

Biochar-root interactions are mediated by biochar nutrient content and impacts on soil nutrient availability
M. T. Prendergast‐Miller M. Duvall S. P. Sohi
First published: 04 September 2013

"Our results indicate that roots are attracted towards biochar, resulting in its partitioning between bulk and rhizosphere soil. Biochar thus controls plant root nutrient acquisition directly as a nutrient source and indirectly by altering soil nutrient content."

Rapid electron transfer by the carbon matrix in natural pyrogenic carbon
Tianran Sun, Barnaby D. A. Levin, Juan J. L. Guzman, Akio Enders, David A. Muller,
Largus T. Angenent & Johannes Lehmann
Nature Communications volume 8, Article number: 14873 (2017)

Researchers discover high-def electron pathways in soil
by Cornell University
April 3, 2017

Contains a photo showing roots interacting with a biochar particle.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Effect of Biochar on Root Systems - Roots Love Char | Biochar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The effect of biochar on root systems is strong, as roots love biochar. See photo evidence of roots decorated with char from our experiment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Again we have seen a positive of biochar on the root system of radishes. We have photo evidence from our experiment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
55 Uses of Biochar [Updated to 60] including Agriculture | Biochar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biochar, a versatile material with 60 different uses. This article builds on an article '55 uses of biochar', published in 2014

# data[].attributes.headline
A review on the NOx precursors release during biomass pyrolysis

# data[].attributes.subject
A review on the NOx precursors release during biomass pyrolysis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About ScienceDirect
Shopping cart
Contact and
supportTerms and
conditionsPrivacy policy

# data[].attributes.headline
Farmers And Environmentalists Alike Are Excited About Biochar

# data[].attributes.subject
Farmers And Environmentalists Alike Are Excited About Biochar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Segment Transcript

IRA FLATOW: This is Science Friday. I'm Ira Flatow. And now it's time to check in on the state of science.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

SPEAKER 1: This is-

SPEAKER 2: For WWNO.

SPEAKER 3: Saint Louis Public Radio.

SPEAKER 4: Iowa Public Radio News.

IRA FLATOW: Local science stories of national significance- on this program, we are always on the lookout for climate change solutions. And we found one way up in Maine, where some entrepreneurs are banking on biochar. This is a charcoal-like substance. It's been used for centuries to enhance soil. And recently, it's gained appreciation for its carbon capturing properties.

Joining me to talk about biochar is Murray carpenter, Science Journalist based in Belfast, Maine. He reported this story from Maine Public Radio. Welcome back to Science Friday, Murray.

MURRAY CARPENTER: Thanks, Ira. Glad to be here.

IRA FLATOW: All right. So tell me how you make biochar. What is it?

MURRAY CARPENTER: Well basically, I visited this plant where they're making biochar up in Maine's North Woods in Greenville near Moosehead Lake. And what they do is they take woodchips, like low-value wood products that might be left over from lumber production or the tops and limbs from pulpwood production. And it goes into a hopper, and then it goes into an oven. And it's burned at very high temperatures, like up to 2,000 Fahrenheit and low oxygen conditions. This is called pyrolysis. And so the woodchips go in at one end.

And Pat Jones, President of Clean Maine Carbon- he described it to me this way.

PAT JONES: It starts out as wood, and as you could see when we come over here, you can see what comes out the other end is biochar, which is very high carbon, very porous, very good for agriculture. And so we turn nice white woodchips into black carbon.

IRA FLATOW: And then what do you do with it?

MURRAY CARPENTER: Well, that's the interesting thing. Biochar seems to have some pretty good agricultural properties. It's inert, and it's stable. I mean, scientists call it recalcitrant. So basically, it wants to stay in its carbon form for a long time. But increasingly, people in Maine are looking at it as an agricultural amendment.

IRA FLATOW: So it stores the CO2 that was in the logs or the woodchips. And so a lot of it's not released back into the atmosphere.

MURRAY CARPENTER: Yeah. You're basically pulling this carbon out of the carbon cycle for some period. It may be decades, it may be centuries. But you're pulling it out of the carbon cycle for a long time. It's not immediately going up into CO2, or at least less of it is. Of course, there's some CO2 generated in burning and some in transportation.

Yeah, increasingly people are hoping it will be used as an agricultural amendment. And I talked to Jonathan Foley. He's the director of Project Drawdown. And they're looking at science-based climate solutions. And he basically thought that biochar- it's not a silver bullet as a climate solution, but it's sort of a piece of silver buckshot.

JONATHAN FOLEY: And we can put that in farm fields. We can bury it in old mines. We can bury it in the ground, and it should last for hundreds if not thousands of years under the right circumstances. So it's a pretty clever kind of hybrid between nature and some engineering that might be a pretty good little piece of silver buckshot.

IRA FLATOW: That's really cool. As I said, biochar has been around for a long time, just not necessarily known as biochar. I mean, it's long been used in Indigenous communities to fertilize the ground for planting, right? What are the benefits for the soil?

MURRAY CARPENTER: Yeah. The benefits are that, although it's inert, it retains water and it retains nutrients. So here in Maine, they're looking at it for particularly in three different areas, in the blueberry barrens Down East and in potato fields up north, and also as possible remediation for some pollutants.

And so in the blueberry barrens, we're increasingly seeing, these are sandy soils. And we're increasingly seeing flashy, heavy rains when they come and then long, droughty periods in between. If you have something that has better water retention, it can improve those agricultural soils. And so the other very intriguing area is the idea of remediating problems from pollutants, such as PFAS. It appears that biochar may bind up pollutants in the soil and make it harder for plants to take up those pollutants into crops.

So there are a number of intriguing areas of research. But basically, it's really around this idea that it retains moisture and it retains nutrients.

IRA FLATOW: Yeah, well, we know how important blueberries are in Maine, right? So it could be an important useful item for them. But let's look at the grand scheme of things. How much of a dent could biochar put on our carbon capturing goals?

MURRAY CARPENTER: Well, I think it's never going to be a huge dent. Let's say that. We know it can- I mean, it's definitely locking up, sequestering some carbon. It's hard to say how much. A place I visited in Greenville is producing about 1,200 tons a year. Another plant that's coming online soon hopes to produce about the same amount. It's a small climate solution. It's definitely sequestering some carbon. And it definitely has some agricultural benefits. So people are pretty excited about this.

IRA FLATOW: And they should be because every little bit helps in this climate crisis we're in, right Murray?

MURRAY CARPENTER: Every little bit helps, and this is just one more little bit for sure.

IRA FLATOW: Thank you, Murray.

MURRAY CARPENTER: Thank you, Ira.

IRA FLATOW: Murray Carpenter, Science Journalist based in Belfast, Maine. He reported this story from Maine Public Radio.

Copyright © 2023 Science Friday Initiative. All rights reserved. Science Friday transcripts are produced on a tight deadline by 3Play Media. Fidelity to the original aired/published audio or video file might vary, and text might be updated or amended in the future. For the authoritative record of Science Friday's programming, please visit the original aired/published recording. For terms of use and more information, visit our policies pages at http://www.sciencefriday.com/about/policies/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Farmers And Environmentalists Alike Are Excited About Biochar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This charcoal-like substance packs carbon into a stable form, making it less likely to escape into the atmosphere.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cheap electricity from wood? Homemade power plant + bio char and fertilizer🤯 off grid gas producer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Albert Bates on biochar, forest permaculture and climate change

# data[].attributes.headline
Assessing biochar's permanence: An inertinite benchmark

# data[].attributes.subject
Assessing biochar's permanence: An inertinite benchmark

# data[].attributes.headline
Earthly Biochar announces plan to help Britain's ash trees

# data[].attributes.subject
Earthly Biochar announces plan to help Britain's ash trees

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Earthly Biochar, a research-led organisation that conducts commercial trials of biochar in the UK, has discovered that biochar can help to save the UK's ash trees.

Biochar is a sustainable form of horticultural charcoal. In the process of creating biochar, carbon, which otherwise would have been released into the atmosphere as CO2, is captured and stored instead.

Earthly's Founder, Lottie Hawkins, said: "In summer last year, we visited a farm in Wales that had two woodlands, both with ash trees, and both suffering from ash dieback.

"This farmer makes his own biochar to EU regulatory standards, and in an attempt to save his ash trees, he top-dressed biochar around the base of the trunks. He did this on half the trees with ash dieback and left the other half alone.

"One year went by, and the untreated ash trees had little new growth and looked withered; they looked like they were dying. In contrast, the biochar-treated ash trees have bushy, deep green new growth and look far healthier than their counterparts. This was ground-breaking information, and we decided to take the private research forwards, and apply for government funding to create a citizen science project that can test biochar treatment on a much larger scale across the UK."

The organisation is now responsible for conducting the largest commercial trials of biochar in the UK - and Lottie is asking for help to save our ash trees.

To find out more about the project, click here.

"We're asking members of the public to come forward, become citizen scientists, and help us help the ash trees," the 28-year-old said.

"Similar to the Big Garden Birdwatch from the RSPB, we're hoping people will get involved, document their natural surroundings, and help our natural environment.

"We're asking people to go out and find an ash tree, whether it's on their land, a nearby park, or a forest, and tell us about it using our new ash dieback website. We can then send biochar out for people to apply directly to the tree, or we can send it to the landowner, council, or forestry commission for them to apply.

"Our mission is to help save the ash trees, not just through the application of biochar but also by reducing the need for mass felling. We know from French research that 20% of ash trees have a genetic advantage allowing them to live successfully with ash dieback.

"If we can use biochar to improve the health of the other 80%, then we could move towards only felling single trees if they're a health and safety hazard. With mass felling, the healthy ash trees that have this genetic advantage will also be felled. We need these 20% to repopulate and pass on their genetic advantages, therefore protecting more of our future ash trees.

"It's not just the ash trees we're trying to save; it's also the species that rely on the ash, which often get forgotten about when we discuss losing these trees. There are 115 Ash-related species made up of insects, microbes, plants, and birds that would risk falling into decline when the ash trees have gone. This extinction cascade would be devastating to our UK woodlands."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Devon-based organisation launches project to try and save our ash trees

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Devon-based organisation, Earthly Biochar, has come up with a project set to help save Britain's ash trees.

# data[].attributes.body
preliminary comparison of regenerative

and conventional farming

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Enhancing Underground Communications (Advanced Session) – Part 1 - Groundswell 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We can all help feed our soil and restore the missing life in it where we live and work.

Through sharing knowledge & information across our network we help people to make & supply local compost that is so alive & diverse that it can regenerate soil health anywhere on earth.

We help people to start their own local composting projects and host online events for the sporulation of ideas. We see presentations from our members and all help solve challenges with ideas and experience. Every other month we have 'In Conversation With' type events where one the leading teachers and practitioners in the world of Soil Ecosystem Restoration joins us to spread their spores of wisdom too!

Hosted by Compost Tom, there's a different meet up on zoom every month that boost the group with the answers and connections they need to make better compost everywhere.

This is a resource sharing network presented by Old Tree Soil for the benefit of our members' movements for local composting and social land regeneration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We're a global network of local compost creators committed to restoring soil health and reviving our food and drink culture. We platform regenerative teachers and share knowledge to build the movements for the social and ecological restoration of our world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study shows that inoculating soil with mycorrhizal fungi can increase plant yield by by up to 40%

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Farmland often harbors a multitude of pathogens which attack plants and reduce yields. A Swiss research team has now shown that inoculating the soil with mycorrhizal fungi can help maintain or even improve yields without using additional fertilizers or pesticides. In a large-scale field trial, plant yield increased by up to 40%.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Carl Zimmer for Conservation Magazine, part of the Guardian Environment Network

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How biochar production could help climate change fight

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Cornell University’s Johannes Lehmann thinks biochar - using organic matter to bury carbon dioxide in the ground - could be a large scale way to tackle global warming

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Due to the synergistic effects of biochar and compost/composting, the combined application of biochar and compost (biochar-compost) has been recognized as a highly promising and efficient method of soil improvement. However, the willingness to apply biochar-compost for soil improvement is still low compared to the use of biochar or compost alone. This paper collects data on the application of biochar-compost in several problem soils that are well-known and extensively investigated by agronomists and scientists, and summarizes the effects of biochar-compost application in common problem soils. These typical problem soils are classified based on three different characteristics: , abiotic stresses, and contaminants. The improvement effect of biochar-compost in different soils is assessed and directions for further research and suggestions for application are made. Generally, biochar-compost mitigates the high mineralization rate of , phosphorus deficiency and aluminum toxicity, and significantly improves crop yields in most . Biochar-compost has shown positive performance in the remediation of both dry and or high climatic zones soil organic matter tropical soils. Biochar-compost can help to achieve long-term sustainable management of temperate agricultural soils by sequestering carbon and improving saline soils by reducing the threat of soil water scarcity salinity and improving the consequent deterioration of soil conditions. By combining different mechanisms of biochar and compost to immobilize or remove contaminants, biochar-compost tends to perform better than biochar or compost alone in soils contaminated with heavy metals (HMs) or organic pollutants (OPs). This review aims to improve the practicality and acceptability of biochar-compost and to promote its application in soil. Additionally, the prospects, challenges and future directions for the application of biochar-compost in problem soil improvement were foreseen. soil physicochemical properties

Introduction

Soil health is essential for maintaining crop production, environmental quality, and animal health (Doran and Zeiss, 2000). However, as the proportion of problem soils grows around the world, there is a growing awareness of the pressing need to find a suitable management strategy to improve problem soils (Hou et al., 2020; Mukhopadhyay et al., 2021). Problem soils are commonly defined broadly as "soils with undesirable physical, chemical, and biological properties that inhibit or prevent plant growth", such as contaminated soils or poor soils (Yu et al., 2019). Organic soil amendments like biochar and compost are widely suggested for the improvement of problematic soil due to their environmental friendliness, efficiency, and economic viability (Karim et al., 2022; Qin et al., 2022a; Qin et al., 2022b). The strategic addition of biochar and compost to problem soils has great potential to improve the quality of problem soils. Both biochar and compost are effective in alleviating the constraints of problem soils on plant growth or crop production, such as water scarcity, compaction, low fertility, and pollutant toxicity (Natasha et al., 2022).

In the last decade, it has been noticed that mixtures of biochar and compost can be applied to soils with excellent amelioration efficiency. Kammann et al. reported that the biomass yield of poor soils was dramatically raised by 305 % after applying co-composted biochar (2 %, w/w), but the biomass yield was decreased after applying original biochar (Kammann et al., 2015). Jien et al. suggested that compost and biochar together were more effective in stabilizing and sequestering carbon than biochar alone (Jien et al., 2015). Meanwhile, the interaction between biochar and compost in combined applications has received growing attention (Antonangelo et al., 2021; Wu et al., 2017a). Biochar can extend the residence time of compost in the soil, and compost can solve the problem of insufficient nutrients provided by biochar (Elias et al., 2020; Jien et al., 2018). Composting improvement with biochar ultimately contributes to compost quality, including nutritional value, safety, and stability (Sanchez-Monedero et al., 2018). The biochar exhibits modifications after the co-composting process, such as surface functional groups, nutritional content, cation exchange capacity (CEC), and the amount of inhibitory aromatic compounds (Antonangelo et al., 2021). These changes have the potential to increase the efficiency of biochar and compost in soil improvement. For example, the increased nutrients and organic matter (OM) in biochar and compost may favor improved soil quality and microbial growth, which may benefit plant growth. The increased CEC of biochar and compost may be beneficial for improving nutrient retention capacity. An increase in the amount of functional groups in biochar and the number of microorganisms in compost may favor their ability to absorb pollutants (Wu et al., 2017a). Given these, biochar-compost has been considered as a potentially more effective soil amendment than biochar or compost.

Due to a lack of awareness and publicity about the effectiveness of biochar-compost on various problem soils, the willingness to utilize biochar-compost for soil improvement is still low compared to biochar or compost alone (Antonangelo et al., 2021). The application data in various problem soils are important for the practical application of biochar-compost, such as application rates, material ratios, etc. In addition, soil problems may be caused by the long-term effects of climate and biology (plants, animals and microorganisms) on the soil, as well as by human activities (Patil et al., 2020). Thus, soil problems in actual problem soils are often complex and diverse. For instance, HM-polluted soils usually exhibit low nutrient efficacy, limited microbial enzyme activity, and poor soil structure in addition to high amounts of HMs (Ussiri and Lal, 2005). Despite a rudimentary understanding of some of the advantages of applying biochar-compost, it is still unclear how biochar-compost treatments address different soil issues. The practical application of biochar-compost is severely hampered by this, and people would prefer to stick with the previous simple biochar or compost methods rather than combining the two.

To fill this gap, this paper focuses on the mechanisms of biochar-compost interaction with various typical problem soils and the effects of application. Several problem soils that have been well-known and extensively studied by agronomists and scientists and may have one or more soil problems were chosen as representatives for this review's examination. Due to the diversity of soil problems and the absence of a clear definition of problem soils, the problem soils investigated in this study will be categorized and discussed according to three specific characteristics: (i) climatic zones; (ii) abiotic stresses; and (iii) contaminants. The purpose of this is to reflect the ability of biochar-compost to solve soil problems in a convenient and more visual way. In contrast to other articles that also focus on biochar-compost applications, this study highlights the potential of biochar-compost to solve or alleviate multiple soil problems. Investigating how biochar-compost affects the physiochemical properties and microbiological diversity of various problem soils to potentially achieve higher efficiency than treatment alone helps to increase the willingness to employ biochar-compost to improve soils. Besides, this work briefly reviews the effects of biochar and compost alone, the synergistic mechanisms of biochar and compost/composting, and the contemporary combined methods of biochar-compost. Finally, future research needs related to biochar-compost and soil improvement were identified to ensure the widespread use of biochar-compost.

Section snippets

Effects on soil properties

Owing to the special characteristics of biochar, the physicochemical and biological properties of the soil will be affected to some extent after biochar application (Fig. 1a). For instance, it has been demonstrated that biochar can reduce soil bulk density and increase soil porosity (Omondi et al., 2016). The porous structure also allows biochar to effectively improve the water holding capacity (WHC) of the soil and retain more water. Biochar treatment can increase soil aggregate capacity and

Effects on soil properties

As a soil amendment widely used worldwide, compost can improve the physical and chemical properties of soil and enhance soil quality. For instance, adding compost rich in OM can markedly decrease soil bulk density. At 0-15 cm depth, the lowest bulk density (1.12 mg cm −3) was obtained with compost application, while the application of mineral fertilizer did not affect soil bulk density (Celik et al., 2010). Curtis and co-workers observed a 19-21 % reduction in bulk density after the compost is

Combined application of biochar and compost on soil

Biochar and compost have shown their unique potential as soil amendments, and more studies have been conducted to combine the two materials in the hope of obtaining higher improved efficiency (Table 3). Currently, there are three common methods of producing and applying biochar in combination with compost to soil: (i) Immediate application of the material to the soil after mixing biochar and compost (final product), without incubation (B + C); (ii) Composting of biochar with biomass (e.g. rice

Biochar-compost amendment improves various problem soils

The potential of applying biochar or compost alone for soil improvement has been demonstrated in many studies, but the combined application of two materials promises to create even greater value for soil improvement. This section collects data on the application of biochar-compost in several problem soils that are well-known and widely studied by agronomists and scientists to reflect the potential of combined applications. In addition, it is worth emphasizing that the typical soils discussed in

Conclusion and outlook

The synergistic effect between biochar and compost/composting has the potential to improve the efficiency of soil improvement, and biochar-compost has been proposed as an alternative to separate applications. This review evaluates the effectiveness of biochar-compost in several problem soils, intending to promote the practical application of biochar-compost. These effect summaries are important for the subsequent assessment of the applicability of biochar-compost in problem soils.

For problem

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Shixian Qian: Writing - original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis. Xuerong Zhou: Methodology, Investigation, Writing - review & editing. Yukui Fu: Methodology, Writing - review & editing. Biao Song: Methodology, Writing - review & editing. Huchuan Yan: Validation, Writing - review & editing. Zhexin Chen: Writing - review & editing. Qian Sun: Writing - review & editing. Haoyang Ye: Validation, Writing - review & editing. Lei Qin: Conceptualization, Writing - review & editing,

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

This study was financially supported by the Program for the National Natural Science Foundation of China (52100183, 52170161, 52100180), the Hunan Natural Science Foundation (2020JJ3009), Hunan Researcher Award Program (2020RC3025), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (531118010473).

View full text

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biochar-compost as a new option for soil improvement: Application in various problem soils

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Due to the synergistic effects of biochar and compost/composting, the combined application of biochar and compost (biochar-compost) has been recognize...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Biochar is charcoal produced from feedstock under pyrolysis. It has gained interests among researchers in recent years because of its agronomic and environmental benefits. It is considered to increase soil fertility and crop productivity, and biochar might play an important role as a climate mitigation tool that is able to capture carbon in the soil.

However, although research has focused on the chemical, biological, and technical aspects of biochar, we seem to be far away from the implementation of a functioning biochar system. One key aspect needed for the actual use of biochar technologies is increased awareness and emphasis on the social and organizational aspects of its implementation. As there are no functional markets for the services and products needed to 'produce' a biochar system, political and market devices are needed. This paper contributes to this debate by introducing a socio-technical framework that investigates the implementation of different biochar technologies in Norway. Based on this socio-technical system framework, we discuss necessary components of a sustainable biochar socio-technical system, and we outline variations of this system based on different levels of biochar production scaling.

Introduction

By storing biochar in the soil, one can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and increase soil quality. Consequently, it has gained widespread interest among researchers. Yet, it is not widely implemented. Our argument in this article is that the lack of implemented, or functioning, biochar systems is partly due to the fact that research and policy analyses are narrowly focused on technical considerations and omit social and organizational elements of a biochar system. We contribute to the field of research by introducing and moderating a socio-technical system framework that is able to investigate the potential and practical implementation of different types of biochar systems.

Biochar is a form of char produced under pyrolysis, which is a thermochemical conversion of biomass that is carried out at temperatures above 300 C without oxygen. Pyrolysis produces three different products: bio-oil, biochar, and syngas. It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss the chemical processes of pyrolysis in detail, but in general we can state that slow and intermediate pyrolysis results in higher biochar yields, while fast pyrolysis provides higher liquid yields (e.g., bio-oil) [24]. Biochar can be produced from a variety of feedstocks such as agricultural crop residues, forestry residues, wood waste, organic portion of municipal solid waste (MSW), and animal manures [24], while the type of feedstock and the pyrolysis conditions mainly define the quality of the biochar and thus its stability for sequestering carbon [36].

The use of biochar as a soil amendment is not a new idea. Its beginning can be traced back to the Amazon where indigenous people amended their soils with biochar approximately 2000 years ago due to its positive impacts on soil quality and crop yields (Lehmann et al., 2004 in Galinato et al. [31]:6344). In recent years, biochar has experienced a new wave of interest. A search on Web of Science shows that the amount of articles that included the word 'biochar' in their titles has increased from 455 published articles in 2013 to 1260 in 2016. Biochar has gained great interest among researchers in recent years because of its perceived agronomic and environmental benefits. Maraseni et al. ([50]:852) list 8 benefits of biochar on soils. (1) It reduces leaching of soil nutrients, (2) it enhances nutrient availability for plants, (3) it increases water quality of runoff, (4) it reduces dependency on artificial fertilizers, (5) it reduces toxicity of aluminum to plant roots and microbiota, (6) it increases soil structure and pH and therefore reduces the need for lime, (7) it reduces bioavailability of heavy metals, and (8) it reduces GHG emissions by decreasing N 2O and CH 4 emissions from soils. Thus, biochar becomes very interesting for development agencies that are particularly interested in biochar applications for unfertile lands in developing countries to increase crop production. In this context, the production of biochar can lead to increased food production and higher incomes and hence presents a suitable tool for poverty alleviation.

Biochar might also play an important role as a climate mitigation tool by capturing carbon in the soil. A reduction of emissions alone is not seen as sufficient for reducing the CO 2 values from the atmosphere, and methods of extracting CO 2 from the atmosphere in form of carbon capture are suggested [33]. Biochar becomes relevant in this context since it can be stored in the soil and has a high residence of sequestering carbon from 100s to 1000s of years [24]. However, the duration depends on several parameters such as (1) the temperature during pyrolysis (biochar production with lower temperatures leads to higher residence time), (2) the feedstock material, (3) the degree to which the material is charred, (4) the surface volume ratio of the particles, and (5) the conditions of the soil where biochar is added ([50]:853).

Due to its multiple benefits and potential as a climate mitigation tool, researchers work with biochar all around the world. This interest in biochar is also reflected in the formation of the International Biochar Initiative (IBI) in 2006, a platform that aims to "promote good industry practices, stakeholder collaboration, and environmental and ethical standards to foster economically viable biochar systems that are safe and effective for use in soil fertility and as a climate mitigation tool" [38]. Biochar production has been carried out at different levels varying from pyrolysis units designed at a household level to large-scale commercial production [42]. There have been several successful field trials of biochar production as well [7].

Section snippets

Limited implementation of biochar

Despite its remarkable potential, biochar is not yet widely implemented. According to the IBI [39], lack of awareness about the benefits of biochar among diverse stakeholders presents a major constraint to its adoption and use. Bjerregaard [10] found out that only 5% of Danish farmers had heard of biochar. Current research has a strong technical focus that mainly investigates the chemical processes of biochar, for example, studying the long-term stability of biochar in soils and identifying

Biochar adoption in the lens of socio-technical system theory

Our point of departure is that the successful implementation of biochar systems neither depends solely on economic factors nor the technical features of the chosen processes; in addition, socio-cultural and political factors need to be addressed. One way to address the wide range of relevant factors is through a socio-technical system framework. Based on a socio-technical system framework, we will discuss the necessary components of a sustainable biochar implementation, and we will outline

Methods, data, and limitations

This study is based on a mixed method approach. It departs with a literature review on research on the implementation of socio-technical systems in general and biochar systems in particular. We have also had a particular view on Norwegian literature of relevance to the implementation of biochar technologies. The general literature review was undertaken in English with 'Scopus' as major search engine. We decided to use Scopus because it is one of the most effective academic search engines for

Scales of biochar systems and their system components

A series of biochar technologies are available. One central feature is that such technologies are scalable at different levels of centralization. We depart from a continuum where we have small-scale, decentralized biochar systems at the one end and large-scale, centralized, industrial biochar systems at the other end. Still, there is room for cooperation between farmers on different parts of the value chain, where we imagine a medium-scale production of biochar (see Fig. 1). We assume that for

Conclusion

At this point, we have presented the three different scales of biochar systems and the values of all six components for each system based on a literature review supplemented with quantitative and qualitative data. We can see that the situation is complex, and the implementation of biochar systems requires a thorough analysis of relevant social and organizational factors that not only address the physical technology and economic benefits.

The aim of this article was to investigate non-technical

Acknowledgement

This work was part of a larger research project "Capture+: Sustainable Biochar systems for a zero emission society", financed by the Norwegian Research Council. The authors would like to thank Jostein Brobakk and Alexander Krogsrud-Thanem for assisting in the survey design and two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. We would also like to thank the Norwegian farmers who took part in this study.

Pia Piroschka Otte is a senior researcher at the Centre for Rural Research in Trondheim. She worked previously as Postdoctoral Research Fellow and coordinator within the Graduate Program "Urban Infrastructures in Transition: The Case of African Cities" at TU Darmstadt, and obtained a PhD in Political Science from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim.

Norske bønders syn på klimaendringer og klimatilpasning

Norske bønder og globale klimaendringer. En kvantitativ analyse av bønders oppfatninger av hvordan deres egne gårdsbruk vil bli påvirket av klimaendringer

The potential role of biochar in comabting climate change in Scotland: an analysis of feedstocks, life cycle assessment and spatial dimensions

Diversification and the entrepreneurial motivations of farmers in Norway

The roles of risk and ambiguity in technology adoption

Biochar info
Small Scale Biochar Production Methods

P. Bjerregaard
The Social Shaping of Technology - a Case Study of Biochar in Denmark

Biochar: Assessing the Promise and Risks to Guide U.S. Policy

Understanding farmers' aesthetic preference for tidy agricultural landscapes: a bourdieusian perspective

Exploring farmers' cultural resistance to voluntary agri-environmental schemes

Pia Piroschka Otte is a senior researcher at the Centre for Rural Research in Trondheim. She worked previously as Postdoctoral Research Fellow and coordinator within the Graduate Program "Urban Infrastructures in Transition: The Case of African Cities" at TU Darmstadt, and obtained a PhD in Political Science from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim.

Jostein Vik received a doctoral degree (dr.polit) in political science from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim. He is a senior researcher at the Centre for Rural Research (CRR), which he joined in 2005. Current research interests include several aspects of governance and power in a rural context, as well as rural entrepreneurship and agricultural diversification.

View full text

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biochar systems: Developing a socio-technical system framework for biochar production in Norway

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biochar is charcoal produced from feedstock under pyrolysis. It has gained interests among researchers in recent years because of its agronomic and en...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Now roots play some key roles in the life of plants they; anchor plants in the soil, are the engine for plant growth, provide access to water and nutrients, as well as storing energy and carbon ...so what effect does biochar have on tomato root systems?

Observations from our Tomato Trial

As our tomato growing experiment came to an end we extracted the roots from the beds to see if the improvements we had seen above ground were somehow repeated underground. To our pleasant surprise, there were major differences. The roots of the biochar grown plants were substantially bulkier than the controls.

Looking more closely we noticed that what appeared to be biochar particles adhered to the root system.

We think it's a thing of beauty and weren't expecting such striking images.

The roots form quite a tangle but we could see examples where the root is growing directly into the particles of biochar.

We are not the first to see this. Lehmann and others have published photos showing roots interacting with biochar particles, see References below.

The Test - Are these particles Biochar?

The root system is decorated with particles, black particles. At first glance they look like the biochar we had incorporated into the compost used in our growing beds. To be sure we tested a section by crushing some of the particles under a small screwdriver blade ca 2mm width. The clear give-away for char is that it crushes with, often, a small "crack" before breaking into a pile of fine particles or dust - a brittle failure.

Among the pieces of char we did find some fragments, black on the outside brown and wood-like on the inside. These particles did not show the brittle failure of biochar but rather a plastic deformation under the pressure of the blade. The soil we used in the trial was created from garden compost sieved to 12.5 mm to remove larger material such as pieces of wood and stones. Woody fragments smaller than this were still present in our growing media.

Reflection - Root Systems Love Char

These tomato plant roots have formed an extensive network decorated with biochar and some woody fragments. Both biochar and these wood fragments are clearly not phyto-toxic. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that these "roots love biochar". Reference 1 below includes the comment: "Our results indicate that roots are attracted towards biochar, resulting in its (N & P*) partitioning between bulk and rhizosphere soil. Biochar thus controls plant root nutrient acquisition directly as a nutrient source and indirectly by altering soil nutrient content." Their reference* in the quote above is to nitrogen and phosporous.

It is difficult to draw too much from this small scale experiment but it deserves follow up in later trials.

References

Biochar-root interactions are mediated by biochar nutrient content and impacts on soil nutrient availability
M. T. Prendergast‐Miller M. Duvall S. P. Sohi
First published: 04 September 2013

"Our results indicate that roots are attracted towards biochar, resulting in its partitioning between bulk and rhizosphere soil. Biochar thus controls plant root nutrient acquisition directly as a nutrient source and indirectly by altering soil nutrient content."

Rapid electron transfer by the carbon matrix in natural pyrogenic carbon
Tianran Sun, Barnaby D. A. Levin, Juan J. L. Guzman, Akio Enders, David A. Muller,
Largus T. Angenent & Johannes Lehmann
Nature Communications volume 8, Article number: 14873 (2017)

Researchers discover high-def electron pathways in soil
by Cornell University
April 3, 2017

Contains a photo showing roots interacting with a biochar particle.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Effect of Biochar on Root Systems - Roots Love Char | Biochar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The effect of biochar on root systems is strong, as roots love biochar. See photo evidence of roots decorated with char from our experiment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
55 Uses of Biochar [Updated to 60] including Agriculture | Biochar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biochar, a versatile material with 60 different uses. This article builds on an article '55 uses of biochar', published in 2014

# data[].attributes.headline
EBC (2020), Certification of the carbon sink potential of biochar, Ithaka Institute, Arbaz,Switzerland. (http://European-biochar.org). Version 1.0E of 1st June 2020

# data[].attributes.subject
EBC (2020), Certification of the carbon sink potential of biochar, Ithaka Institute, Arbaz,Switzerland. (http://European-biochar.org). Version 1.0E of 1st June 2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Restoring the Earth: How John D Liu’s Dream Inspired a Global Movement to Restore Ecosystems

# data[].attributes.headline
I think we're on Huw's wave length a bit of forking and spading when we need to.

# data[].attributes.subject
I think we're on Huw's wave length a bit of forking and spading when we need to.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About ScienceDirect Shopping cart Contact and supportTerms and conditionsPrivacy policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Effect of Wood Biochar Amendment to Sand on Leachate Water Quality with Repeated Dairy Manure Application: A Soil Column Study – Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Community

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Make carbon sink, not rise. Most of the world's toilets are not connected to sewers but drain into septic systems or cesspools. With new smart biochar based septic designs, this human derived waste carbon could become long term carbon sinks. Refashioning our subsoil waste disposal into safe systems of carbon sequestration could open up vast new opportunities for the circular urban economy and climate action.

The need to find large reservoirs for carbon storage is heating up exponentially. While some Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies are targeting deep crevices into which CO 2 can be injected, biochar has historically focused on additions just below our feet, particularly in carbon-depleted or contaminated agricultural soils. Few that deeply understand biochar would argue against its use on farms, though more than a few argue against its use anywhere else! However, getting farmers to adopt new practices is notoriously challenging and slow, even when the value proposition looks favorable.

The stark climate reality is that we do not have the luxury of time on our side to solely focus on persuading vast numbers of farmers to bury carbon. The biochar industry has spent more than a decade focusing on farmers and has barely put a dent in that market. This is not to say we should give up on it. It is obvious that we cannot and should not. But if biochar is to have a material impact on climate change in the short time frame that is necessary, vast new sinks must be identified quickly.

Image 1: Scheme of a conventional sanitary sewer pipe trench.

Fortunately, there are a growing number of not only safe but beneficial sinks that could provide enormous sequestration opportunities. [Albert Bates and I explore many of these in BURN.] One such opportunity could be upgrading the lowly cesspool, a primitive system used to manage toilet waste, as well as the improved but far from optimal septic system. Cesspools, though largely now banned in the US and Europe, continue to exist in rural areas around the world and cause significant issues as they are often a primary source of Nitrogen pollution and usually contain coliform bacteria (e.g. E.coli), phosphates, chlorides, chemicals and viruses (e.g. the novel Corona virus may spread through human feces) which contaminate groundwater or local water bodies.

Cesspools or cesspits come in various types but are basically a drywell for untreated household waste, including human feces. In some rural areas and even suburban areas these are still common. Long Island still has 250,000 cesspools and 110,000 septic systems in need of upgrading or replacement as these are largely responsible for the increase in algal blooms, fish kills and beach closures. Local municipalities have offered significant funds to homeowners to upgrade these leaching liabilities which have harmed the local economy.

The renewal or replacement of cesspools and septic systems may become a huge opportunity for the establishment of carbon-sinks. Septic systems are perhaps an even greater carbon sink opportunity as they are far more common and typically much larger. Though they are an improvement over cesspits, they too are responsible for significant water contamination.

A properly designed septic system often involves moving around large quantities of soil, sand and gravel to improve infiltration and filtration. However, septic systems seem to work indirectly on the principal of 'dilution is the solution' versus actual filtration. Soils with poor percolation are amended with vast amounts of sand and gravel to improve infiltration of rain water. The majority of this filtering materials is, strange as it sounds, placed above the area where the effluent is released into the soil. This set-up allows rainwater to percolate and prevents effluent from backing up and pooling at the surface. Drain pipes with holes at the bottom are typically sandwiched into a gravel layer which sits directly atop the subsoil (to where the effluent is then diluted and may contaminate ground water and even surface water). Adding a filtration layer of biochar below the drain pipes could help immobilize or neutralize contaminants of concern.

Using biochar for a septic system for private construction

In perhaps the first residential use of biochar in a septic system, I recently worked with a civil engineer and excavator to design a shallow trench septic system that included biochar. Since biochar is not currently an approved soil amendment for drain fields, we had to design it so that it could still pass regulatory muster. This was done by digging deeper trenches upon which biochar could be added before the gravel, sand and topsoil. Before trenches were dug, sand was used to create a raised bed. In this design roughly 10 cm of biochar was applied to 5 trenches measuring 18m in length for a total of one ton of biochar. Drainpipes with holes near the bottom were sandwiched in between 30 cm of gravel then covered with a geotextile to prevent soil from clogging the gravel. Finally, 30cm of topsoil was layered above the geotextile. Adding a layer of biochar beneath the gravel and pipe enhances adsorption and biological degradation, though in this demonstration measuring results will be quite a challenge.

Image 2&3: Setup of the septic biochar system where the biochar bed is placed below the sewage drainage pipe. Sand and gravel is then placed above.

This was a small system yet it still required 8 truckloads of sand (200t) and 2 truckloads of gravel to be hauled in. Larger homes often required three times as much sand in areas with heavy clay soils. Mixing far larger quantities of biochar into the sand and/or gravel layer, might allow for 50 - 100 tons of biochar per septic system. In addition to the drain fields, it could be used around the septic tank and in the trenches connecting the septic tank to the home and to the distribution box which lies between the septic tank and the drain field lines and serves to distribute effluent evenly. Similar structured soils have been successfully used in the Stockholm Biochar Project. Storm drains, bioswales, retention basics, detention ponds, rain gardens and dry creeks could also benefit from the addition of biochar. Biochar could even be used as an additive to make the concrete septic tank, the PVC pipes and the geotextile used in the septic system!

Municipalities could potentially fund cesspool upgrades or out of date septic systems using carbon financing. Imagine replicating the Stockholm model where the city converts green waste into biochar. The municipality could sell the carbon removal credits and use both the funds and the biochar to upgrade the leaking systems. This would have the added advantages of creating large-scale, local demand for biochar while also helping cities to manage their organic materials more economically.

Reusing septic system amendments

Municipalities might consider retaining the rights to the amendments so that they could remove them after a decade or so and use the enriched structured soils to rebuild coast lines or for urban tree planting. In theory, the biochar septic system could be set-up like a sort of "night soil aging" though the economics would be hard to predict and municipalities would be content, probably, with the assessment of the added carbon sink.

Carbon Math

The biochar for my homebuilding demonstration project was supplied by National Carbon Technologies using sustainably sourced wood and had a carbon content >90%. One ton of biochar would have 900kg of carbon. Based on experience from calculations using the EBC-Sink methodology, an average carbon to CO 2 multiplier of 2.5 could be used to convert the carbon to CO2e. This takes into consideration the emissions related to feedstock production, chipping, transportation, pyrolysis emissions and other factors. The current carbon removal price is north of $60 per ton CO 2e, so this single ton could generate $US 150 per ton of biochar. Now imagine being able to put 50 - 100 tons per residential system. That would generate more than enough funding to install higher performing, healthier sewage management systems. In Long Island alone this could lead to 18 - 36 Million tons of biochar being utilized which equates to carbon sequestration of between 45 Mt - 90 Mt CO 2 eq! Now imagine this model being rolled out across a good part of the planet. This is the scale that is needed to make a material impact on climate rebalancing.

Additional research needed

To date little, if any, formal research has been done on this topic. Understanding the role of biochar's particle size, friability, water holding capacity and adsorption potential would be helpful to understand if certain biochars are superior to others in this context and how much is needed for an average household of six persons. Determining what blends of biochar, sand and gravel work best in different soils and climates would help in developing best management practices needed for regulators and system designers. Designing a cost-effective circular economy model for carbonizing urban green waste and blending it into reusable structured soils for cesspools and septic systems would be a game-changer when it comes to creating multi-beneficial sinks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Make carbon sink, not rise. Most of the world's toilets are not connected to sewers but drain into septic systems or cesspools. With new smart biochar based septic designs, this human derived waste carbon could become long term carbon sinks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Limiting climate change to 2 °C will require not only a 90% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 but also the creation of additional C-sinks of at least 220 billion tons of carbon (800 billion tons of CO2eq) by 2100 (Hilaire et al., 2019; Rockström et al., 2017; Werner et al., 2018). Expanding biomass productivity of agricultural land through methods such as agroforestry, forest pastures, forest gardens, and algae farms could remove a total of at least 30% of the required amount of carbon from the atmosphere over the next 70-80 years. If this biomass would be converted to biochar and pyrolysis oil using pyrolysis plants (Schmidt et al., 2019), the extracted carbon could be transformed into long-term carbon sinks (centuries to millennia). However, there is still a long way to go in terms of both agricultural and industrial development to produce roughly 100 billion tons of pyrogenic carbon (biochar and pyrolysis oil) from 300 billion tons of additional biomass.

In the first decade of the biochar industry, which in Europe began in 2009 when the first pyrolysis plant dedicated to biochar production was commissioned in Switzerland, a small, dynamically evolving market has established itself. In 2012, there were only three EBC-certified plants in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland with a total production volume of just under 500 tons of biochar per year (the machines stood idle for longer than they were producing biochar). In 2021 more than 60 biochar production sites in ten European countries with an annual production of over 40,000 t of biochar are operating. The US, Canada, Australia, and China have also seen sustained growth in biochar production. The industry is professionalizing via the establishment of industry associations such as the European Biochar Industry Consortium (EBI), most producers and technology providers are active members of the International Biochar Initiative (IBI), and a growing number of countries have a national biochar association in which industry, science, government, nature conservation, and other stakeholders exchange information in order to grow national biochar industries. At the same time, the regulatory framework for using biochar in different markets is gradually becoming clearer.

C-Sink Certificates

With the introduction of the EBC C-sink certificate in 2020, the industry became a forerunner in the establishment of negative emission technologies, i.e., the creation of C-sinks. While most political and scientific decision-makers proclaimed the need for negative emissions, no other framework or certification schemes had been developed yet.

The 800 billion metric tons of CO2 (i.e., 800 Gt CO2eq) calculated according to various climate models to be permanently removed from the atmosphere by the end of the century (Hilaire et al., 2019), will almost certainly not be sufficient. On the one hand, current emissions are being reduced too slowly - despite all the noble political declarations of intent, global emissions have continued to rise. On the other hand, more and more natural carbon sinks are being destroyed or severely impaired - most notably via forest fires, thawing permafrost, and the drying out of steppes and peatlands. However, for the sake of illustrating the industrial challenge to ramp up the pyrolysis industry, we are going to use the 800 Gt CO2eq C-sink objective as a minimum target. In economic terms, this target already corresponds to a turnover of more than 500 billion euros per year assuming a price of 50 € per ton of CO2eq (= 800 billion t CO2eq / 75 years * 50 €/t). Despite this nearly unimaginable amount of both tons of CO2 and euros needed to avoid catastrophic climate change, so far there are no government initiatives to promote or mandate C-sink establishment, certification, and registry into national climate policies (apart from supporting tree plantations).

Besides the EBC-C-sink, numerous other C-sink standards are starting to emerge with more to follow in the coming years. Competition is a good driver for the further development of standards. However, in the absence of government regulation, there is a risk that the impact of certain C-sinks will be frivolously exaggerated and extrapolated to generate more supply (C-sink certificates) to meet growing demand. Currently, most large consumer product companies (e.g., cell phones, fashion, furniture, chocolate) are seeking to position themselves as carbon neutral to enhance their market image or providing their customers with the "opportunity" to offset the climate damage of their consumption for a token amount of money. To do so, these companies often look for cheap carbon credit compensation schemes that can be financed from marketing budgets. So far, these credits have mostly come from reforestation projects that have often not been subject to much scrutiny. How the land was previously used, whether and when a forest fire occurs, a pest infestation attacks the monoculture, or clear-cutting for timber use occurs after the certification period is often not factored into the carbon equation.

Considering these past experiences and the urgent need to accurately understand carbon storage, the EBC and its partners see it as their duty to set a high standard with carefully and accurately calculated and controlled carbon accounting. Future new providers of C-sink certificates will have to measure themselves using these rigorous yet transparent standards. Other carbon marketplaces that want to offer certificates based on less stringent standards will then at least have to justify the rationale for their standards, and buyers of C-sink certificates will be given comparative criteria by which they can select their C-sink providers.

Ten years after the first EBC certification of a biochar producer, the biochar industry is about to enter a new, major, and decisive stage. Biochar pioneers, whose history will soon be written, are fast becoming industrial companies. And yet, this is admittedly a very modest and far too measured beginning. To capture at least 30 percent of the 800 billion metric tons of CO2 and store it safely and sensibly for centuries, at least 380,000 industrial pyrolysis plants will need to be built over the next 30 years.

Manufacturing of 380,000 industrial pyrolysis plants

Thirty percent of 800 billion t CO2eq corresponds to (30% * 800 billion / 44 * 12 =) 65 billion t C to be sequestered using biochar and pyrolysis oil. At a pyrolytic C efficiency of 70% (Schmidt et al., 2019), (65 * 10^9 t C / 48% C content of biomass / 70% efficiency =) 190 billion tons of biomass on a dry matter base (DM) would be required for pyrolysis. If we assume that the required technology and biomass cannot be provided at this scale before 2050, (190 billion ton / 50 years =) 3.8 billion tons of biomass (DM) will be needed per year from 2050 to 2100. A medium-sized pyrolysis plant processes an average of 10,000 tons of biomass (DM) per year to produce (10,000 t * 48% C content * 70% efficiency =) 3,400 t of sequestrable carbon. Consequently, at least (3.8 billion t biomass / 10,000 t biomass per plant =) 380,000 industrial pyrolysis plants would be needed worldwide by 2050 to fulfill the 30% goal by the end of the century.

Not only scaling up to 380,000 manufacturing plants is required, but also processes and markets must be developed to optimize and use pyrolysis oil and/or pyrolysis gas. Today, the liquid and gaseous pyrolysis products are most often simply burned to produce heat which emits CO2. If the pyrolysis oil and gas are not used for C-sequestration purposes, pyrolysis plants can only achieve 30-40% C-sink efficiencies, with a few achieving up to 50% (Schmidt et al., 2019). We have less than 30 years to achieve this scale and technology development, but given the rapid advances over the past decade, this should be achievable with the proper levels of investments.

To scale from roughly 100 industrial pyrolysis plants in 2021 to 380,000 in 2050 would require at least a 33% annual increase. Such exponential growth may not sound like much for the earlier years. It means that in the year 2030 about 320 industrial plants would have to be installed, yet by 2040 there would be a total of 22,200 installed plants, with an annual increase of 5500 plants. In 2050, if things were so mathematically exact, almost 100,000 new plants would be built annually, so that the necessary total number of 380,000 pyrolysis plants could be reached. From that moment on, however, the global biomass capacity would also be fully utilized. No new plants would be needed from this point on although older plants would have to be kept operational and replaced if necessary. This is likely to correspond to refurbishing or replacing (5% of 380,000=) 19,000 plants per year.

Fig. 1: Annual growth in installed pyrolysis plants to reach a total of 380,000 commissioned plants in 2050.

We used here a standard 10,000 tons biomass pyrolysis unit to model and illustrate the dimension of the task. We expect many different types and sizes of pyrolizers to enter the market in the next decade. It needs industrial, automatized manufacturing and serial production, but there is a need for smaller farm and village size pyrolizers (100 - 1,000 tons of biomass), mid-size pyrolizers as used in our model calculation, and big size industrial plants transforming more than 100,000 tons of biomass per year. If there will be proportionally more small-scale pyrolizers than mid- and big-scale units, the calculated 380,000 units would correspondingly be more.

Controlled shrinking

Such exponential growth followed by rapid decline is not without challenges. Starting in 2051, most of the welding robots, laser cutters, automated delivery lines, assembly halls, countless subcontractors, transport vehicles, shipping containers, company cafeterias, and, most importantly, the vast majority of the millions of workers worldwide would no longer be needed after equilibrium is reached. Of course, the workers could be retrained, and the robots reprogrammed, and the raw material flows of steel, ceramics, glass, compressed wood, and electronics redirected. But how are a company and workforce supposed to deliver plant manufacturing excellence in 2050 when the workers know they will be laid off the following year and the company knows it will have to provide warranty and service for the next 20 years on the equipment it delivers, without generating sales and profits by building new equipment?

To prevent the industry, which would have been built up with high investments and commitment, from suddenly bleeding out at the moment when the target of the last 5-year plan has been reached, a slower, more orderly reduction or reallocation of production capacities should take place. However, this would also mean that the annual output of pyrolysis plants would have to proceed much faster initially so that the addition of new capacity could level off as early as 2040 and the total number of globally installed pyrolysis units would remain the same as of 2050.

As shown in Figure 2, if the annual output of pyrolysis plants from 2021 to 2043 would increase by 40% instead of 33%, the yearly output of new pyrolysis plants could decrease more slowly by 12% between 2043 and 2050. In 2050, the required 380,000 pyrolysis plants would be in operation. The continuous annual production of 19,000 pyrolysis plants would maintain the stock of installed pyrolysis capacity level until the end of the century. The manufacturing industry must be ramped up rapidly, then ramped down more slowly but still exponentially compared to current growth. Eventually, production will stabilize at a relatively low annual level. It is a fundamental economic challenge, though feasible if the appropriate policy and financial mechanisms are adopted quickly around the globe.

Fig. 2: Annual growth in installed pyrolysis capacity if there is exponential growth through 2043 and an exponential decrease in manufacturing capacity between 2043 and 2050.

This scaling challenge is not unique to pyrolysis; it is the same for all other relevant climate technologies such as direct air capture (DAC) or enhanced weathering (EW). The required industrial plants must be built quickly in large series and need exponential annual growth rates to do so, but as soon as the limits for the climate and/or the natural resources, energy, or carbon deposits are reached, the production of the climate technologies can and should be scaled down just as rapidly.

In terms of the market economy, rapid scaling followed by planned, rapid decline is a very interesting challenge: How can an exponential increase, which is necessary for climate protection, shrink again after a certain point in such a way that the planetary limits are observed, and private and national economic interests are still safeguarded. Except for a wartime economy, this type of premeditated boom and bust cycle is not something humanity has often experienced and would require nothing less than a new economic model. The purely market-based economic model, which makes the risks of a present investment appear acceptable through the expectation of future growth, would be upended. Without the planning powers of the state providing financing and social guarantees, such a massive project is very unlikely to be implemented.

Such a global targeted exponential shrinkage of a major industry had never happened before in history and was never intended. Nevertheless, there is probably no alternative when it comes to technologically countering climate change. But insofar as C-sinks can only be realized on the necessary scale within the framework of partnerships between the public sector and private industry anyway, other economic models than those valid today become conceivable.

C-sinks are based on state-regulated markets

In our view, the amount of new C-sink capacities to be created each year will have to be determined at the state or international level in accordance with the climate targets. C-sinks, like bridges, highways, railroads, wastewater pipelines, and power lines, are part of the infrastructure and should be subject to federal and international organization and management.

It should also be noted that for the following reasons, biological and pyrogenic C-sinks are not suitable for direct compensation of CO2 emissions: The residence time of organic and pyrogenic carbon in C-sinks is long but still limited (decades to millennia, depending on the type of sink), whereas historical and current CO2 emissions accumulate and exert a climate forcing for millions of years. While a carbon sink guarantees that a quantified amount of CO2 is not returned to the atmosphere for a given period of time, all CO2-emissions have a global warming effect that extends well beyond the likely survival of humankind. The climate effects of C-sinks and of CO2-emissions are not of the same temporal order. Thus, the markets, pricing, and policies for CO2 emission reductions (CO2 allowances or CO2 taxes) versus those for carbon sinks and their maintenance are fundamentally different.

Geological C sinks with residence times of many millions of years, such as the CarbFix process in Iceland or the use of rock flour for CO2 removal through geological weathering can completely compensate for emitted CO2. However, the expansion of these technologies to a climate-relevant level is expected to take several decades due to technical and physical challenges. In addition, the extraction of CO2 needed for geological storage (e.g., by DAC from Climeworks) is extremely energy-intensive, requiring further acceleration of renewable energy development. To extract one ton of CO2 from the atmosphere using DAC requires as much energy as is contained in one ton of lignite before its combustion for energy which causes one ton of CO2-emission.

In contrast, C-sinks based on organic and pyrogenic carbon can already be expanded to climate-relevant dimensions today. The fact that the carbon in such C-sinks has lower residence times than in geological C-sinks is of secondary importance over the next several decades. The decisive factor is, for now, how civilization limits climate change over the next 50 years, how the total amount of sequestered carbon increases, and how the CO2 content of the atmosphere is reduced.

The buildup of C-sinks must be an intergenerational contract. The climate problem cannot be eliminated once and for all; even centuries from now, the preservation and renewal of terrestrial C-sinks will remain an essential climate service to be carried on by future generations. While each greenhouse gas emission causes a climate effect over many hundreds of thousands of years, most C-sinks must be permanently maintained, cared for, and protected by civilization. This task can be viewed as a service contract, with duration over many generations. Following this logic, neither companies nor individuals can fully offset their past, present, and future emissions through the mere construction of a C-sink, since the services to maintain it will extend far into the future. C-sinks must be built, maintained, and their maintenance needs to be controlled and validated over generations (e.g., a biochar asphalt should not be scraped off from a road and combusted). Thus, the market and incentives for building and maintaining C-sinks should be structured differently compared to the currently existing market for emission reductions, where financial incentives to reduce emissions are created through taxes or penalties.

C-sinks require governmental and international target agreements to achieve the global amounts of necessary C-sinks identified by climate science. For example, the EU could specify a C-sink capacity target of 30 billion tons CO2eq by 2050 and a total of 230 billion tons CO2eq by 2100. Since the EU is responsible for about 29% of global climate change, it would have to pay for 29% of the necessary negative emissions of 800 Gt CO2eq, which is just under 230 billion tons CO2eq (Hickel, 2020).
If countries set binding targets for the creation of C-sinks every five years and put their request for carbon removal proposals out to tender in the same way as other public contracts, e.g., the construction of a bridge or the operation of local public transport, they could create a strong, long-term market for C-sinks while also setting up regulations to minimize double counting and promote maximum carbon efficiency. Dynamic pricing for C-sink services would emerge when the creation and assessment of C-sinks follow internationally binding agreements. Public tender creates competition to develop C-sinks as large as possible, as long-term as possible, and as cost-effectively as possible. Direct or indirect taxes should be leveraged to finance the creation and maintenance of C-sinks. C-sinks are not ordinary products from which a consumer or a company has a direct physical benefit like when a van is purchased that can transport goods or a computer the allows internet surfing. The real benefit of setting up C-sinks is reversing climate change, but that will only occur if the entire global community participates. The private benefit only occurs

Without the participation of all, individual actions will only have a minimal effect, barely measurable in the grand scheme of planetary emissions. C-sinks are part of civilization's responsibility and must therefore be organized and financed by the peoples' representatives, i.e., countries. Thus, nation-states would be both the end customer buying the climate service of a C-sink and the initiator supporting the establishment of the industry through co-financing new production capacity. Much of this investment money could and should come from CO2 taxes. It is evident that carbon taxes must be generated mainly in wealthy industrialized countries and must include their respective historical responsibility for climate change (Hickel, 2020). Due to the long residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere, historical emissions (since the beginning of industrialization) are as relevant as current emissions.

CO2 credits and taxes work like a tipping or disposal fee. The objective is to make the emission of greenhouse gases gradually more expensive than the cost to avoid emissions. In order to maximize the impact of carbon taxes, the revenues generated from CO2 taxes must be invested in climate technologies. Using the CO2 taxes, the government could issue price guarantees for C-sinks and provide the necessary subsidies for constructing production lines for climate technologies. Such government involvement could also ease the impact of the anticipated exponential decrease of production capacities around mid-century. Aligning the scaling of climate removal technologies with CO2 tax rates and revenues could correspond well with the anticipated scaling timelines. The revenues from CO2 taxes will increase until about 2040 (on the one hand, by increasing the CO2 price, but mainly by gradually including all GHG emissions instead of only those of selected industries). From 2040 onwards, CO2-tax income will likely begin to decrease because, according to the Paris Climate Agreement, emissions will have to be reduced by 90% by 2050 and, thus, there would be fewer CO2-emissions to be taxed. This timeline would correspond to a decreasing growth of, and subsidies needed for pyrolysis plants production from 2043 onward.

Our civilization's capacity to compel exponential growth and targeted exponential shrinking is very likely to be a determining factor as to whether humanity will preserve our habitat in the coming decades. The climate targets adopted by almost all countries will only be achievable if the extraction of fossil carbons is exponentially reduced to a minimum. In parallel, the production of renewable energy and renewable plastics (10% of the fossil carbon extracted annually is used in plastics and chemical industries and must be replaced when fossil carbon extraction ends) must be ramped up dramatically. Economic integration of industrial shrinkage and linking it to the rapid growth of new technologies requires innovative business models, as well as social and economic reform.

Manufacturing service provider

The ramp-up and ramp-down of entire industries would have been an almost unsolvable problem in the old economy. But the more intelligently the automation of production processes is organized, the easier it will be to switch from one production line to another with the same robots, each with only short changeover phases. For example, a large factory (Gigafactory) that produces pyrolysis plants in series could build plants for direct air capture or seawater desalination or tidal power plants after a changeover phase of just three to four months. In the electronics industry, valuable experience is already being gained with flexible production lines.

Machine manufacturing is becoming increasingly modular and, at the same time, more flexible. There will be a whole new type of factory that sees itself primarily as a manufacturing service provider. Car companies, pyrolysis developers, battery manufacturers, or hydrogen producers will be able to order their equipment from manufacturing service providers in any quantity. Once the order is processed, the manufacturing service provider will switch over and fabricate different equipment for another company. This works not entirely different than it does today, where international technology companies have their products manufactured in South East Asia and sign unit contracts with the outsourced manufacturing company. The main difference could be that in the future, there will probably be less outsourcing to distant foreign countries to improve local and regional resiliency against supply chain interruptions due to climate-induced disruptions. Instead, industries are more likely to engage nearby manufacturing service providers who, with robotics, 3D printing, innovative flexibility, and precision planning, will be able to handle large orders with exponential growth rates. The flexibility of various production lines means that exponential ramp-ups and ramp-downs will be part of their daily business.

Outlook

As complex and contrary to our economic-political experiences the necessary ramp-up and orderly ramp-down of global environmental technologies may seem, there can be no doubt that the fabrication and commissioning of nearly 400,000 pyrolysis plants should be technologically and politically manageable. More problematic is the doubling of the net biomass productivity in terrestrial and marine ecosystems to facilitate increased carbon removal from the atmosphere, eventually converted to solid and liquid pyrogenic carbon products suitable for long-term carbon sequestration. If large-scale industrial methods were used to doubled biomass production, ecosystems, groundwater, and biodiversity would very likely be endangered or destroyed to an unprecedented extent (due to monoculture cropping, excessive use of fertilizers, irrigation, and massive use of pesticides).
Given the much greater potential for biomass production in the tropics, a large part of the additional biomass will have to be grown in tropical countries. Done poorly this could lead to a potentially fatal competition between food and biomass production similar to what has previously happened with the production of biofuel feedstock. It could shatter the social cohesion in regions that are already noticeably affected by climate change. We will address this potentially even greater challenge than industrial scaling in the second part of this article.

Literature

Hickel, J., 2020. Quantifying national responsibility for climate breakdown: an equality-based attribution approach for carbon dioxide emissions in excess of the planetary boundary. Lancet. Planet. Heal. 4, e399-e404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30196-0
Hilaire, J., Minx, J.C., Callaghan, M.W., Edmonds, J., Luderer, G., Nemet, G.F., Rogelj, J., del Mar Zamora, M., 2019. Negative emissions and international climate goals-learning from and about mitigation scenarios. Clim. Change 157, 189-219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02516-4
Rockström, J., Gaffney, O., Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N., Schellnhuber, H.J., 2017. A roadmap for rapid decarbonization. Science (80-. ). 355.
Schmidt, H.-P., Anca-Couce, A., Hagemann, N., Werner, C., Gerten, D., Lucht, W., Kammann, C., 2019. Pyrogenic carbon capture and storage. GCB Bioenergy 11. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12553
Werner, C., Schmidt, H.-P., Gerten, D., Lucht, W., Kammann, C., 2018. Biogeochemical potential of biomass pyrolysis systems for limiting global warming to 1.5 °c. Environ. Res. Lett. 13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabb0e

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
tBJ:400,000 Pyrolysis Plants to Save the Climate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Limiting climate change to 2 °C will require not only a 90% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 but also the creation of additional C-sinks of at least 220 billion tons of carbon (800 billion tons of CO2eq) by 2100 (Hilaire et al., 2019; Rockström et al., 2017; Werner et al., 2018).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We seek to spark innovative research to find economically and environmentally responsible uses for biochar. We seek to bring scientific content to life in a manner that inspires academics and non-specialists alike. Although we use certain elements common to scientific publications such as peer review and references, we do not aspire to be an academic journal. We use these standards as we want our readers to be confident that what is written in the Biochar Journal is based on sound science and practicality. In the same way that we are not an academic publication, neither are we an industry journal although we hope that industry and entrepreneurial people find inspiration and ideas for new products and successful models for biochar deployment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We seek to spark innovative research to find economically and environmentally responsible uses for biochar. We seek to bring scientific content to life in a manner that inspires academics and non-specialists alike. Although we use certain elements common to scientific publications such as peer review and references, we do not aspire to be an academic journal.

# data[].attributes.headline
A recent study has found that soil is home to 59% of all life on Earth, from an insect feeding on the soil surface to a tiny microbe nestled in a soil pore. This discovery crowns soil as the most biodiverse habitat on the planet.

# data[].attributes.subject
A recent study has found that soil is home to 59% of all life on Earth, from an insect feeding on the soil surface to a tiny microbe nestled in a soil pore. This discovery crowns soil as the most biodiverse habitat on the planet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
More than half of life on Earth is found in soil – here’s why that’s important

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With more than one species for every person on the planet, soils are the most diverse habitat on Earth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Burning Solution (to a burning problem)  - Biochar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Search by Type

Jorat E, Goddard MA, Manning P, Lau HK, Ngeow S, Sohi SP and Manning DAC. 2020. Passive CO2 removal in urban soils: Evidence from brownfield sites. Science of the Total Environment 703: 135573.

Melia PM, Busquets R, Hooda P, Cundy AB and Sohi SP. 2019. Driving forces and barriers in the removal of phosphorus from water using crop residue, wood and sewage sludge derived biochars. Science of the Total Environment 675: 623-631.

Liu Y, Sohi SP, Liu S, Guan J, Zhou J and Chen J. 2019. Adsorption and reductive degradation of Cr(VI) and TCE by a simply synthesized zero valent iron magnetic biochar. Journal of Environmental Management 235: 276-281

Kolosz BW, Sohi SP and Manning DAC. 2019. CASPER: A modelling framework to link mineral carbonation with the turnover of organic matter in soil. Computers and Geoscience 124:58-71

Buss W, Assavavittayanon K, Shepherd J, Heal K and Sohi SP. 2018. Biochar phosphorus release is limited by high pH and excess calcium. 2018. Journal of Environmental Quality 47:1298-1303

Masek O, Buss W and Sohi SP. Standard biochar materials. 2018. Environmental Science and Technology 52:9543-9544

Cabeza I, Waterhouse T, Sohi SP and Rooke JA. 2018. Effect of biochar produced from different biomass sources and at different process temperatures on methane production and ammonia concentrations in vitro. Animal Feed Science and Technology 237: 1-7

Shepherd JG, Buss W, Sohi SP and Heal KV. 2017. Bioavailability of phosphorus, other nutrients and potentially toxic elements from marginal biomass-derived biochar assessed in barley ( Hordeum vulgare) growth experiments. Science of the Total Environment 584/5:448-457

Bachmann HJ, Bucheli TD, Dieguez-Alonso A, Fabbri D, Knicker HE, Schmidt H-P, Ulbricht A, Becker R, Buscaroli A, Buerge D, Cross A, Dickinson D [...] Masek O, Mumme J, Carmona M, Calvelo R, Rees F, Rombolà AG, de la Rosa JM, Sakrabani R, Sohi SP, Soja G, Valagussa M, Verheijen FGA, Franz F. 2016. Toward the standardization of biochar analysis: The COST Action TD1107 interlaboratory comparison. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 64: 513-527

Reza MT, Rottler E, Tölle R, Werner M, Ramm P, Mumme J. 2015. Production, characterization, and biogas application of magnetic hydrochar from cellulose. Bioresource Technology 186:34-43

Reza MT, Mumme J, Ebert A. 2015. Characterization of hydrochar from hydrothermal carbonization of wheat straw digestate. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery doi:10.1007/s13399-015-0163-9

Hübner T, Mumme J. 2015. Integration of pyrolysis and anaerobic digestion - use of aqueous liquor from digestate pyrolysis for biogas production. Bioresource Technology 183:86-92

Carter, S., Shackley, S., Sohi, S.P., Suy, T.B. and Haefele (2013) The impact of biochar application on soil properties and plant growth of pot grown lettuce ( Lactuca sativa) and cabbage ( Brassica chinensis). Agronomy, 3:408-418

Shackley, S., Carter, S., Knowles, T., Middelink, E., Haefele, S., Haszeldine, S. (2012), Sustainable gasification-biochar systems? A case-study of rice-husk gasification in Cambodia, Part II: Field trial results, carbon abatement, economic assessment and conclusions, Energy Policy, 41:618-623

Ibarrola, R., et al. Pyrolysis biochar systems for recovering biodegradable materials: A life cycle carbon assessment.
Waste Management (2011), doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.10.005

Mašek, O., Brownsort, P., Cross, A., & Sohi, S. (2011). Influence of production conditions on the yield and environmental stability of biochar. Fuel. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2011.08.044

Cross, A., Sohi, S.P. (2011) The priming potential of biochar products in relation to labile carbon contents and soil
organic matter status, Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 43: 2127-2134

Brownsort PA 2009. Biomass Pyrolysis Processes: Performance Parameters and their Influence on Biochar System Benefits. MSc diss. Univ. of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Sohi SP, Shackley SJ, Haszeldine RS, Manning D and Mašek O 2009. Biochar, reducing and removing CO2 while improving soils:A significant and sustainable response to climate change. Evidence submitted to the Royal Society Geo-engineering Climate Enquiry, UKBRC Working Paper 2

Sohi SP, Shackley SJ, Mandy M, Pratt K, Lopez-Capel E, Haszeldine RS, Gaunt J, Masek O, Manning D, Cook J and Carter S 2009. Biochar: An Emerging Technology for Climate Change Mitigation?, Workshop proceedings, UKBRC Working Paper 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UK Biochar Research Centre | Publications | Complete List

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Search by Type Jorat E, Goddard MA, Manning P, Lau HK, Ngeow S, Sohi SP and Manning DAC. 2020. Passive CO2 removal in urban soils: Evidence from brownfield sites. Science of the Total Environment 703: 135573. Melia PM, Busquets R, Hooda P, Cundy AB and Sohi SP. 2019.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
© Pacific Biochar | The latest vineyard wonder offers improved performance - for a price.

A lot of viticulturists are talking about biochar these days but most people haven't a clue what it even is.

Biochar is a soil amendment that is gaining popularity in agriculture, though it remains on the cutting edge in viticulture. It's essentially pulverized charcoal. It has the ability to build organic matter in poor or depleted soils, boost microbial populations and lower a vineyard's need for nutrient and water inputs - allowing for less human intervention, as well as lowering both grower's cost of production and carbon footprint. This means healthier soils, healthier vines, healthier environment, and happier grower.

Biochar is made by charring plant material in a low enough oxygen environment that it does not turn to ash, a process called pyrolysis. As Josiah Hunt, CEO of Pacific Biochar in Santa Rosa, California, describes: "The resulting material has a tremendous surface area for its size, and as its adhesive surface bonds with charged ions, it can retain impressive amounts of nutrients from environmental loss, while allowing them to be biologically available. Biochar is also extremely porous, which imparts a sponge-like ability to keep water in topsoil and to be a home and safe haven for microbial populations."

It's also extremely stable; biochar will remain inactive in soil for thousands of years. Because of this stability, it's a great way to sequester carbon - not only its own carbon, but the additional CO2 it can pull from the air when soil conditions are improved. It also creates strong bonds with contaminant metals in soils, helping preclude their ending up in water sources or produce. It's a very eco-friendly and versatile soil amendment.

Origins

Biochar as a human soil additive has occurred in many parts of the world, but it is most associated with the Amazon, where it is known as "terra preta do Indio" (Indians' black earth). Although the Amazon appears lush, it has extremely poor soils, and is only able to survive from the constant recycling of its plant life (which is why Amazon deforestation causes permanent damage). Biochar-enriched soils are thought to cover swaths of the Amazon the size of France and to have allowed historic populations to flourish there with these otherwise poor soils.

Hunt quickly points out: "The word biochar is pretty new, but the material is not." Despite commonly being considered a human-made soil additive, he says "biochar exists wherever fire and plant life happen together".

Organic boost

In viticulture, biochar is primarily used in low organic matter soils, which usually means one of two scenarios: highly sandy soils and soils that have lost organic matter to years of conventional farming abuse.

Doug Beck is the science officer for Monterey Pacific, a vineyard management company in Soledad, California, managing more than 13,000 acres of vineyards on California's sandy Central Coast. In a former life he was the soil scientist for the UN's International Center for Tropical Agriculture in Colombia (and has seen the famed terra preta himself). He explains why having sufficient organic matter is important: "When you have less than 1 percent organic matter, it means the vineyard isn't functioning on its own. You add nutrients as needed in a very mechanical way, but they are not retained in the soil and microbial populations are low. You can produce good quality grapes this way, but when you have higher organic carbon and microbial biomass, the site can function better on its own - you can add less [water, compost, fertilizer], and the vineyard will resolve disease problems better."

© Bedrock Wine Company | Bedrock's Jake Neustadt says biochar kicks-starts recovery in depleted vineyards.

Beck notes that while soils on California's North Coast can have around 2 percent organic matter, the sandy soils he works with on the Central Coast often have only 0.8 percent. "You have to manage these depleted soils much more than soils with more organic matter, which largely take care of themselves." As an example of biochar's water-holding effects (directly, and indirectly from the organic matter it facilitates), on sandy soils treated with biochar, Doug is often able to wait a month or two further into the season before starting irrigation - a big deal in drought-ridden California.

Depleted, abused soils are another way a soil can end up with low organic matter. Jake Neustadt, the vineyard manager for Bedrock Wine Company in Sonoma, California, explains: "We take over a lot of old vine sites that have been mistreated for decades, in terms of over cultivation and stripping of organic matter. The farmers may have been disking four times per year, and on sloping vineyards, all the topsoil has slid to the bottom of the hill. In those sites you have very little organic matter."

Bedrock started using biochar about seven years ago when rehabilitating abused vineyards. "The biggest thing for us in rehabilitating a vineyard, before we see a change in the vines themselves, is establishing a healthy cover crop. With biochar, suddenly the soil retains everything better (nutrients, microbes, water), so we see a big increase in cover crop biomass pretty immediately. This is the jolt that makes everything happen."

This "jolt" ushers in a cascade of changes. At first, biochar simply retains what cover crops need to grow. The roots of cover crops feed soil microbes and the biochar becomes a home to them, increasing populations and therefore a soil's ability to recycle plant material and furthering nutrient retention. These nutrients later feed future cover crops and the vines. Cover crops also open up compacted soils - a common occurrence in abused vineyards - allowing deeper water penetration and soil aeration, both critical for a healthy vineyard. Healthier soils and more abundant cover crops bring more beneficial insects. The vineyard gets closer to a self sustaining, closer-to-natural state.

Biochar and terroir

Biochar lasts for millennia and changes the characteristics of a soil - does it therefore alter terroir? Randall Grahm of Bonny Doon, a man who has spent much time mulling over the nature of terroir and who has experimented with biochar himself, has valuable thoughts on this. "It is changing terroir, but everything you touch on the land, every time you do anything [such as fertilizing, watering, adding cover crops, planting vines] is changing terroir. Plowing or disking is a great deformation of terroir. Biochar is a benign one. Because you're encouraging mycorrhizae [the most critical group in the soil microbiome, which actively transport micronutrients in soil to roots], you're enhancing the signal of terroir." In this sense, Grahm feels biochar is a terroir amplifier, rather than a terroir deformer.

For his experimental Popelouchum vineyard in San Juan Bautista, Grahm applied biochar prior to planting. The vineyard is located on the edge of where dry farming is possible in California, and one of his hopes in using biochar is that it will allow him to dry farm. From a terroir perspective, this seems like a great deal. If all changes to a site deform terroir, Grahm is trading the application of a benign terroir deformer (and potential terroir enhancer) to gain full access to a very important aspect of terroir: enabling the vintage to be guided entirely by rainfall, as opposed to human irrigation choices.

Grahm points out that, in California, "we don't have soils that are rich in available minerals; they're very eroded. Especially in sandy soils, biochar is great in enhancing the uptake of minerals. If you look at Switzerland, there's a lot of rock that is currently being eroded and released into the soil solution, biochar doesn't have such a significant impact there. In California, with both mineral deficiency and drought, it's particularly beneficial for our conditions."

Biochar is a promising soil additive for many reasons. For farmers, it can lower costs. For purists, it can lower human intervention in vineyards. For the ecologically minded, it's a great way to sequester carbon and reduce waste, as well as clean up soils and our atmosphere.

And for those interested in great wine, as organics and conscientious viticulture become more prevalent, few would argue with the idea that healthy, happy vineyards make better wine.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biochar: the Vineyard's Next Big Thing | Wine-Searcher News & Features

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A lot of viticulturists are talking about biochar these days but most people haven't a clue what it even is. Biochar is a soil amendment that is gaining popularity in agriculture, though it remains on the cutting edge in viticulture. It's essentially pulverized charcoal.

# data[].attributes.body
In the heart of nature's sacred dance,
Where soil and fire intertwine,
There lies a secret, a second chance,
A gift bestowed upon this earthly shrine.

Biochar, born from flames of old,
From charred remnants of ancient trees,
Its power, a story waiting to be told,
A marvel that nurtures life with ease.

In soils depleted, tired and worn,
Biochar breathes life, a gentle spark,
A carbon guardian, silently sworn,
To heal the land and leave a mark.

Beneath the surface, it finds its home,
An abode for microbes, bustling with glee,
A thriving kingdom, where life can roam,
Unlocking nutrients, setting them free.

With open arms, it cradles the rain,
A sponge for water, a reservoir vast,
In times of drought, it eases the strain,
Sustaining life's journey, steadfast.

Oh, biochar, a champion of the soil,
You hold the key to nature's revival,
With your touch, barren lands shall uncoil,
And verdant landscapes shall surely arrive.

In harmony with the Earth, we stand,
Embracing biochar's transformative might,
Rebuilding ecosystems, hand in hand,
Creating a future that shines bright.

So let us spread this gift so grand,
Unleash biochar's potential untold,
For in its black embrace, we understand,
That regrowth and resilience shall unfold.

In fields and gardens, let biochar thrive,
A testament to our love for the land,
Together, we can ensure it will survive,
For the healing touch of biochar is at hand.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Permaculture Farming – food, soil & community

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Soil Carbon: Where Life Begins — Craig Sams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Back in 1967 my brother and I ran an organic macrobiotic restaurant and food store – we followed macrobiotics, the way of eating described in the book Zen Macrobiotics by Georges Ohsawa. The restaurant bought as much as possible from organic producers around London so we built strong links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Slash and burn is a real issue in the tropical rainforests as farmers look for fertile land. With the climate and ecological emergency, it is urgent we find real solutions to prevent rainforest destruction and biodiversity loss as well as supporting local people. Using the agroforestry system of inga alley cropping is producing amazing results. Regenerating soil by planting inga edulis in alleys and leaving the biomass to break down is showing an astounding increase in yield, improved growth rate, taste and quality of crops and a resistance to the devastating fungal pod rot in cacao without the use of agrochemicals. Speakers from Sierra Leone, the Amazon and the UK will talk about their findings and collaboration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Slash and burn is a real issue in the tropical rainforests as farmers look for fertile land. With the climate and ecological emergency, it is urgent we find real solutions to prevent rainforest destruction and biodiversity loss as well as supporting local people. Using the agroforestry system of inga alley cropping is producing amazing results.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Trees are the main reason humans breathe. Image: Unsplash/Jan Huber

Stay up to date:

Future of the Environment

Follow

Douglas fir, spruce, true fir, beech and maple trees produce the most oxygen. Image: Getty Images

Higher levels of green space and exposure to trees can lead to fewer symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress. Image: Getty Images

Discover

How is the World Economic Forum fighting the climate crisis?

Show more

Shaded areas can lower surface temperatures from 20-45 degrees. Image: Getty Images

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

Sign up for free

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Global Agenda

The Agenda Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

More on Future of the Environment

See all

Olivia Rosane

April 14, 2023

Paige Bennett

April 13, 2023

Olivia Rosane

April 14, 2023

Paige Bennett

April 13, 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How trees make oxygen, and other ways they are vital to human existence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Trees are the main reason humans breathe. Image: Unsplash/Jan Huber Stay up to date: Future of the Environment Follow Douglas fir, spruce, true fir, beech and maple trees produce the most oxygen. Image: Getty Images Higher levels of green space and exposure to trees can lead to fewer symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/sustainability-hub-low-carbon-devon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Low Carbon Devon - Practical stories and action towards net zero - Part Two

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Low Carbon Devon Showcase - Practical stories and action towards net zero

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Low Carbon Devon Showcase - Practical stories and action towards net zero - Part 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Site designed by Speed

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking "Accept All", you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BIOCHAR Producers and Suppliers UK Industry Guide - EBRI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Site designed by Speed We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking "Accept All", you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ivn.nl/app/uploads/sites/231/2023/01/ivn_a_little_bit_of_naturebiginfluence_0.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BIOCHAR - Building homes for soil microbes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nicola Peel, Solutionist inspires others to make a difference in the world, here is some recent media including documentaries and talks...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Miyawaki Method is one of the most effective tree planting methods for creating forest cover quickly on degraded land that has been used for other purposes such as agriculture or construction. It is effective because it is based on natural reforestation principles, i.e. using trees native to the area and replicating natural forest regeneration processes. It has some significant benefits over more traditional forestry methods when used in smaller afforestation projects and is particularly effective in the urban environment. The trees planted by this method grow much faster, jump starting the forest creation process and capturing more carbon. Higher biodiversity has been recorded in Miyawaki forests than in neighbouring woodland, so it's an ideal method for creating diverse forest ecosystems quickly. Within the context of the current climate change emergency and stark warnings about the global loss of biodiversity, being able to create diverse, healthy forests quickly could prove vital to meeting international targets and tackling these issues.

Two year old Miyawaki Forest. Photo credit: Afforestt

The essential principle of the Miyawaki method is using species of trees that would occur naturally in that area and that work together to create a diverse, multi-layered forest community. This creates a resilient and thriving forest ecosystem with species that complement each other, restoring "native forests by native trees". The selection of species to plant in a given area was originally linked to the theory of potential natural vegetation (PNV), in other words the vegetation that would occur in a specific area without further human interference. Extensive surveys have been carried out globally to determine the PNV across the world (see Hengl et al. 2018 for a summary), although there is fierce debate about the most effective way of defining 'native' species. In the UK the PNV is predominantly oak or oak/ash woodland, with beech woodland in the South East of England and boreal pine forest in Scotland. Estuarine and wet woodlands occur in specific habitats, particularly around The Wash and on the Somerset Levels. In spite of the i nherent difficulties in defining native species, those that are adapted to local conditions (in the UK oak, willow, birch for example) will fare better and contribute more to increasing biodiversity than more recently introduced species (e.g horse chestnut, plane).

One of the most noticeable differences in a Miyawaki forest is that the seedlings are planted at very high densities. This replicates the regeneration process that occurs in a natural forest when a clearing in the canopy opens up due to a larger tree falling. The saplings grow very fast to compete for the light and then natural selection will favour the fastest growing individuals and act to thin out the trees. The result is a densely packed pioneer forest that grows in 20 to 30 year s instead of taking 150 to 200 years. This has obvious benefits for projects that are working to maximise a forest's carbon sequestration potential or recreate habitat for biodiversity and wildlife.

Afforestt Clifton Park project, Karachi, after planting and 2 years later. Photo credit: Afforestt

The Miyawaki Method is named after its creator, Akira Miyawaki, a Japanese botanist and plant ecologist who has a particular interest in phytosociology, i.e. how plant species interact with each other within communities. Following the completion of a PhD in plant ecology, Miyawaki went to study with phytosociologist Reinhold Tüxen in Germany, where he learned about the concept of potential natural vegetation. When he returned to Japan and applied the PNV principles to the Japanese landscape, he became interested in the relics of ancient forests found around temples and shrines, known as Chinju-no-mori, sacred groves. These fragments of forest were composed of trees such as Japanese blue oak ( Quercus glauca), Japanese chestnut ( Castanea crenata) and Sakaki ( Cleyera japonica), rather than the coniferous trees such as larch ( Larix kaempferi) and Japanese cedar ( Cryptomeria japonica), which had been introduced from other areas and dominated local forests. There was also a distinct layering in the forest structure, with slow-growing canopy species, tree layer species, smaller sub-tree layer species, shrubs and ground covering herbs.

When Miyawaki combined these concepts, he developed a new way of planting forests. This was based on the native vegetation that he postulated should be growing in that area, as deduced from PNV studies, and his understanding of how these species would interact and grow to produce a dynamic forest ecosystem. His early field trials showed great promise that this method could dramatically accelerate forest growth and result in a stable and diverse forest ecosystem. Since then Miyawaki forests have been successfully planted on more than 3000 sites globally.

Survey local forest fragments and identify PNV tree species that are best suited to the conditions

Determine the forest community structure - identify the main canopy and tree layer species and select companion species based on their compatibility with the key species. This is assessed by looking at local indigenous vegetation and analysis of forest structures elsewhere in the world

Conduct a soil survey to help decide on the type of mulch and soil nutrients required

Collect seeds from local trees to grow seedlings or obtain seedlings of local variants of tree species. There are specific recommendations for how to raise the seedlings including growing them under shaded covers

Apply a mulch made from local materials to protect and nourish the seedlings - this simulates the protection offered by humus / leaf litter in a natural forest

Treat the soil and the seedlings with soil improvers or a mycorrhizal improver

Plant the seedlings randomly and at high density, 20,000 to 30,000 per hectare instead of 1,000 per hectare, with stakes for support

Water regularly and keep the site weed free for the first 2 years

‍

‍

Afforestt St Gobain project after planting and 5 months later. Photo credit: Afforestt

What are the benefits?

The Miyawaki Method has been used successfully around the world in over 3000 projects and the numbers are now also rising in Europe. The ability to create a dense native forest quickly has made the technique useful for creating urban micro forests, for restoring rainforest and Japanese evergreen broadleaf forests and for planting in arid Mediterranean habitat where other forestry techniques have not been successful. Miyawaki forests have also proven effective when used for a specific purpose, such as providing tsunami protection, stabilising mine dump slopes, as typhoon protection and for carbon sequestration. There has been particular focus on planting Miyawaki forests in urban environments as there are significant benefits to tree planting in towns and cities, and this method maximises the space available. Urban forests reduce local temperatures (-1.3°C in one study), improve air quality by reducing pollutants, sequester carbon, and improve the wellbeing of residents, as well as creating a natural oasis for invertebrates and birds. There remains, however, much scope for research on the Miyawaki method. In particular the carbon sequestration rates could be significantly higher than on forest plantations because of the density both at planting and at the final forest stage.

Miyawaki Forest. Photo credit: Afforestt

There has been significant criticism of the concept of Potential Natural Vegetation, although very little of the Miyawaki Method itself. In particular, the idea of using fixed compositions of vegetation has garnered criticism because ecosystems are not static. There is no denying, however, that having a concept of the best adapted vegetation to a particular area can help afforestation projects to create forests that benefit native wildlife. Many research studies still use PNV as a tool to identify potential species that would be expected to occur in an area, whilst also acknowledging its limitations.

The Miyawaki method itself has been criticised for creating forests that look monotonous because the trees are all the same age. However, the diversity inherent in the planting and the biodiversity recorded at the sites demonstrate that a functioning ecosystem has been created, and that the appearance of the forests is more of an aesthetic issue. It is a more expensive method of planting because it requires more seedlings to cover a certain area, but the rapidity of the forest growth and the minimal maintenance required recompense some of that expenditure.

The Miyawaki Method is an effective way of jump starting the creation of a forest or woodland, with considerable benefits for carbon capture and recreating biodiversity. At Creating Tomorrow's Forests we employ the Miyawaki Method alongside restoration of other habitats such as ponds and meadows, to create diverse, rich forest ecosystems for people and wildlife.

‍

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Miyawaki Method for Creating Forests - Creating Tomorrow's Forests | Restoring biodiversity by creating habitats and planting trees

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Miyawaki Method is one of the most effective tree planting methods

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We are part of nature: the ways we eat, travel, live, work and consume impact the ecosystems that give us life.
Globally we consume energy and materials - and produce waste - as if we had 1.75 planets. We are running a deficit. Let's get our footprint back in balance. Join us to support low-impact ways of living that are good for people and the planet.
Lifestyle changes are an untapped opportunity to move quickly on social justice and the triple planetary crises of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
OneEarth Living | Mainstreaming Sustainable Lifestyles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are part of nature: the ways we eat, travel, live, work and consume impact the ecosystems that give us life. Globally we consume energy and materials - and produce waste - as if we had 1.75 planets. We are running a deficit. Let's get our footprint back in balance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CRAW-UK - Report - Soil - the cinderella science vFinal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The South West Net Zero Hub is being delivered in partnership by the West of England Combined Authority (lead partner), Cornwall & Isles of Scilly LEP, Dorset LEP, GFirst LEP, Heart of the South West LEP, Solent LEP and Swindon & Wiltshire LEP

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The South West Net Zero Hub is being delivered in partnership by the West of England Combined Authority (lead partner), Cornwall & Isles of Scilly LEP, Dorset LEP, GFirst LEP, Heart of the South West LEP, Solent LEP and Swindon & Wiltshire LEP

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Planting Foxes Field - Transition Town Wellington

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The orchard area, with apples, plums, pears, apricots and sweet cherries as well as a heritage mulberry, along with nut-bearing trees such as hazel, yellowhorn, bladdernut and walnut, will be enclosed by a food hedge or 'fedge'.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Foraging Guide and Map Download — Transition Town Wellington

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are a local group based in Wellington, Somerset. Part of the Transition Network, we are active in several areas such as food and energy conservation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
iNaturalist is a social network of naturalists, citizen scientists, and biologists built on the concept of mapping and sharing observations of biodiversity across the globe. The buttons below take you to our local projects in Wellington

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wildlife Map and Booklet download - Transition Town Wellington

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
iNaturalist is a social network of naturalists, citizen scientists, and biologists built on the concept of mapping and sharing observations of biodiversity across the globe. The buttons below take you to our local projects in Wellington

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Each day throughout the month, people take their breakfasts outside to eat while listening to the birds, turn gardens into bumblebee havens, and become much closer to nature.

This June has been no different: over 110,000 people have been carrying out these random acts of wildness, and over 1,200 of them have been doing so in Somerset.

The purpose of all this is to encourage as many people as possible to seek out, appreciate, and value the nature around them.

Best of all, it is good for us, and there is now a wealth of research to demonstrate that connecting to nature can have a positive impact on our mental and physical health and wellbeing, helping us feel happier and healthier.

We also hope that by participating in 30 Days Wild and experiencing nature, more people will be encouraged to take action and help look after it.

As Sir David Attenborough has said, 'no one will protect what they don't care about and no one will care about what they have never experienced,' and now, more than ever, we need people to give nature something back.

The UK is one of the most nature depleted countries in the world, and various species, from birds to butterflies, are declining in number.

Yet despite these worrying trends, each one of us can make a difference.

Studies have shown that if just one in four people take action, it can create a social tipping point that will encourage others to follow suit - so if you make your garden a little wilder and plant flowers for pollinators, others may join you, creating a movement of people all taking small actions in their day-to-day lives that can add up to big changes.

30 Days Wild is often the start of that nature connection journey, opening our eyes to what is around us, but it doesn't matter what month it is - nature is not just for June.

We can usually spare a minute or two to listen to the birds or notice the plants sprouting from between cracks in the pavement.

If we all join in with 365 Days Wild, we will feel more connected to nature, which will encourage us to take action and help look after it.

For more information on how you can take action for nature in your community, please visit www.somersetwildlife.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Somerset Wildlife Trust's 20 Days Wild campaign

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Each day throughout the month, people take their breakfasts outside to eat while listening to the birds, turn gardens into bumblebee havens, and become much closer to nature. This June has been no different: over 110,000 people have been carrying out these random acts of wildness, and over 1,200 of them have been doing so in Somerset.

# data[].attributes.headline
Steve, YGS Landscapes, Urban School Microforest

# data[].attributes.subject
Steve, YGS Landscapes, Urban School Microforest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Image: John Allen)

Plymouth has a new urban "forest" after children planted hundreds of trees in a pioneering move which could see every city school have its own woodland. Pupils at Mount Wise Community Primary School planted more than 220 trees - including oak, willow, hawthorn, rowan and other varieties - as part of a project dreamed up by city business YGS Landscapes, which envisages a "forest" at every school in Plymouth.

The Mount Wise micro-forest was planted using a method developed by world-renowned ecologist Dr Akira Miyawaki, which means it has the potential to grow 10 times faster, be 20 times more biodiverse, and up to 30 times better at absorbing carbon compared to more traditional ways of creating woodland. The end result will deliver benefits for the environment and air quality.

The micro-forest project started in 2021 when the school wanted to breathe new life into an overgrown and unused playground. It put out a plea for help at the same time YGS Landscapes was looking to create Plymouth's first urban micro-forest.
READ NEXT: Cafe named after Capt Scott's ship opens in Devonport's listed 'flatiron' building
Volunteers, including Plymouth Albion rugby players, provided time, labour, equipment, and donations. Stonehouse-based charity Millfields Inspired backed the project as part of its Widening Horizons schools programme, which is expanding into Devonport. Plymouth businessman Nigel Pay acted as project manager.

The finished woodland included a forest school seating and learning area, to help children study and engage with the environment. And to help bring learning to life,YGS Landscapes' managing director Steve Warren-Brown penned a children's book series, illustrated by artist Steve Evans, named My Wacky Forest, playing on the name of Dr Miyawaki.

The first three books in the series feature lead character Mushi, a "fun guy" mushroom who introduces young readers to colourful woodland creatures to convey stories about the natural environment in a fun and informative way. The books, of which more are planned, have been adopted into the curriculum at Mount Wise, so the micro-forest, forest school and books can work together to educate and entertain young environmentalists.

All children received copies of the books at a tree-planting event and enjoyed a storytelling session in the forest school area. YGS Landscapes now plans to create a programme that unites schools, volunteers and businesses seeking to offset carbon and support community projects and give every school its own forest, either on its own land or within public spaces.

Mr Warren-Brown said: "I wanted to create Plymouth's first urban micro-forest, and that's been achieved, with the help of an enthusiastic school, supportive sponsors and generous volunteers. I'm exceptionally proud to have brought my vision and books to life in this way. This is the culmination of much hard work, creativity and passion - and hopefully just the start of a project with huge potential.

"Micro-forests are incredible for our climate and community; they act as a 'super-lung' by improving air quality in the area around it - and who wouldn't want that to be a part of every school? For communities, the advantages are obvious, benefiting the next generation in many ways, and for businesses looking to offset their carbon and support socially responsible projects, it presents a huge opportunity."

Helen Jennings, head of Mount Wise Community Primary School, said: "We put out a call to our community to support us in creating an outside learning space, and we now have this incredible urban forest. It's been an exciting journey with so much learnt along the way, and is only the beginning. We want our children and the community to get involved, learn more about the environment, and enjoy the forest for generations to come."

Andy Botterill, trustee of Millfields Inspired, said: "We were keen to support this project; something that benefits children's learning, community connections, and helps the environment is the type of initiative that fits perfectly with our objectives. With our Widening Horizons programme expanding into Devonport, we help children learn more about the world of work and possibilities open to them, and this project is a great starting point."
Want m ore of the news you love? Sign up to our bespoke newsletters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plymouth's first urban 'forest' planted at city school

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Plymouth has a new urban "forest" after children planted hundreds of trees in a pioneering move which could see every city school have its own woodland. Pupils at Mount Wise Community Primary School planted more than 220 trees - including oak, willow, hawthorn, rowan and other varieties - as part of a project dreamed up by city business YGS Landscapes, which envisages a "forest" at every school in Plymouth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fantastic Fungi is a documentary on Netflix about fungi. There are thousands of species of fungi all over the world, some edible, some medicinal and some poisonous. Fungi are the lymphatic system of the Earth, they break down waste, clean soil, remove toxins, absorb and store co2 underground, all the while tasting great. Whether you want to eat the Chicken of the woods, for it's similarities to chicken in texture and taste, or use Lion's Mane to strengthen your immune system and regrow nerves, the magical nature of fungi is endless.

There was an experiment using fungi, to see it's effect on waste products. In the study there were four piles saturated with diesel and other petroleum waste. One was a controlled pile, one pile was treated with enzymes, one pile treated with bacteria, and one pile was inoculated with mushroom spores. The fungi absorbs the oil so the fungi is producing enzymes for oxidases, that break carbon-hydrogen bonds. These are the same bonds that hold hydrocarbons together so the fungi becomes saturated with oil.

The scientists got a surprise when they returned six weeks later, after they removed all the tarps and all the other piles were dead, dark and stinky. The fungi pile on the other hand, was covered with hundreds of pounds of Oyster mushrooms, some of these mushrooms are very happy mushrooms, very large, which shows how much nutrition they could obtain. But something else happened, they sporulated spores which attract insects, birds then came, bringing in seeds, and that pile became an oasis of life. T his shows how important fungi is to nature.

The mushroom you get is similar to an apple to a tree, as what you don't see is the vast underground covered in fungi, just how our immune system is mostly in our gut. This is called mycelium, mycelium is the vegetative part of fungus or fungus-like bacterial colony, consisting of a mass of branching, thread-like hyphae. The mass of hyphae is sometimes called Shiro, especially within the fairy ring fungi. Fungal colonies composed of mycelium are found in and around on soil and many other substrates.

Mycelium has more networks than our brain has neural pathways, and works in much the same way, with electrolytes, electrical pulses. Their the most common species on Earth their everywhere. Just to give you an idea of how much fungi are in the forest, your walking through about 300 miles of fungi, under every footstep that you take, and that's all over the world. They form these massive links, it's like a big web just growing through the forest. Mycelium that can grow out even just 3 foot can have trillions, of end branching's, almost everyone knows about the computer internet, the mycelium shares the same network design.

Tree's are communicating using the mycelium as pathways, their connecting one tree to another, their using the mycelium to feed one another, in other words one tree can swap nutrients with another tree using mycelium as the passageway. We often think kin recognition as an animal behaviour, humans love their babies, we know it's our baby and we're going to look after that baby. We never thought that plants can do that but, we're finding in our research that plants can recognize their own kin. So these mother tree's recognize their kin through their mycorrhizal networks, the mother tree and the baby seedling are sending signals talking to each other. When their connected together and carbon is moving between plants, the trees are supporting the weaker ones. If the mother tree knows that there are pests around, and that she is under danger, she will increase her competitive environment towards her own babies, so that they regenerate further away. It's a magical thing that could not happen without fungi.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fantastic Fungi is a documentary on Netflix about fungi. There are thousands of species of fungi all over the world, some edible, some medicinal and some poisonous. Fungi are the lymphatic system of the Earth, they break down waste, clean soil, remove toxins, absorb and store co2 underground, all the while tasting great.

# data[].attributes.headline
 Climate Vulnerability Monitor (CVM3) biophysical data explorer. Global assessment of the impacts and risks of human-induced climate change. A tool to help policy makers understand their local climate challenges and make better decisions for a resilient future in their countries.

# data[].attributes.subject
 Climate Vulnerability Monitor (CVM3) biophysical data explorer. Global assessment of the impacts and risks of human-induced climate change. A tool to help policy makers understand their local climate challenges and make better decisions for a resilient future in their countries.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
​​CMF developed the visual interface of the interactive map for the Climate Vulnerability Monitor (CVM3) biophysical data explorer. The Climate Vulnerability Monitor is an independent global assessment of the impacts and risks of human-induced climate change. As a digital database, it is a tool which can help policy makers understand their local climate challenges and make better decisions for a resilient future in their countries. In November 2022, our CEO Bernd Hezel presented the CVM3 Data Explorer for the Climate Vulnerability Forum at the COP27. Watch the presentation here.

CMF also scripted and produced so-called impact stories, which bring climate data to life with concrete lived experiences. The video case studies from Bangladesh, Ghana, Kenya, Philippines and St. Lucia will be online soon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
​​CMF developed the visual interface of the interactive map for the Climate Vulnerability Monitor (CVM3) biophysical data explorer. The Climate Vulnerability Monitor is an independent global assessment of the impacts and risks of human-induced climate change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
My2050 calculator - create your pathway for the UK to be net zero by 2050

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
2050 calculator of UK greenhouse gas emissions for your pathway of lever ambition levels

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With around a quarter of our total personal carbon footprint coming from food, what we choose to eat can have a huge impact, not just on our health, but on the planet's too.

But there is a huge amount of controversy, confusion and conflicting claims about the real impact of the different things we eat - especially given that so much of our food today contains multiple ingredients from all over the world. The connection between animal agriculture and climate change is probably the most contentious area of all.

Check out the Our World in Data site for some fascinating illustrations of the relative impacts of different types of foods - some of them might really surprise you!

There is a lot of information in this section of our website - because when you get behind the headlines things are not necessarily quite as black and white as they may seem...

Please note any recommendations given in this section are just a sample and certainly not exhaustive - if you know of a great farm or anybody else producing food in a progressive, climate-friendly way please let us know so we can look at adding them.

The big question - should we stop eating meat and dairy to combat climate change?

According to the United Nations, livestock farming contributes at least 14.5% of all global greenhouse gas emissions - more than all the world's cars, trucks, planes and ships.

Meat and dairy consumption is increasing rapidly as the world gets richer. In fact, over the same period that the world's human population has doubled, meat consumption has increased fivefold.

Around 80% of all the world's farmland is devoted to raising animals, and about half of all the crops grown worldwide are fed to domestic livestock rather than humans.

Globally, we now slaughter over 70 billion animals for food each year, and clearing of wild land to farm animals is a leading cause of deforestation and biodiversity loss.

The largest increase in livestock numbers has been among chickens and pigs, but the number of cattle and sheep on the planet has also doubled over the past 50 years.

In fact, humans and our few species of domesticated livestock now account for 96% of all the biomass of mammals on the planet, while all the world's wild mammal species combined make up just 4%.

At current levels, climate scientists warn that global livestock farming and meat consumption will take us well beyond the critical 'safe' threshold of 1.5 degrees of climate warming.

There is broad agreement among everyone from the United Nations' International Panel on Climate Change to the UK government's own Climate Change Committee that a key step needed to help avoid climate breakdown must be a significant reduction in meat and dairy consumption.

But is it really so black and white?

Find out more about the impacts of meat and other kinds of foods in Oxford University's Meat the Future resource.

There are clearly big differences between animals living outdoors on permanent pasture on a Cornish farm (land that was deforested centuries ago) and cattle grazing on recently-cut Amazon rainforest or farmed in their thousands in intensive feedlots.

And while 'growing' animals for meat generally uses much more land and water than the resources needed to grow a similar volume of protein-rich plant foods such as beans or nuts, the reality is that farming crops for human consumption is very difficult in some parts of the world, for example where rainfall is unpredictable.

In these subsistence communities, animals can convert plant matter like grass and thorns, which humans can't eat, into nutrient dense meat and milk (although climate breakdown may unravel this food security - with one-quarter of Kenya's cattle having died due to drought over recent years, for example).

Cornwall is not a place where other foods cannot be grown. However, many of our upland areas are too poor for growing crops, and our topography, soil and climate make the whole of the Duchy supremely suited to growing grass - and therefore farming livestock.

If grazed well, the grass and other plants in permanent pastures and herbal leys can keep growing and photosynthesising nearly all year here (unlike trees), locking carbon from the air down through their roots into the soil, while also allowing meat and milk to be produced.

However, right now much of the grass that we see Cornwall's livestock grazing on is a temporary monoculture of high energy rye grass. This does not have the same carbon capturing benefit of a herbal ley, and generally requires significant artificial fertiliser use and ploughing - both of which are bad for the climate.

‍

All cows, sheep and other ruminants burp methane. In fact, 80% of all livestock-related greenhouse gas emissions come from ruminant animals, mostly cattle.

Methane is also released from animal waste rotting in manure heaps and dairy farm slurry stores (including pig and poultry farms, etc).This map shows how the UK's methane emissions correlate closely with the parts of the country with most dairy and livestock farms.

It is often argued that, because it lasts only a short time in the atmosphere (decades rather than hundreds of years like CO2), the methane being produced by livestock today is simply replacing what was produced by animals in the recent past.

While it is true that the ruminant population in Cornwall has not hugely changed, and our local cows produce less methane than animals in other parts of the world that eat a rougher diet, the sheer number of ruminants worldwide and the scale of the pits used to contain their waste has ballooned in recent years.

This is a major problem because methane is 86 times more powerful than CO2 as a greenhouse gas over the first 20 years after it is emitted.

Livestock emissions combined with the large amounts of methane also being released by the fossil fuel industry mean levels of this gas in the atmosphere are now rising worryingly fast.

And we're also facing a methane double whammy ...

The Earth's atmosphere has already heated on average by over one degree, and places that hold truly gigantic stores of ancient natural methane, such as the frozen lakes and permafrost in the Arctic, are starting to melt. The potential for these vast methane stores to be released could lead us into rapid and uncontrolled climate breakdown.

Urgently addressing ALL emissions of methane, be they from livestock or industry, could therefore buy us a bit more time to respond to this threat.

There are various areas of research looking at how to address methane emissions from animal agriculture, for example by adding feed additives such as seaweed to limit the amount that cattle burp.

Other initiatives include the Bennamann scheme (shown in our film) to turn the methane released from slurry lagoons into fuel, and the promotion of pasture-fed systems to fully or partly offset livestock emissions by drawing atmospheric carbon down into the soil.

But given the urgency of the problem, should we be doing more?

At the COP26 climate talks in Glasgow in 2021, over 100 countries pledged to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030, and some countries are already taking decisive steps to try to meet this goal.

Is factory farming actually more environmentally friendly?

For example, nearly half New Zealand's total greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture, mainly methane, and plans are now afoot to charge farmers for their emissions, while in Ireland, where 35% of national greenhouse gases come from farming (the highest level in Europe), plans have been mooted to cull a large proportion of the dairy herd.

The Netherlands has the highest density of livestock in Europe and is the continent's biggest meat exporter. The government there is looking at buying out 3,000 of the country's most polluting farms, or compensating them to transition to less intensive farming methods, with the aim of reducing livestock numbers by one-third.

Some people argue that animals in intensive large commercial systems have lower lifetime impacts than free range animals, because they take up much less land.

Because they're indoors with food in constant supply, the animals don't waste energy moving around to forage or trying to keep warm, meaning they grow faster, producing more meat or milk more quickly. Cows fed on concentrated feed may also burp less methane than pasture-fed ones grazing outdoors, since grass is harder to digest.

But can animal farming actually help to fight climate change?

However, this ignores the huge amounts of energy and 'ghost acres' required to keep these intensive systems going. While the footprint of a factory farm or feedlot may seem relatively small, it will be responsible for vast emissions due to the amount of land worldwide being ploughed up and sprayed with chemicals to grow feed crops like soya.

In fact a chicken breast from a factory farm is very likely to have more soya in it than a similar amount of tofu, because of the quantity of soya the chicken would have eaten in its short life to produce that meat.

Intensively farmed animals are also often treated with high doses of antibiotics, chemicals, medicines and growth hormones, etc.

The planet's soils are a vast carbon sink, estimated to hold about three times more carbon than the atmosphere, so we must protect them at all costs.

Large herbivores have played a key role in the evolution of our landscape throughout the ages, helping to build up soils as they graze and defecate.

It has been proposed that increasing the amount of carbon-rich soil organic matter (e.g. compost, animal dung, etc) in soil by just 0.4% each year over a number of years could be enough to compensate for all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions.

Right now, however, the opposite is happening, with many soils eroding and degrading, releasing their stored carbon and adding to global greenhouse gas emissions.

Soils with a greater organic matter content could be lifesavers in other ways as climate change ramps up too. Healthy soils are much better at storing water - helping to prevent flooding in winter, and also retaining moisture to help crops grow and keep rivers flowing in dry periods.

Regeneratively-farmed, pasture fed livestock play an essential role in soil recovery, and so could be really important in fighting climate change.

While consumption of industrially-farmed meat and dairy at current levels is bad for human health and unsustainable for the planet, regeneratively farmed, pasture fed livestock could help cushion climate impacts and boost the capacity of our soils to grow healthy food without damaging artificial fertilisers. Is soil carbon really a silver bullet to solve the climate crisis?

At the moment, however, only a fraction of animals in the UK are farmed in this way, and if all farming was regenerative this would support far fewer animals - producing less milk and meat than the amount currently consumed.

While this could have significant benefits for biodiversity, the climate, and also human health, it could be a very hard sell with a public accustomed to cheap meat and dairy. It would also cause massive upheaval in the farming industry, with many farmers either going out of business or having to significantly change their farming practices.

Farming and the food system we have right now is a result of government policy, subsidy regimes, supermarket contracts and foreign trade deals. Such a huge change in farming practice would require major government intervention and support.

It's complicated!
Another very interesting resource is the Can we restore our soils and grow food without animals?
'Grazed and Confused' report from the Food Climate Research Network at Oxford Martin School, which explains more about soil health, soil carbon, and how livestock farming interacts with this. But don't we need meat and dairy to get enough protein?
https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/reports/fcrn_gnc_report.pdf
Working through the confusion to find climate-friendly animal products

The Northern Kenya Rangelands Carbon Project is the world's first large-scale grasslands soil carbon project. By changing grazing practices it aims to improve the soils over 1.9 million hectares, aiming to remove and store 50 million tons of CO2 over 30 years - the same as the emissions of over 10 million cars - as well as improving habitat for endangered species.

Projects like this could be really exciting. However, it is important to note that the soil's carbon storage mechanisms are still not fully understood.

It is very unlikely that soil can continue absorbing more and more carbon indefinitely. It is believed that soil carbon content reaches equilibrium after a few decades, so the benefits of carbon sequestration through good grazing management - although very important - will be time limited.

There is also uncertainty over how long any sequestered carbon may remain in the soil, and changing conditions (droughts, floods, over grazing, change of farming system, etc) could lead to any stored carbon being rapidly lost.

So by far the best way to keep carbon locked down in the soil is to reduce the conversion of wild land (forests, scrub, etc), which holds very stable carbon stores, into grazing for cattle or ploughed arable land.

As well as farming more regeneratively, returning at least some of the land currently used for livestock farming to a more natural state could also be very important in reversing soil carbon losses.

So how can I be sure the meat I'm eating is climate friendly?

You can find loads more information about soil health - and how that links in with human health - on the brilliant Regenerative Food and Farming website (regenerativefoodandfarming.co.uk)

It is traditionally thought that creating sufficient soil fertility to grow cereals or other crops on a large scale must either involve using livestock as part of the rotation or artificial fertilisers.

However, a movement is developing called "veganics", which uses a sophisticated composting system to grow organic produce without either chemicals, manure or any other animal products to improve the soil. Will this be part of the future solution?

Find out more here.

Meat and dairy are certainly good sources of protein. However, in the UK we are already eating about 50% more protein than is good for us, according to the National Diet and Nutrition Survey.

For health, men should eat on average 55g and women 45g of protein daily. That's about two palm-sized portions - but these do not only need to come from animal sources.

Animal products, while high in protein, can also be high in fats, and it is a good idea for both the climate and your health to replace some of your meat and dairy intake with other protein-rich foods such as tofu, nuts, pulses, oats, brown rice and eggs.

You may find a plethora of confusing labels certifying various forms of farming methods and animal welfare on meat and dairy products - but what do they actually mean?

Around 50,000 British farmers are accredited to Red Tractor standards, which form the basis of buying and sourcing specifications for major supermarkets, household brands and restaurant chains.

Red Tractor certification means the product is traceably British and complies with certain rules around use of pesticides and antibiotics, animal welfare etc., but not soil health.

You will also be able to find links to useful information and good local farm businesses and growers through the following sites:
Nature Friendly Farming Network
The RSPCA Assured logo on meat, fish, dairy and egg products means the animals were reared to set welfare standards. However, this has nothing to do with the farming system and its potential climate or environmental impact.
Remember that just because a farm is 'local' does not mean that the meat it produces is low impact. Unless the animals are pasture fed they might be eating food grown in climate-wrecking systems and imported from the other side of the world! Other sites for finding local, regeneratively farmed/ organic produce (not necessarily meat):Community Supported Agriculture

LEAF marque accreditation is granted to farmers who meet certain standards in farm practices to help tackle the climate and ecological emergencies, including reduced antibiotic use in animals, use of renewables, soil and water management, and habitat protection. Nearly 900 businesses, farming 310,537 hectares of land around the world, have LEAF marque certification.

Products marked with the Soil Association logo are organic - this means they have been produced without any artificial chemical additives such as feed, medicines, pesticides, fertilisers etc.

This is great for the soil and the nutritional quality of the product. However, organic farming may also involve practices that are damaging for soil carbon storage, such as ploughing, to break down the remnants of previous crops grown in a field (unlike conventional farming, where this may be done using herbicides).

Some farms grow to organic principles but do not pay to have Soil Association accreditation.

To have had a really positive impact on soil health, the most climate friendly meat and dairy will come from pasture-fed animals that were raised without chemical inputs and moved in a mob grazing system across herbal leys made up of a variety of deep-rooted plants.

While an increasing number of farmers around Cornwall, such as those featured in Food for Thought, are using at least some of these practices, they are still very much in the minority, so we asked our film's presenter Lisa Guy for some tips on how customers can have the most positive climate impact with any meat they buy. This is what she told us:

Trewithen Dairy - Earth Milk

"Unfortunately, labelling and signposting to help people find good meat is still limited, but a really valuable place to start is to start asking questions.

"Ask your butcher, the pub, the café, the restaurant, the shop... where does this meat come from?

"Is it local? Is it pasture fed and finished? Is it from a regenerative or organic farm?

"Don't feel nervous or embarrassed about asking! This action really can have an impact. If outlets realise that people want to buy 'better' meat this will start to inform them - and will be a huge encouragement to farmers who are working to produce high quality, high welfare, environmentally-friendly meat.

"Ideally, try not to buy meat in the supermarket, but take the time to find a local farm, farmer's market, business or butcher that is selling 'better' meat."

This is not going to be feasible for everyone, so if you do buy supermarket meat, organic is the best option.

Some organic veg box schemes also include meat options, so you can have meat delivered to your door - but make sure to ask them the same questions about how that meat was farmed for soil and climate.

Also remember that you don't just have to buy prime cuts. There are cheaper cuts, particularly with beef, like shin and stew bones for making amazing broth, that are packed with flavour and nutrition.

Check out Lisa's website. Even if you don't want to buy one of her beef boxes, there's lots to read about all the other climate and nature-friendly initiatives going on at Higher Keigwin Farm:

His high-end mutton (not lamb) now sells to some of the top restaurants in London.

Is a plant-based diet the answer?

It is hard to have any idea about the farming system behind supermarket milk, as milk from individual farms is collected and mixed together in big milk tankers.

Because their margins are so small, most dairy farmers have little option but to focus on getting the maximum possible yield out of their land and animals. Many farms today are therefore large, industrial operations using a lot of bought-in products and/ or growing feeds like maize that can cause other serious environmental problems due to ploughing, soil run-off etc.

If you do buy milk at the supermarket, choosing organic will mean the cows have not been treated with antibiotics or other chemicals, and the feed they have eaten will not have been grown with chemical inputs like fertilisers or pesticides, etc. - although they may have been transported long distances and been produced in ways that are not particularly beneficial to the soil or climate.

However, there is a small but growing number of commercial dairies are starting to explore more pasture-based systems, where cows are being grass fed for most or all of the year.

Some other recommended dairies in Cornwall include Treen Farm near Land's End, a small organic farm selling milk through a variety of outlets here: treenfarm.co.uk/our-products/

One standard aspect of the general dairy industry is the separation of calves from their mothers when they are just a few days old. This inevitably causes distress for the animals, but results in greater milk production than allowing the calves to suckle naturally from their mothers.

There is now a small but growing movement of dairies that allow cows to keep their calves 'at foot'. Milk sharing in this way delivers a smaller yield but ensures higher animal welfare by permitting mother and calf to express their natural behaviours.

Is a plant-based diet good for me?

Climate-friendlier dairy doesn't only have to be a small-scale, niche thing. Trewithen is one of Cornwall's biggest dairies, with capacity to process 150 million litres of milk per year and produce enough clotted cream for 100,000 cream teas a day.

Its Earth Milk project started in 2020, with two of its supplier farmers spearheading research into how to to produce carbon neutral milk.

Hundreds of boreholes have been dug with the help of satellite positioning technology and thousands of soil samples have been sent to independent laboratories, showing that - through changes to land management - the organic content of most of the soils tested is increasing year-on-year.

The aim is to prove that farms within the programme can offset the greenhouse gas footprint of their milk production process through measures like reducing fertiliser use, improving wildlife, planting trees and hedges and grazing cattle on rich herbs.

To achieve this, the farms will need to add 0.1% organic matter per hectare per year to their soils, which Trewithen believe will draw down 8.9 tonnes of extra CO2 per hectare.
If you're choosing a plant-based diet, do it well!

Trewithen is supplied by 36 farms, all operating within 25 miles of the dairy, and it will be inviting a further two to four farms to join the project in 2023.

All its supplier farms must meet certain standards, such as allowing the cows to graze on grass for at least 120 days a year, and soil carbon measurement is being made a requirement too.

You won't be buying Earth Milk in the supermarket any time soon though - this is still very much in the trial stages, with no claims being made yet about carbon neutrality.

Bridget Whell, one of the farmers involved in the trial, said: "They reckon it takes about five years to get to where we'd like to be - i.e. not relying on chemical bagged nitrogen fertilisers at all. The soil is everything. Whatever you farm, ultimately it depends on soil - if we can get it right everything else blossoms on top of that."

Are you a farmer keen to farm for soil health and climate?

Check out these useful resources to get support on your journey:

With eight billion people on Planet Earth, set to rise to at least 10 billion, we clearly have to take steps to address the impact of what we're eating.

There will not be one single answer to the many issues posed by our food system. Unsettlingly sci-fi as they may sound, it is likely that in the future at least some of what we eat may be industrially-produced foods made by a process called precision fermentation (read more here) - or lab grown 'real' meat (which doesn't involve farming or killing any animals) here.

Why are vegan products more expensive?

In the meantime, our current consumption of industrially-farmed meat and dairy is still too high, with the average British person consuming over 60kg of meat per year - compared with just 3kg per year for the average Indian.

However, this is a significant fall compared with the amount of meat we ate 20 years ago. Up to 10% of people in the UK now identify as either vegan or vegetarian. Of course not everybody can or will be prepared to go this far, but it could make a huge difference if the remaining 90% reduced their meat and dairy intake - particularly of cheap, industrially-produced supermarket or takeaway meat products.

Treating animal products more as an occasional treat, and trying to buy meat and milk from local, regeneratively farmed, pasture-fed animals could have a really beneficial climate impact.

Growing crops to directly feed humans takes only a fraction of the land needed for farming animals. However, it's important to recognise that vegetable farming can have harmful impacts too. Conventional plant growing (which also includes the ryegrass and other crops grown to feed livestock) often involves soil-damaging ploughing and use of artificial fertiliser - especially where animals are not used as part of the rotation to improve soil health.

However, there are increasing numbers of local growing initiatives across Cornwall and beyond now using permaculture and no-dig systems, working to produce healthy food while protecting the soil and its precious carbon - and it is not necessarily only small-scale, community-based operations looking much more seriously at these methods.

None of its fields are now left bare after harvest, but are planted with a varied cover crop of plants that feed pollinators and birds, replenish the soil and also hold it together to prevent flooding of neighbouring villages. The company has stopped ploughing, now using a strip tiller instead to keep soil disturbance to a minimum and keep carbon locked down into the soil. Wildlife and worms have flourished, as well as predator insects that feed on crop pests. As a result the company's use of expensive chemicals like fertilisers and pesticides has dropped significantly.
Rewilding - a threat to food production?

Many people are eating a lot more animal protein than is good for health (high consumption of red meat, especially processed meat, has been associated with higher incidence of heart disease, type 2 diabetes, stroke and certain cancers).

But is a diet with no animal protein at all any better?

The growing number of people cutting out animal products for either ethical or environmental reasons has led to a veritable profusion of plant-based burgers, sausages, milks, protein bars and other vegan convenience foods on sale in our shops. With big brands, supermarkets and fast food outlets all cashing in on people's desire to go plant based, it's very easy to be a bad vegan.

A common argument against these processed plant-based foods is that producing them consumes a lot of energy, whilst they may come from the other side of the world, be wrapped in plastic packaging, laden with salts, sugars, other additives and very low on nutrients and fibre.

However, it's not actually for vegans to eat any of these processed foods. And of course many non-vegans eat huge amounts of processed foods too. Breakfast cereals, crisps, biscuits, cakes, ready meals, takeaways and sweets - not to mention processed meats and ready meals - form a large part of many people's diets.

In fact, over half of all the calories consumed in the UK now come from ultra processed foods - products with multiple unpronounceable ingredients that have undergone industrial interventions, such as extrusion, moulding and milling making them unrecognisable from their original form. Regular consumption of such foods has been implicated in health risks ranging from cancer and dementia.

Animal products are generally richer than plant foods in micronutrients such as iron, calcium, zinc, Vitamin A and particularly vitamin B12 (which is essential for proper functioning of the nervous system).

New environmental farming subsidies?

However, both the British Dietetic Association and NHS have stated that a well-balanced vegan diet is healthy, safe and nutritionally adequate for all stages of life including, pregnancy, lactation and infancy.

It may seem daunting to have to cook healthy meat-free meals from scratch, but it's probably much easier than you think, and there is a vast selection of plant-based recipe ideas online to save you time, energy and imagination.

There are many easy hacks to make low-cost, healthy meals in pretty much the same way as with meat - for example, swapping the mincemeat in bolognaise or lasagne for a tin of lentils, or using chickpeas to make a tuna replacement topping on jacket potatoes. A spoonful of Marmite or a sprinkle of paprika will give a deep, savoury flavour to meat-free dishes.

You can find some easy and low-cost plant-based recipes here:

Cookery book The Green Roasting Tin has both vegan and vegetarian dishes - all super easy meals that are thrown into a roasting tin and cooked in the oven.

https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/collection/budget-vegan-recipes

Feel better/ deliciously ella - this app costs £2 a month (free trial at deliciouslyella.com). It but provides endless ideas for delicious, cheap and easy plant based meals.

While cutting down on animal products is one of the most important things you can do to reduce your carbon footprint, a good compromise for health and planet (unless you are choosing a vegan diet for ethical reasons) may be to eat predominantly plant-based foods (locally-sourced as far as possible) with just a small amount of animal protein sourced from local, organic, regeneratively farmed systems.

Plant-based milks can be more expensive than their dairy equivalents, meaning they may not be accessible to everybody.

This might seem counterintuitive given the greater amount of inputs required to produce milk - from animal feed, housing and medication to the energy required for milking machines, refrigeration, pasteurisation and transport. However, dairy farming is heavily subsidised by the government.

With a large number of people now regularly using plant-based milks (according to The Grocer magazine, over 60% of households have bought plant milks at some point), the cost is coming down though.

Plant-based meat replacements can be relatively expensive too, as they may have required a large amount of processing, packaging and transportation.

Healthier whole foods like nuts and pulses are mostly imported too, but there are a growing number of projects attempting to grow protein-rich plant foods in the UK. As our climate changes it's possible these will do better and better.

One of the first of these is Hodmedods (https://hodmedods.co.uk/), which has been successfully experimenting with pulses for some time. Their online shop sells British-grown lentils, chickpeas, and many more.

A number of Cornish initiatives are also experimenting with other unexpected crops from avocados to sunflowers. Is it possible that one day we will even have locally grown, low food miles soya?

Many livestock farmers are heavily reliant on taxpayer subsidies, and Animal Rebellion (plantbasedfuture.animalrebellion.org) is calling for the government to use this money to support farmers transition to a plant-based farming system instead.

One organisation, Farmers For Stock-Free Farming, has even been set up to support meat and dairy farmers who want to transition to animal-free agriculture.

Because only a small amount of land is needed to farm vegetables compared with meat, it is argued that, by drastically reducing the farm animal population, we could give most of the country's farmland back to nature, drawing down carbon from the atmosphere and hugely restoring biodiversity.

The UK government's advisory Climate Change Committee says that transitioning from grassland to forestland in England would increase the soil carbon stock by 25 tonnes per hectare - as well as the carbon that would be stored in the biomass of the trees themselves.

However, there are worries that large scale rewilding could end up with valuable farmland being planted with trees.... and lead to us needing to import even more of our food in the UK (we already import about 50% of what we eat).

This is an understandable concern, especially as climate impacts affecting other parts of the world that we currently import our food from could leave us increasingly vulnerable in future.

There's a very good argument for us becoming much more self sufficient in food locally, so we certainly would need to avoid rewilding prime agricultural land.

However, to put this into a bit more context, right now we already have large areas of land in Cornwall and the UK devoted to non-food production purposes, such as golf courses and farms growing daffodils or crops for biofuel. These areas dwarf any proposed rewilding schemes.

Do we actually need all-out rewilding? Fighting climate change and food production do not need to be mutually exclusive.

The post-Brexit shake-up of farming subsidies was due to start rewarding farmers with 'public funds for public goods' - i.e. for climate and environment-friendly practices such as tree planting, wetland restoration, soil improvement and buffer zones to prevent flooding - all of which would boost biodiversity and draw down carbon while allowing farms to continue producing food.

This Environmental Land Management Scheme (ELMS) could be a really exciting initiative, marking a total change from the basic payments system of subsidies previously used under the EU's Common Agricultural Policy, which simply paid farmers for the amount of land they kept in a farmable condition.

Unfortunately, due to recent political turmoil at the time of writing (December 2022) it is now unclear whether the ELMS scheme will still be rolled out, or if it is in what form.

The Sustainable Food Trust's report Feeding Britain from the Ground Up explores the potential impacts on land use, food production and individual diets if the UK were to transition to sustainable farming based on biological principles.

The following are just a few of some really interesting books that to go deeper into learning about livestock farming, its positive or negative environment impacts and why we've ended up with the situation we're in today - as well as varying views of what a better future for both food and nature may look like:

English Pastoral by James Rebanks

Small Farm Future by Chris Smaje

Dirt to Soil by Gabe Brown

Regenesis by George Monbiot

Rebirding by Benedict Macdonald

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Food For Thought a Cornwall Climate Care documentary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With around a quarter of our total personal carbon footprint coming from food, what we choose to eat can have a huge impact, not just on our health, but on the planet's too.

# data[].attributes.headline
Environmental Impacts of Food Production

# data[].attributes.subject
Environmental Impacts of Food Production

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Agriculture has a significant environmental impact in three key ways.

First, it requires large amounts of fresh water, which can cause significant environmental pressures in regions with water stress. It needs water as input and pollutes rivers, lakes, and oceans by releasing nutrients.

It is a crucial driver of climate change, responsible for around one-quarter of the world's greenhouse gas emissions.

Finally, agriculture has a massive impact on the world's environment due to its enormous land use. Half of the world's habitable land is used for agriculture.

Large parts of the world that were once covered by forests and wildlands are now used for agriculture. This loss of natural habitat has been the main driver for reducing the world's biodiversity. Wildlife can rebound if we reduce agricultural land use and allow natural lands to restore.

Ensuring everyone has access to a nutritious diet sustainably is one of the most significant challenges we face. On this page, you can find our data, visualizations, and writing relating to the environmental impacts of food.

Key insights on the Environmental Impacts of Food

Food production has a large environmental impact in several ways

What are the environmental impacts of food and agriculture?

The visualization here shows a summary of some of the main global impacts:

Food production accounts for over a quarter (26%) of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Half of the world's habitable land is used for agriculture. Habitable land is land that is ice- and desert-free.

70% of global freshwater withdrawals are used for agriculture.

78% of global ocean and freshwater eutrophication is caused by agriculture. Eutrophication is the pollution of waterways with nutrient-rich water.

94% of non-human mammal biomass is livestock. This means livestock outweigh wild mammals by a factor of 15-to-1. This share is 97% when only land-based mammals are included.

71% of bird biomass is poultry livestock. This means poultry livestock outweigh wild birds by a factor of more than 3-to-1.

Tackling what we eat, and how we produce our food, plays a key role in tackling climate change, reducing water stress and pollution, restoring lands back to forests or grasslands, and protecting the world's wildlife.

Half of the world's habitable land is used for agriculture

Around half of the world's habitable land is used for agriculture. Habitable land is land that is ice- and desert-free. This is what the visualization shows.

Agricultural land is the sum of pasture used for livestock grazing, and cropland used for direct human consumption and animal feed.

Agriculture is, therefore, the world's largest land user, taking up more area than forests, or wild grasslands.

Three-quarters of this agricultural land is used for livestock, which is pasture plus cropland used for the production of animal feed. This gives the world just 18% of global calories, and 37% of its protein. The other quarter of land is for crops for human consumption, which provide the majority of the world's calories and protein.

What you should know about this data

Other studies find similar distributions of global land: in an analysis of how humans have transformed global land use in recent centuries, Ellis et al. (2010) found that by 2000, 55% of Earth's ice-free (not simply habitable) land had been converted into cropland, pasture, and urban areas. This left only 45% as 'natural' or 'semi-natural' land.

The study by Joseph Poore and Thomas Nemecek (2018) estimates that 43% of ice- and desert-free land is used for agriculture. 83% of this is used for animal-sourced foods.

The difference in these figures is often due to the uncertainty of the size of 'rangelands'. Rangelands are grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, wetlands, and deserts that are grazed by domestic livestock or wild animals. The intensity of grazing on rangelands can vary a lot. That can make it difficult to accurately quantify how much rangelands are used for grazing, and therefore how much is used for food production.

But as the review above showed, despite this uncertainty, most analyses tend to converge on an estimate of close to half of habitable land being used for agriculture.

Food is responsible for one-quarter of the world's emissions

Food systems are responsible for around one-quarter (26%) of global greenhouse gas emissions.

This includes emissions from land use change, on-farm production, processing, transport, packaging, and retail.

We can break these food system emissions down into four broad categories:

30% of food emissions come directly from livestock and fisheries. Ruminant livestock - mainly cattle - for example, produce methane through their digestive processes. Manure and pasture management also fall into this category.

1% comes from wild fisheries, most of which is fuel consumption from fishing vessels.

Crop production accounts for around a quarter of food emissions. This includes crops for human consumption and animal feed.

Land use accounts for 24% of food emissions. Twice as many emissions result from land use for livestock (16%) as for crops for human consumption (8%).

Finally, supply chains account for 18% of food emissions. This includes food processing, distribution, transport, packaging, and retail.

Other studies estimate that an even larger fraction - up to one-third - of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from food production. These differences come from the inclusion of non-food agricultural products - such as textiles, biofuels, and industrial crops - plus uncertainties in food waste and land use emissions.

What you should know about this data

The source of this data is the meta-analysis of global food systems from Joseph Poore and Thomas Nemecek (2018), published in Science. This dataset is based on data from 38,700 commercially viable farms in 119 countries and 40 products.

Environmental impacts are calculated based on life-cycle analyses that consider impacts across the supply chain, including land use change, on-farm emissions, the production of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides, food processing, transport, packaging, and retail.

Greenhouse gas emissions are measured in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq). This means each greenhouse gas is weighted by its global warming potential value. Global warming potential measures the amount of warming a gas creates compared to CO2. In this study, CO2eq and warming effects are measured over a 100-year timescale (GWP100).

Emissions from food alone would take us past 1.5°C or 2°C this century

One-quarter to one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions come from our food systems. The rest comes from energy.

While energy and industry make a bigger contribution than food, we must tackle both food and energy systems to address climate change.

Michael Clark and colleagues modeled the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that would be emitted from food systems this century across a range of scenarios.

In a business-as-usual scenario, the authors expect the world to emit around 1356 billion tonnes of CO 2-we by 2100.

As the visualization shows, this would take us well beyond the carbon budget for 1.5°C - we would emit two to three times more than this budget. And it would consume almost all of our budget for 2°C.

Ignoring food emissions is simply not an option if we want to get close to our international climate targets.

Even if we stopped burning fossil fuels tomorrow - an impossibility - we would still go well beyond our 1.5°C target, and nearly miss our 2°C target.

What you should know about this data

The source of this data is the meta-analyses of global food systems from Michael Clark et al. (2020), published in Science.

Their 'business-as-usual' projection makes the following assumptions: global population increases in line with the UN's medium fertility scenario; per capita diets change as people around the world get richer (shifting towards more diverse diets with more meat and dairy); crop yields continue to increase in line with historical improvements, and rates of food loss and the emissions intensity of food production remain constant.

This is measured in global warming potential CO2 warming-equivalents (CO2-we). This accounts for the range of greenhouse gasses, not just CO2 but also others such as methane and nitrous oxide. We look at the differences in greenhouse gas metrics at the end of our articleon the carbon footprint of foods.

What we eat matters much more than how far it has traveled

'Eat local' is a common recommendation to reduce the carbon footprint of your diet. But it's often a misguided one.

Transport tends to be a small part of a food's carbon footprint. Globally, transport accounts for just 5% of food system emissions. Most of food's emissions come from land use change and emissions from their production on the farm.

Since transport emissions are typically small, and the differences between foods are large, what types of food we eat matter much more than how far it has traveled. Locally-produced beef will have a much larger footprint than peas, regardless of whether it's shipped across continents or not.

The visualization shows this.

Producing a kilogram of beef, for example, emits 60 kilograms of greenhouse gasses (CO 2-equivalents). The production of a kilogram of peas, shown at the bottom of the chart, emits just 1 kilogram of greenhouse gasses. Whether the beef or peas are produced locally will have little impact on the difference between these two foods.

The reason that transport accounts for such a small share of emissions is that most internationally traded food travels by boat, not by plane. Very little food is air-freighted; it accounts for only 0.16% of food miles. For the few products which are transported by air, the emissions can be very high: flying emits 50 times more CO 2 eq than boat per tonne kilometer.

Unlike aviation, shipping is a very carbon-efficient way to transport goods. So, even shipping food over long distances by boat emits only small amounts of carbon. A classic example of traded food is avocados. Shipping one kilogram of avocados from Mexico to the United Kingdom would generate 0.21kg CO 2 eq in transport emissions.This is only around 8% of avocados' total footprint.

Even when shipped at great distances, its emissions are much less than locally-produced animal products.

What you should know about this data

The source of this data is the meta-analyses of global food systems from Joseph Poore and Thomas Nemecek (2018), published in Science. This dataset is based on data from 38,700 commercially viable farms in 119 countries and 40 products.

Environmental impacts are calculated based on life-cycle analyses that consider impacts across the supply chain, including land use change, on-farm emissions, the production of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides, food processing, transport, packaging, and retail.

Greenhouse gas emissions are measured in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq). This means each greenhouse gas is weighted by its global warming potential value. Global warming potential measures the amount of warming a gas creates compared to CO2. In this study, CO2eq and warming effects are measured over a 100-year timescale (GWP100).

When we compare the carbon footprint of different types of foods, a clear hierarchy emerges.

Meat and dairy products tend to emit more greenhouse gasses than plant-based foods. This holds true whether we compare on the basis of mass (per kilogram), per kilocalorie, or per gram of protein, as shown in the chart.

Within meat and dairy products, there is also a consistent pattern: larger animals tend to be less efficient and have a higher footprint. Beef typically has the largest emissions; followed by lamb; pork; chicken; then eggs and fish.

What you should know about this data

This data presents global average values. For some foods - such as beef - there are large differences depending on where it is produced, and the farming practices used. Nonetheless, the lowest-carbon beef and lamb still have a higher carbon footprint than most plant-based foods.

The source of this data is the meta-analyses of global food systems from Joseph Poore and Thomas Nemecek (2018), published in Science. This dataset covers 38,700 commercially viable farms in 119 countries and 40 products.

Environmental impacts are calculated based on life-cycle analyses that consider impacts across the supply chain, including land use change, on-farm emissions, the production of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides, food processing, transport, packaging, and retail.

Greenhouse gas emissions are measured in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq). This means each greenhouse gas is weighted by its global warming potential value. Global warming potential measures the amount of warming a gas creates compared to CO2. For CO2eq, this is measured over a 100-year timescale (GWP100).

The most effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the food system is to change .

Adopting a more plant-based diet by reducing our consumption of carbon-intensive foods such as meat and dairy - especially beef and lamb - is an effective way for consumers to reduce their carbon footprint.

But there are also opportunities to reduce emissions by optimizing for more carbon-efficient practices and locations to produce foods. For some foods - in particular, beef, lamb, and dairy - there are large differences in emissions depending on how and where they're produced. This is shown in the chart.

Producing 100 grams of protein from beef emits 25 kilograms of carbon dioxide-equivalents (CO 2eq), on average. But this ranges from 9 kilograms to 105 kilograms of CO 2 eq - a ten-fold difference.

Optimizing production in places where these foods are produced with a smaller footprint could be another effective way of reducing global emissions.

What you should know about this data

The source of this data is the meta-analyses of global food systems from Joseph Poore and Thomas Nemecek (2018), published in Science. This dataset covers 38,700 commercially viable farms in 119 countries and 40 products.

Environmental impacts are calculated based on life-cycle analyses that consider impacts across the supply chain, including land use change, on-farm emissions, the production of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides, food processing, transport, packaging, and retail.

Greenhouse gas emissions are measured in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq). This means each greenhouse gas is weighted by its global warming potential value. Global warming potential measures the amount of warming a gas creates compared to CO2. For CO2eq, this is measured over a 100-year timescale (GWP100).

Explore data on the Environmental Impacts of Food

Research & Writing

More key articles on the Environmental Impacts of Food

Food production and climate change

Food miles and transport

Environmental impacts of meat and dairy

Land use and deforestation

Other articles on food impacts

Interactive charts on Environmental Impacts of Food Production

Endnotes

FAO. (2011). The state of the world's land and water resources for food and agriculture (SOLAW) - Managing systems at risk. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome and Earthscan, London.

Ellis, E. C., Klein Goldewijk, K., Siebert, S., Lightman, D., & Ramankutty, N. (2010). Anthropogenic transformation of the biomes, 1700 to 2000. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 19(5), 589-606.

Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F. N., & Leip, A. J. N. F. (2021). Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nature Food, 2(3), 198-209.

'Food miles' are measured in tonne-kilometers which represents the transport of one tonne of goods by a given transport mode (road, rail, air, sea, inland waterways, pipeline etc.) over a distance of one kilometer. Poore & Nemecek (2018) report that of the 9.4 billion tonne-kilometers of global food transport, air-freight accounted for only 15 million. This works out at only 0.16% of the total; most foods are transported by boat.

We get this footprint value as: [9000km * 0.023kg per tonne-kilometer / 1000 = 0.207kg CO2eq per kg].

Cite this work

Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this topic page, please also cite the underlying data sources. This topic page can be cited as:

Hannah Ritchie, Pablo Rosado and Max Roser (2022) - "Environmental Impacts of Food Production". Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: 'https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food' [Online Resource]

BibTeX citation

@article{owidenvironmentalimpactsoffood, author = {Hannah Ritchie and Pablo Rosado and Max Roser}, title = {Environmental Impacts of Food Production}, journal = {Our World in Data}, year = {2022}, note = {https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food} }

Reuse this work freely

All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license. You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.

The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.

All of our charts can be embedded in any site.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Environmental Impacts of Food Production

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What are the environmental impacts of food production? How do we reduce the impacts of agriculture on the environment?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Biochar is produced by heating organic material without oxygen and can be used to sequester carbon, improve plant growth, treat contaminated soils and for filtration.

Biochar is a useful and versatile charcoal-like substance that occurs as a residue of pyrolysis thermochemical conversion. Pyrolysis is process of converting biomass, such as plant matter, in a low-oxygen environment.

Achieving sustainable living standards for all demands innovative approaches to waste management, especially those that offer novel means to recovering or replacing nutrients lost due to industry and agriculture.

Industries such as forestry and agriculture represent some of the world's largest sources of residue materials. They are particularly rich sources of low-value biomass and feedstock. Many of these biodegradable materials often end up unused, producing potent greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as methane, carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide as they decay.

Biochar has a key role to play in reducing these emissions, but challenges surrounding affordability and its potential for mass-market adoption remain. Our research at EBRI aims to help extract maximum commercial value while minimising the environmental impact of these waste by-products.

While primarily known for its usefulness as an environmentally-friendly soil additive, biochar has a range of remarkable uses, including:

Improving soil health and biodiversity

Mitigating global warming via carbon capture

Absorbing harmful industrial by-products

Increasing agricultural productivity

Water filtration

Inclusion in construction materials

EBRI is actively working with partners on the use of biochar to decarbonise cities, in vertical farming applications and clean-up of contaminated land. We welcome collaboration opportunities with academia, government bodies and industry from around the world.

To contact us, email the EBRI Business Support Team or call us on 0121 204 3383.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biochar is a useful and versatile charcoal-like substance that occurs as a residue of pyrolysis thermochemical conversion. Pyrolysis is process of converting biomass, such as plant matter, in a low-oxygen environment. Achieving sustainable living standards for all demands innovative approaches to waste management, especially those that offer novel means to recovering or replacing nutrients lost due to industry and agriculture.

# data[].attributes.headline
Planting Urban Trees With Biochar - Stockholm

# data[].attributes.subject
Planting Urban Trees With Biochar - Stockholm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biochar use in planting urban trees_1461183230486

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our Bright Future was an ambitious and innovative partnership led by The Wildlife Trusts which brought together the youth and environmental sectors. It ran from 2016 to the end of 2022. This £33 million programme was funded by the National Lottery Community Fund. It was formed of 31

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Roughly one-third of all food produced worldwide is wasted. Where income is low, waste is generally unintentional and occurs on farms or during storage or distribution. In regions of higher income, food waste dominates further along the supply chain. Retailers and consumers reject food based on bumps, bruises, and coloring, or simply order, buy, and serve too much.

When food is wasted, all the energy, resources, and money that went into producing, processing, packaging, and transporting it are wasted, too. Producing uneaten food squanders a whole host of resources-seeds, water, energy, land, fertilizer, hours of labor, financial capital-and generates greenhouse gases at every stage. The food we waste is responsible for roughly 8 percent of global emissions.

Project Drawdown's Reduced Food Waste solution involves minimizing food loss and wastage from all stages of production, distribution, retail, and consumption. It replaces current reported trends in food waste by region.

We can reduce waste in many ways. In lower-income countries, improving infrastructure for storage, processing, and transportation is essential. In higher-income regions, major interventions are needed at the retail and consumer levels. National food-waste targets and policies can encourage widespread change. Beyond addressing emissions, these efforts can also help to meet future food demand.

If measures are taken to reduce food waste by improving storage and transport systems, generating public awareness, and changing consumer behavior, this solution could lead to substantial reductions in waste and carbon emissions.

Methodology

To evaluate the impact of reduced food waste, we created an independent model outside Project Drawdown's core model framework that projects food consumption and waste from 2020 to 2050. This was required due to the complexity of estimating country- and regional-scale food consumption and waste trends.

Total Addressable Market

We defined the global market for reduced food waste as the total demand for food, based on estimated kilocalories supplied per year for consumption by all of the people in the world. We projected the baseline food consumption for all countries up to 2060 in kilocalories per capita per year, using data compiled by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) for 2013. We forecasted future consumption using growth factors from Alexandratos and Bruinsma (2012), which reflect projected dietary changes. The projected dietary changes show significant impacts for countries like India and China, whose populations are expected to demand more carbon-intensive foods over the next 30 years.

We calculated total food loss and wastage according to regional estimates of waste generated at each supply chain stage (agricultural production, post-harvest handling and storage, processing, packaging, distribution, and consumption; FAO, 2011), applied to aggregated country-level food demand by commodity type. Current adoption of reduced food waste (defined as the amount of functional demand supplied in 2014) is considered to be 0 percent.

Adoption Scenarios

We calculated impacts of increased adoption of reduced food waste from 2020 to 2050 by comparing two growth scenarios with a reference scenario, in which the market share was fixed at current levels.

Adoption scenarios in this model grow linearly over time starting from the base year of 2014, and are considered complete in 2050. We chose linear growth trends because of the lack of country or regional data; additional behavioral research at more granular scales can reveal more representative adoption estimates.

Scenario 1: Total global food loss and wastage is reduced 50 percent by 2050.

Scenario 2: Total global food loss and wastage is reduced 75 percent by 2050.

Emissions Model

To estimate emissions, we drew commodity-specific carbon dioxide equivalent per-calorie values from several sources (see Audsley et al., 2010; Heller and Keoleian, 2014; Hoolohan et al., 2013; Tilman and Clark, 2014; Vieux et al., 2012) to estimate minimum, average, and maximum emissions factors per commodity. We multiplied the emissions factors by the baseline annual food demand by country and commodity to get the carbon dioxide equivalent values for food items over time. We aggregated emissions estimates by commodity type (cereals, roots and tubers, oilseeds and pulses, fruits and vegetables, meat, fish and seafood, milk) and regions used by Project Drawdown.

We applied FAO regional estimates of food loss and wastage by commodity types across the supply chain stages to aggregated emissions values associated with regional food demand. We calculated emissions reductions based on the incremental adoption of reduced food waste, which was applied across all stages of the supply chain. We then aggregated resulting emissions reductions to represent the total global reduction from avoided agricultural production.

Integration

We calculated the total reduction in food loss and wastage by weight and commodity type. We assumed that reduced loss and wastage can be diverted to feed current and future undernourished populations. We used diverted tonnage of food as an input in our Integrated Yield Model, which combines all agricultural production models to determine the annual yield required to meet the estimated food and bio-based product demand. Results from both demand-side solutions (Reduced Food Waste and Plant-Rich Diets), determine the need to convert land to cropland and grassland to meet future food demand. We applied emissions reductions associated with land conversion to Reduced Food Waste and Plant-Rich Diets solutions according to the proportion of their contribution to diverted food supply. We also applied the results from Reduced Food Waste to solution models in the Industry sector that use organic municipal solid waste.

Results

Between 2020 and 2050, Scenario 1 projects the reduction of 88.50 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions: 32.98 gigatons due to diverted agricultural production, 55.20 gigatons from avoided land conversion, and 0.32 gigatons from ecosystem protection.

Scenario 2 projects the reduction of 102.20 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions: 47.16 gigatons due to diverted agricultural production, 54.71 gigatons from avoided land conversion, and 0.32 gigatons from sequestration from ecosystem protection.

Discussion

Food loss and waste has many negative economic and environmental impacts. The global economic, environmental, and social cost of food wastage is estimated at US$2.6 trillion, which is nearly equal to the GDP of France (FAO, 2014). Food waste generates unnecessary greenhouse gas emissions and wastes both water and land, harming ecosystems.

Reducing food loss and waste can help close the over 60 percent gap between food available today and food needed in 2050, thereby working toward eliminating hunger. Although solutions at consumer level are difficult to implement and hard to measure, we must pursue them wherever consumer food waste is high. We must develop tools to standardize food loss and waste measurement and reporting. We must set food waste reduction targets at country levels and broken down to corporate, supplier, and consumer levels. We need to create incentives that change food waste behavior. By doing these things, we can reap the benefits of reducing food waste for the economy, the environment, society, and human health.

References

Alexandratos, N. and Bruinsma, J.. (2012). World agriculture towards 2030/2050: The 2012 revision. ESA Work. Pap, 3. Agricultural Development and Economics Division of the FAO http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph240/yuan2/docs/ap106e.pdf

Audsley, E., Brander, M., Chatterton, J. C., Murphy-Bokern, D., Webster, C., and Williams, A. G. (2010). How low can we go? An assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from the UK food system and the scope reduction by 2050. World Wildlife Fund and Food Climate Research Network. https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/6503

UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2011). Food Wastage Footprint & Climate Change. https://www.fao.org/3/bb144e/bb144e.pdf

UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2014). Food wastage footprint full-cost accounting: final report. https://www.fao.org/3/bb144e/bb144e.pdf

Heller, M. C. and Keoleian, G. A. (2014). Greenhouse Gas Emission Estimates of U.S. Dietary Choices and Food Loss: GHG Emissions of U.S. Dietary Choices and Food Loss. Journal of Industrial Ecology, pp 391-401. https://css.umich.edu/sites/default/files/publication/CSS14-23.pdf

Hoolohan, C., Berners-Lee, M., McKinstry-West, J., and Hewitt, C. N. (2013). Mitigating the greenhouse gas emissions embodied in food through realistic consumer choices. Energy Policy, 63 pp 1065-1074. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301421513009701

Tilman, D. and Clark, M. (2014). Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 515 (7528) pp 518-522. http://www.nature.com/articles/nature13959

Vieux, F., Darmon, N., Touazi, D., Soler, L. G. (2012). Greenhouse gas emissions of self-selected individual diets in France: Changing the diet structure or consuming less?. Ecological Economics, 75 pp 91-101. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0921800912000043

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Roughly one-third of the world's food is never eaten. By reducing loss and waste, we can reduce the need for land and resources used to produce food as well as the greenhouse gases released in the process.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Here, we present the individual solutions reviewed and assessed by Project Drawdown, including their relevant sector(s) and their impact on reducing heat-trapping gases. This list is extensive but not exhaustive, and we continue to add to it as a living project.

Project Drawdown uses different scenarios to assess what determined, global efforts to address climate change might look like. Both scenarios shown here are plausible and economically realistic. Drawdown Scenario 1 is roughly in line with 2˚C temperature rise by 2100, while Drawdown Scenario 2 is roughly in-line with 1.5˚C temperature rise at century's end.

The results shown here are based on projected emissions impact globally. The relative importance of a given solution can differ significantly depending on context and particular ecological, economic, political, or social conditions. We invite a deeper dive into the many particularities and nuances of all of these solutions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here, we present the individual solutions reviewed and assessed by Project Drawdown, including their relevant sector(s) and their impact on reducing heat-trapping gases. This list is extensive but not exhaustive, and we continue to add to it as a living project. Project Drawdown uses different scenarios to assess what determined, global efforts to address climate change might look like.

# data[].attributes.headline
Green Walls Insulation - Research from Plymouth University - Low Carbon Devon

# data[].attributes.subject
Green Walls Insulation - Research from Plymouth University - Low Carbon Devon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Green walls can reduce heat lost by buildings by over 30% in temperate climates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
They look great and can help keep heating bills low.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
New study: World map of the most important protected areas to avert a climate catastrophe

# data[].attributes.headline
Most important areas that need protecting to avert a climate catastrophe

# data[].attributes.subject
Most important areas that need protecting to avert a climate catastrophe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Irrecoverable Carbon in Earth's ecosystems. This map shows dense stores of ecosystem carbon which, if lost, could not be recovered by mid-century. From Noon et al. 2021. Mapping the irrecoverable carbon in Earth's ecosystems. Nature Sustainability.

These stores, which researchers call "irrecoverable carbon", are primarily mangroves, tropical forests and peatlands, as well as old-growth forests in temperate latitudes. The special protection of these crucial areas has another advantage: they are also havens of biodiversity. Thus, the targeted protection of these irretrievable carbon reservoirs can simultaneously make a significant contribution to species conservation.

"The consequences of releasing this stored carbon would stretch on for generations, undermining our last chance to stabilize Earth's climate at tolerable levels for nature and humanity," said Johan Rockström, Conservation International chief scientist and co-director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, a leader in climate and sustainability research. "We must act now to safeguard the planet's ability to serve as a carbon sink, which includes prioritizing these unique ecosystems."

The new worldwide map, published today in the journal Nature Sustainability, shows that half of Earth's irrecoverable carbon is highly concentrated on just 3.3% of land - primarily old-growth forests, peatlands and mangroves. These vast reserves of carbon are equivalent to 15 times the global fossil fuel emissions released last year.

Researchers say that knowing which ecosystems contain the greatest irrecoverable carbon stores can help governments focus global efforts to protect 30% of land by 2030. Targeted conservation would yield big gains - increasing the land under protection key areas by just 5.4% would keep 75% percent of Earth's irrecoverable carbon from being released into the atmosphere, researchers found.

An accompanying report, also released today, reveals that many of these irrecoverable carbon areas overlap with places containing high concentrations of biodiversity - meaning that protecting lands essential for climate stability would also conserve habitats for thousands of mammal, bird, amphibian and reptile species. The paper calls for the creation of "irrecoverable carbon reserves," new, area-based conservation measures designed to ensure irrecoverable carbon remains in these critical ecosystems.

According to the Nature Sustainability study, the largest and highest-density irrecoverable carbon ecosystems include

The tropical forests and peatlands of the Amazon biome (31.5 Gigatonnes irrecoverable carbon);

The Congo Basin (8.2 Gigatonnes);

Islands of Southeast Asia (13.1 Gigatonnes);

The temperate forests of northwestern North America (5.0 Gigatonnes);

Mangroves, seagrasses and tidal wetlands globally (4.8 Gigatonnes).

The study also details how vulnerable irrecoverable carbon areas are to human activity and climate change - and how much irrecoverable carbon is stored within Indigenous and protected lands. These key findings include

52% of the world's irrecoverable carbon currently lacks any formal protection or management;

More than a third of irrecoverable carbon (46.7 billion gigatonnes) is stored within the government-recognized lands of Indigenous peoples and local communities;

Across ecosystems, the highest concentrations of irrecoverable carbon are found in mangroves (218 tonnes per hectare, on average), tropical peatlands (193 t/ha) and boreal wetlands (173 t/ha).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New study: World map of the most important protected areas to avert a climate catastrophe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
11/18/2021 - New research out today from Conservation International maps the places on Earth that humanity must protect to avoid a climate catastrophe. These ecosystems contain what researchers call "irrecoverable carbon," dense stores of carbon that, if released due to human activity, could not be recovered in time for the world to prevent the most dangerous impacts of climate change.

# data[].attributes.headline
South West Environment and Climate Actions Network (SWeCAN) 

# data[].attributes.subject
South West Environment and Climate Actions Network (SWeCAN) 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The South West Environment and Climate Actions Network (SWeCAN) is an emerging initiative for anyone in the South West to learn more about climate positive action in the South West. Anyone can be involved, from local authorities, charities and individuals to international business in the region or l…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What comes to mind when you think of the climate change conversation? Puffed-up academics? Militant hippies? Infuriating climate sceptics? Only ten years to save the world? Yep - it's pretty overwhelming, pretty polarised, and we're here to help you fi...

https://api.entale.co/download/28a10b13-66ec-42d7-9c29-42ea1a7912e6/5d7cec8e-127d-4a94-bebc-b075d849aaa4/media.mp3

What comes to mind when you think of the climate change conversation? Puffed-up academics? Militant hippies? Infuriating climate sceptics? Only ten years to save the world? Yep - it's pretty overwhelming, pretty polarised, and we're here to help you find a way through this 'wicked problem' of climate change. In this episode of TEDxLondon's Climate Curious we're joined by the legendary TEDxLondon speaker and neuroscientist specialising in polarisation, Dr. Kris De Meyer, who gives us the tools to disarm ourselves of limiting values and opinions and instead approach the climate crisis from a place of pure action. Tune into our most empowering episode to date with Maryam Pasha and Ben Hurst where they explain why climate change is a wicked problem, debunk why the 2020 climate conversation feels so fragmented and hostile, and unpack the neuroscience at the centre of this polarising topic. Spoiler alert - it involves going on a journey to discover where your 'agency' and climate intersect. This week's Climate Confessions? Engaging with strangers on climate, vowing to be less judgemental and struggling to sort the recycling.

For a full list of sources and further reading in this episode visit the TEDxLondon site: https://tedxlondon.com/news/climate-curious-why-theres-much-more-to-climate-action-than-reducing-your-carbon-footprint/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why there's much more to climate action than reducing your carbon footprint - TEDxLondon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What comes to mind when you think of the climate change conversation? Puffed-up academics? Militant hippies? Infuriating climate sceptics? Only ten years to save the world? Yep - it's pretty overwhelming, pretty polarised, and we're here to help you fi...

# data[].attributes.headline
Biochar - Building homes for soil microbes

# data[].attributes.subject
Biochar - Building homes for soil microbes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BIOCHAR - Building homes for soil microbes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Biochar is a charcoal-like substance that's made by burning organic material from agricultural and forestry wastes (also called biomass) in a controlled process called . Although it looks a lot like common charcoal, biochar is produced using a specific process to reduce contamination and safely store carbon. During pyrolysis organic materials, such as wood chips, leaf litter or dead plants, are burned in a container with very little oxygen. As the materials burn, they release little to no contaminating fumes. During the pyrolysis process, the organic material is converted into biochar, a stable form of carbon that can't easily escape into the atmosphere. The energy or heat created during pyrolysis can be captured and used as a form of clean energy. Biochar is by far more efficient at converting carbon into a stable form and is cleaner than other forms of charcoal.

In terms of physical attributes , biochar is black, highly porous, lightweight, fine-grained and has a large surface area. Approximately 70 percent of its composition is carbon. The remaining percentage consists of nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen among other elements. Biochar's chemical composition varies depending on the feedstocks used to make it and methods used to heat it.
The concept of biochar is rooted in an ancient Amazonian practice
Although biochar technology is considered a more recent strategy for carbon sequestration, the practice of adding charred biomass to improve soil quality is not new. This process is modeled after a 2,000-year-old practice in the Amazonian basin, where indigenous people created areas of rich, fertile soils called terra preta (meaning "dark earth").

Whether these soils were intentionally made or are simply a by-product of farming and/or cooking practices is still . But one thing's for sure: The fertility of terra preta is significantly higher than the otherwise famously infertile soils of the Amazon. This explains why plants grown in terra preta soil grow faster, and are more nutrient-dense, than plants grown in neighboring soils. In fact, terra preta soils continue to hold carbon still today.
How to make biochar: A closer look into biochar production
The quality of feedstocks, or materials burned, have a direct impact on the quality of the final biochar product. Ideally, clean feedstocks with 10 to 20 percent moisture and high lignin content must be used-some good examples are field residues and woody biomass. Using contaminated feedstocks, including feedstocks from railway embankments or contaminated land, can introduce toxins into the soil, drastically increase soil pH and/or inhibit plants from absorbing minerals. The most common contaminants are heavy metals-including cadmium, copper, chromium, lead, zinc, mercury, nickel and arsenic-and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons.

Biochar can be manufactured through low-cost, small-scale production using modified stoves or kilns, or through large-scale, cost-intensive production, which utilizes larger plants and higher amounts of feedstocks. One of the most common ways to make biochar for on-farm use is through pyrolysis using a top-lit updraft biochar machine .
Applications of biochar in agriculture: enhancing soil and compost properties
Soil degradation is a major concern in agriculture globally. To address this burgeoning problem, researchers suggested applying biochar to degraded soils in order to enhance its quality. Some of the ways that biochar may help improve soil quality include:

enhancing soil structure

increasing water retention and aggregation

decreasing acidity

reducing nitrous oxide emissions

improving porosity

regulating nitrogen leaching

improving electrical conductivity

improving microbial properties

Biochar is also found to be beneficial for composting, since it reduces greenhouse gas emissions and prevents the loss of nutrients in the compost material. It also promotes microbial activity, which in turn accelerates the composting process. Plus, it helps the compost's ammonia losses, bulk density and odor.
How to use biochar to improve soil quality
Biochar is applied to agricultural soils using a variety of application rates and preparation techniques. The rate of application and preparation of the biochar will largely depend on specific soil conditions as well as on the materials used to make the biochar. It is often recommended to mix biochar with compost or other materials to inoculate it with nutrients and beneficial organisms.

The recommended method for applying biochar will vary depending on how healthy or nutrient-depleted your soil is. Before you use biochar in your own garden or farm, you should first consider the state of your soil. For more information on how to apply biochar on different kinds of soils, check the guidelines on International Biochar Initiative and Wakefield Biochar .
Biochar: an environmental solution
Biochar may seem like a simple material, but it can help solve a variety of global problems simultaneously. For instance, the process by which it's manufactured may help sequester a billion tons of carbon annually and hold it in the soil for thousands of years, where it's most beneficial.

Some of the other environmental benefits of biochar include decreased groundwater pollution, lower cost of water filtration, reduced amounts of waste and higher profitability for farmers. This technology also contributes to food security by increasing crop yields and retaining water in areas prone to drought.
The role of biochar in sequestering carbon and mitigating climate change Click here to subscribe to Regeneration International's newsletter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Biochar? - Regeneration International

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biochar is a charcoal-like substance that's made by burning organic material from agricultural and forestry wastes (also called biomass) in a controlled process called . Although it looks a lot like common charcoal, biochar is produced using a specific process to reduce contamination and safely store carbon.

# data[].attributes.body
Biochar incorporation into soil is an important route for CO2 removal from the atmosphere by terrestrial carbon sequestration (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; 2018)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scientists, growers, foresters, greenkeepers and gardeners alike are still learning about the benefits and drawbacks of biochars. The name "biochar" covers a wide range of materials with different properties. Many useful properties of biochar are owed to their physical structure.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jane Turner looks at the indelible footprint left by 'forever chemicals' (PFAS) used to make clothing waterproof and investigates what companies and the government are doing about it, and what consumers can do.

Boycotting brands that are complicit in Palestinian human rights violations is a powerful form of consumer activism, but how ethical is the product you buy instead?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your personal ethical consumer guide. Independent product guides, research, information and analysis since 1989.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As a verdict on the climate crimes of humanity, the new Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report could not be clearer: guilty as hell.

The repeatedly ignored warnings of scientists over past decades have now become reality. Humanity, through its actions, or lack of action, has unequivocally overheated the planet. Nowhere on Earth is escaping rising temperatures, worse floods, hotter wildfires or more searing droughts.

The future looks worse. "If we do not halt our emissions soon, our future climate could well become some kind of hell on Earth," says Prof Tim Palmer at the University of Oxford.

This would be the sentence for these climate crimes, but it has yet to be passed down. The world can avoid the harshest punishment, but only just. Immediate repentance for the delays that have brought the world to the brink is required in the form of immediate and deep emissions cuts.

The key aspect of the IPCC report is that the 42-page summary is agreed, line by line, by every government on the planet, with the scientists vetoing any politically convenient but unscientific proposal.

As a result, governments that continue to fail to take action have nowhere left to hide - the crystal-clear report has bust all of their alibis. "Too many 'net-zero' climate plans have been used to greenwash pollution and business as usual," says Teresa Anderson at ActionAid International.

The report exposes such plans with its stark statement that immediate action is the only way to avoid ever-worsening impacts, of which today's wildfires in California, Greece and Turkey, floods in Germany, China and England, and heatwaves in Canada and Siberia are merely a foretaste. As Greta Thunberg says, the climate crisis must be treated as a crisis.

The action required is well known and the IPCC report must be the spur for it to be taken, says António Guterres, the UN secretary general: "This report must sound a death knell for coal and fossil fuels, before they destroy our planet. If we combine forces now, we can avert climate catastrophe. But, as the report makes clear, there is no time for delay and no room for excuses."

Every choice made now matters. Helen Clarkson, the CEO of the Climate Group, which represents 220 regional governments and 300 multinational businesses, covering 1.75 billion people and 50% of the global economy, says: "Every decision, every investment, every target, needs to have the climate at its core."

The gravity of the situation laid out in the report blows away blustering over the supposed costs of climate action. In any case, not acting will cost far more. "It's suicidal, and economically irrational to keep procrastinating," says Prof Saleemul Huq, director of the International Centre for Climate Change and Development at the Independent University, Bangladesh.

For those governments and businesses that still chose inaction, the IPCC report may well end up being used as key evidence against them in real courtrooms. "We'll be taking this report with us to the courts," says Kaisa Kosonen at Greenpeace.

"By strengthening the scientific evidence between human emissions and extreme weather the IPCC has provided new, powerful means to hold the fossil fuel industry and governments directly responsible for the climate emergency," she says. "One only needs to look at our recent court victory against Shell to realise how powerful IPCC science can be."

Hope remains, just. Christiana Figueres, who was UN climate chief when the Paris deal was sealed in 2015, says: "Everything we need to avoid the exponential impacts of climate change is doable. But it depends on solutions moving exponentially faster than impacts."

The IPCC's report means all the evidence that will ever be needed is now in place. "The continued dithering to address climate change is no longer about the lack of scientific evidence, but directly tied to a lack of political will," says Kristina Dahl of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

That means political leaders are now in the dock and the vital UN Cop26 summit in Glasgow in November may be the last hearing at which they can avoid the judgment of history.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IPCC report's verdict on climate crimes of humanity: guilty as hell

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a verdict on the climate crimes of humanity, the new Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report could not be clearer: guilty as hell. The repeatedly ignored warnings of scientists over past decades have now become reality. Humanity, through its actions, or lack of action, has unequivocally overheated the planet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nature is in crisis, placing human and planetary health at risk. This decade must be the turning point where we recognize the value of nature, place it on the path to recovery and transform our world to one where people, economies and nature thrive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nature is in crisis, placing human and planetary health at risk. This decade must be the turning point where we recognize the value of nature, place it on the path to recovery and transform our world to one where people, economies and nature thrive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Zero Hour: it's time to pass the CEE Bill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The CEE Bill explained - In less than 2 minutes

# data[].attributes.headline
Sir David King with leading scientist group (Indie)

# data[].attributes.subject
Sir David King with leading scientist group (Indie)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Several of the world's leading scientists plan to launch an independent expert group this week to advise, warn and criticise global policymakers about the climate and nature crises.

The new body has been inspired by Independent Sage - the cluster of British scientists who have held UK ministers and civil servants to account for their lack of transparency and mishandling of the Covid pandemic.

The Climate Crisis Advisory Group, comprising 14 experts from 10 nations and every continent, aims to have more of an international reach and provide the global public with regular analysis about efforts to tackle the global heating and biodiversity crises.

Headed by the former UK chief scientific adviser Sir David King, the new group will issue monthly updates about the state of the global environment at meetings that will be open to the media and the public. These online gatherings will be chaired by the BBC presenter Ade Adepitan.

"We are hoping that by putting expertise directly into the public domain we are reaching into policymakers' decision processes, and into the financial sector and how they invest in our future," King told the Observer. "We are not just going to say 'this is the state of the global climate', but also what should the global response be from governments and companies ... What we do in the next five years will determine the future of humanity for the next millennium."

The experts - who include Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency and Johan Rockström, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - also plan to issue statements and respond to journalists' inquiries on breaking news, such as declarations by the G7, reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, new targets set by national governments, actions taken by major corporations, and geoengineering proposals, such as refreezing the Arctic.

School pupils in central London take part in the Global Strike for Climate Justice, organised by Extinction Rebellion, Greenpeace and other groups in September 2019. Photograph: Guy Bell/Rex

King hopes the group will emulate the impact of Independent Sage, which he set up early in the pandemic to counter a lack of transparency over Covid on the part of the UK government. At that time, he said, the official Sage - the government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies - were refusing to disclose minutes of its meetings and even the names of its members. This has subsequently changed as a result of pressure by the independent alternative.

"I've been amazed by the response to Independent Sage," King said. "All 12 members have become media personalities. I hope we get the same level of interest for the climate group."

The focus will be different. While Independent Sage has pushed for more transparency in pandemic decision-making, the Climate Crisis Advisory Group will press for more urgency. Currently, there is a large amount of data from the IPCC and in academic journals about the long-term risks of global heating, but little in the way of rapid response to new developments.

A draft launch statement warns the Earth may have already passed several dangerous tipping points, including melting ice sheets, the slowdown of Atlantic circulation and the dieback of the Amazon rainforest, which highlight the need for speed. "Only by acting quickly and robustly will we be able to stabilise climatic conditions, ensure a just transition and protect vital biodiversity and ecosystem functions for the next generation," the statement says.

The new body highlights growing concern among scientists and world bodies that global climate action is too slow. Earlier this year, 126 Nobel laureates declared a planetary emergency. Last month, the International Energy Agency said exploitation and development of new oil and gas fields must stop this year if the world is to stay within safe limits of global heating and meet the current goal of net zero emissions by 2050.

The draft statement says ambition needs to be raised still higher. "Net zero greenhouse emissions by 2050 is no longer enough to halt the climate crisis and we need to reach carbon net zero by 2035 to 2040," it says.

King said that discussions with other panel members had showed how rapidly things can change even in the short term. One member, based in the Arctic Circle, told him temperatures had shifted from minus 30C to plus 35C in just a few weeks, leading to unusually rapid ice melt.

"This rapid heating is threatening the whole world. This thing is cascading upwards and has got many of us extremely worried," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Head of Independent Sage to launch international climate change group

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Several of the world's leading scientists plan to launch an independent expert group this week to advise, warn and criticise global policymakers about the climate and nature crises. The new body has been inspired by Independent Sage - the cluster of British scientists who have held UK ministers and civil servants to account for their lack of transparency and mishandling of the Covid pandemic.

# data[].attributes.headline
Tom from The Jump - presentation to Climate Emergency Centres July 21

# data[].attributes.subject
Tom from The Jump - presentation to Climate Emergency Centres July 21

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CEC meeting on Take the Jump initiative 22 July 2021

# data[].attributes.body
https://youtu.be/a9yO-K8mwL0

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Crude Britannia: How Oil Shaped a Nation, co-authored by James Marriott and Cambridge-based Terry Macalister, has more bangs for its buck than most Hollywood movies.

Terry Macalister, co-author of 'Crude Britannia' with James Marriott

Written at a relentlessly frantic pace, Crude Britannia reads like a detective novel as the authors - Terry Macalister is a former energy editor of The Guardian - visit locations and key players around the UK to study the effects of big oil on the UK economy.

They interview site managers, investors, executives, former executives, film makers, politicians, security guards, oil riggers, traders, lab workers, musicians and academics. They travel by train, air, car and helicopter from the North Sea to Aberdeen to the Mersey estuary, the Severn estuary, the Thames estuary - the places where oil was found and the places it was moved around.

Much as they try to present a rounded picture of how the industry operates, but they can't quite disguise the fact that oil companies are venal. For instance, as the authors explain, during the Second World War, Shell ended up backing both horses.

"Shell decided to effectively divide itself into an Allied corporation and an Axis corporation," we read. Shell adopted Nazi ideology on mainland Europe and enforced anti-Semitic policies at every level of its organisation. Shell traded profitably from both fascism and democracy throughout the war. The Nazi flag flew at Shell's HQ in The Hague. Certainly, some of the Messerschmitt 109s and the Spitfires that duelled over English skies during the Battle of Britain were powered by Shell.

A panoramic image of Grangemouth petrochemical plant in central Scotland

After the post-war settlement Shell became more socially aware. BP was largely state-owned and therefore also inclined to lean in towards building communities and the trust that goes with that. Alongside the refineries came housing and other social infrastructure.

This paternalistic role saw big oil acting largely in the interests of the British state where required. But in the 1980s UK prime minister Margaret Thatcher developed a mania for privatisation and, when oil was discovered in the North Sea, the UK's oil fields became a showcase for Thatcher's preferred way of doing things.

We hear how the oil barons became the new colonialists, ditching accountability to aggressively pursue new oil fields from Alaska to Nigeria - and, as the authors describe, nowhere was this more obvious than in Shell's behaviour towards the Ogoni in Nigeria.

In 1993 50 per cent of the Ogoni people protested against the oil extraction process and the laying of pipelines through their communities. The then-military ruler, General Sani Abacha, sent in the army and military police. Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni activists were hanged by the state in 1995. Despite a raft of evidence linking Shell with the government's actions, no company executive has ever been answerable for its involvement. The taint of African colonialism, with pressures that also resulted in 2m people dying in the Biafra-Nigeria war in 1967 - played out against a background of lucrative oil production in the Niger Delta - couldn't quite be eradicated. And, on the back of oppression and exploitation, business was good, say the authors.

BP's logo history: the greenwashed version in use today was stroke of genius on the part of former chief executive John Browne

Over at BP - which had settled on the UK side after WW2 started in 1939 - the company had been privatised by 1987. The John Browne era started in the late 1980s. Coolly, Crude Britannia describes how Browne unleashed one of the most successful rebrands of all time: the BP logo changed in 2000 from the rather patrician shield it had been for 50 years to a depiction of the Helios, the sun king. BP went 'Beyond Petroleum'. It was largely greenwashing, of course, but at a stroke BP earned itself a reprieve for which it is still thankful because, by adopting the language of sustainability and renewable energy, it got itself off the hook.

It was just the latest ruse in a long line of rearguard actions. The business model for fossil fuels started really falling apart in the 1980s: evidence that burning fossil fuels resulted in harmful particulates being expelled into the air had first been published in the 1960s, and thereafter the alarm bells were ringing ever louder. To protect itself against the damning scientific evidence, big oil invested in launching a counter-scientific viewpoint, including vigorous lobbying - the start of a reframing of an industry which poured toxins into the atmosphere so effectively that it created the most significant warming the Earth has seen for around 56 million years (early Ecocene). So successful has the rearguard action been that it has not only prolonged the fossil fuel business model for four decades and counting, but has also contributed to the distrust of science itself, a distrust which manifests today as conspiracy theories believed by millions.

Musician and actor Wilko Johnson, a scion of Canvey Island, at the Cambridge Corn Exchange. Picture: Terry Macalister

A full analysis of the horrific legacy of spills, accidents, colonial legacies and aspirations, and Macchiavellan behaviour is on display in Crude Brittania. Events which allowed the public to see the real-world costs of digging up fossil fuels and deliberately burning it in the atmosphere - Deepwater Horizon, the Alaska pipeline, the North Sea oil boom, the rise of Russia as a key oil player - are all assessed.

These vast narratives are not the prime focus of this richly rewarding book, which puts the human perspective first. The authors are not condemnatory, they are curious. There are many lighter moments, including the use of song lyrics and an unlikely-but-thrilling interview with Wilko Johnson (there was an oil refinery on Canvey Island). It's glorious stuff, but it still begs a question - why? Why are these appalling crimes against our life support system still continuing? Why do the chief architects of our doom remain free - and respected - men (and it is, invariably, men? Why does our society continue to condone them, and reward them with riches beyond avarice?

You're left to fend for yourself when it comes to these riddles. But perhaps there will be a sequel - Cruder Brittania? In which case I'd be keen to read that one too.

'Crude Britannia' is published on May 20

Crude Britannia: How Oil Shaped a Nation (Pluto Press, hardback £20) is published on May 20, 2021.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Crude Britannia': A Big Oil painting of the lies that wrecked the planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Crude Britannia: How Oil Shaped a Nation, co-authored by James Marriott and Cambridge-based Terry Macalister, has more bangs for its buck than most Hollywood movies. Written at a relentlessly frantic pace, Crude Britannia reads like a detective novel as the authors - Terry Macalister is a former energy editor of The Guardian - visit locations and key players around the UK to study the effects of big oil on the UK economy.