OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION

• Introduction
• Biochar characteristics
• Benefits of biochar amendment to soil
• Agronomic benefits of biochar amendment
• The need for fundamental and applied research
• Current research work in UPM
• Issues and challenges in biochar utilization
 Malaysian Soil
• Highly weathered (tropical
climate)
• Low organic matter
• Low plant nutrients (high
leaching due to high rainfall)
• Low nutrient retention

NEED SOIL AMENDMENT

 Reduced methane Carbon negative
soil emissions energy

Reduce N2O soil Reduced Odour

emissions
Carbon capture

Atmospheric
Benefits
Soil
Benefits Viable Sustainable

Decreased nutrient Improved soil

losses fertility

Increased soil Improved soil tilth

carbon
Illustrated by
Kevin D. Brown
• Biochar is often associated with Terra Preta
(latin for dark soil) found in the Amazon
region in the 1870s.
• The ultimate purpose of biochar application:

– Climate change mitigation – C sequestration)

– Soil improvement (for improved productivity as
well as reduced pollution)
– Waste management
– Energy production
(Lehmann and Joseph, 2009)
 Solid Organic Wastes

Empty Fruit Bunches Oil Palm Fronds Oil Palm Shell

Paddy Husk Paddy Straw Wood waste

Peanut Shells Corn Stalks Mushroom Waste

Food Waste Paper Waste Garden Waste

Statistics of solid waste produce in Malaysia

Mohamad Ali Hassan and Yoshitoshiraj, 2006

A carbonator (left) build by a company to convert oil palm empty fruit
bunches (EFB) into EFB biochar.
Two types of biochar available in Malaysia

Rice Husk Biochar Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch Biochar

• Stable and resistant to microbial degradation
• High cation exchange capacity (CEC)/negative
charge
• High sorption capacity
• High pH (normally above 7)
• High surface area
• High porosity
Nutrient Content of Various Biochars
Tot. Tot. Avail. Min. Production
Feedstocks pH C C/N K References
(g/kg) N P (g/kg) P N Condition
(g/kg) (g/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)

By local Lehmann et
Wood - 708 10.9 65 6.8 0.9 - -
farmer al. (2003)
Green
6.2 680 1.7 400 0.2 1.0 15 <2 450°C
wastes Chan et al.
Poultry (2007)
9.9 380 20 19 25.2 22.1 11600 2 450°C
litter
Bridle and
Sewage
- 470 64 7 56 - - - 450°C Pritchard
sludge
(2004)
Broiler 700°C and Lima and
- 258 7.5 34 48 30 - -
litter steam Marshall
Broiler cake - 172 6.0 29 73 58 - - activated (2005)

Adopted from Lehmann and Joseph (2009)

 Tot. Tot. Avail. Min. Production
Feedstocks pH C C/N K References
(g/kg) N P (g/kg) P N Condition
(g/kg) (g/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)

Bark of
260°C - Yamato et
Acacia 7.4 398 10.4 38 - - 31 -
360°C al. (2006)
mangium
Rice straw - 490 13.2 37 - - - -
Sugar cane
- 710 17.7 40 - - - - Tsai et al.
bagasse 500°C
(2006)
Coconut
- 690 9.4 73 - - - -
shell
Eucalyptus Rondon et
7.0 824 5.73 144 0.6 - 49.5 - 350°C
deglupta al. (2007)

Adopted from Lehmann and Joseph (2009)

• Reduce nutrient leaching
• Increase CEC
• Moderating soil acidity
• Increase water retention
• Provide sustainable habitat for beneficial soil
microbes
• Reduce bioavailability and mobility of heavy
metals
• Increase soil pH and formation of aggregates
• Possibly reduce soil GHGs emission
Soil responses to different biochars
 Soil responses to different biochars (cont’)
Feedstock Crop/Soil Responses Reasons References
20 g/kg biochar
Mesic Typic treatements reduced Adsorption
Hardwood
Hapludolls total N and total properties Laird et al.
(0 – 20 g/kg
(soil dissolved P leaching by of biochar, (2010)
soil)
column) 11% and 69%, increase CEC
respectively
Radish,
Ferrosol: Increase pH,
wheat and Liming
CEC, exchangeable Ca Van
Paper mill soybean on value,
and total C Zwieten et
waste Ferrosol adsorption
Calcarosol: Increase C, al. (2010)
and properties
exchangeable K.
Calcarosol
Chicken Both biochar reduced Adsorption
manure Indian Cd, Cu, and Pb of metals on Jin et al.
and green mustard bioavailability and the surface (2011)
waste (5%) phytotoxicity of biochars
• Studies reported positive crop yield response
• Improve fertiliser-use efficiency
Crop yield responses to different biochars
Feedstock Crops Responses Reasons References
Water-holding
Unknown
capacity and Iswaran et
wood Soybean Biomass increased by 51%
black colour on al. (1980)
(0.5 t/ha)
temperature
Bamboo Height and volume Retained
Hoshi
(unknown Tea tree increased by 20 and 40%, fertiliser and
(2001)
rate) respectively maintained pH
Secondary
Improved P, K,
forest wood Biomass of rice increased by Lehmann et
Rice and possibly Cu
(68 – 17% al. (2003)
nutrition
135 t/ha)
Little response with biochar
alone, but with a
Secondary
Rice and combination of biochar and Steiner et
forest wood Not stated
sorghum fertiliser yielded as much as al. (2007)
(11 t/ha)
880% more than plot with
fertiliser alone
 Crop yield responses to different biochars
(cont’)
Feedstock Crops Responses Reasons References
Not clearly
understood,
Rice husk Maize,
10 – 40% yield increase dependent upon FFTC (2007)
(10 t/ha) soybean
soil, crop and
other nutrients
No positive effect with Indirect effect of
Green waste Not biochar 100 t/ha, but with improving physical Chan et al.
(0 – 100 t/ha) stated added N fertiliser 266% properties of hard- (2007)
increase in dry matter setting soil
Paper mill Increase in wheat height Van
Mainly liming
sludge Wheat by 30 – 40% in acid soil Zwieten et
value
(10 t/ha) but not in alkaline soil al. (2007)
Not stated
Durum 30% increase in biomass Improved soil Vaccari et
(30 and
wheat production and yield properties al. (2011)
60 t/ha)
Adopted from Lehmann and Joseph (2009)
 Current Research In UPM

Effects of Biochar in an
Biochar production and
organic farming system
characterisation
(vegetables and herbs)

Effects of biochar
on soil fertility
Biochar for soil carbon and crop
sequestration performance and
fertilizer 15N
efficiency -
upland soil
Effects of biochar on flooded rice
yield and greenhouse gas
emissions (Conventional and SRI)
Characteristic of Selected Biochars

Rice Husk Biochar Oil Palm EFB Biochar

pH: 9.39 pH: 9.66
CEC: 22.07 (cmolc/kg) CEC: 42.85 (cmolc/kg)
Total C: 9 – 15% Total C: 45 – 55%

Other Types of Biochar under Research:

• Bayam
• Kangkong
• Sweet Corn
• Rice
1. Effect of Rice Husk Biochar on Vegetables
Control Rice husk biochar
(0 t /ha) (20 t/ha)

Bayam (Amaranthus viridis)

Kangkong (Ipomoea aquatica)

Rice Husk Biochar Effect on Bayam (Amaranthus viridis)
EFB Biochar Effect on Sweet corn
Total Dry Matter Weight
Rice Husk Biochar Effect on Sweet corn
Total Dry Matter Weight
2. Growth Performance of SRI Rice with
Different Rates of EFB Biochar

T1 T2 T3 T4 T1 T2 T3 T4
72 days after transplanting 118 days after transplanting

T1 : 0 t/ha biochar
T2 : 5 t/ha biochar
T3 : 10 t/ha biochar
T4 : 20 t/ha biochar

27 Nov 2012 28
 Cumulative Effect of EFBB on Grain Yield of 2nd Crop

50

45
Rice grain yields with 10t/ha and

40 20 t/ha biochar were significantly
35
higher than control.
30

The grain yields increased by 142-
25 476%, These results in agree with
20 results of Glaser et al., (2002) and
15 Major et al., (2010) who reported
10
yield increases of 200% and above
with biochar application.
5

29
 Cumulative Effects of EFBB on Yield Parameters

Cumulative effects of EFBB on No. of tiller, No of panicle, % filled grain and weight of 1000 grains. Means with
different letter indicates significant difference at 0.05 level by Tukey test. 30
 Nutrient Uptake (mg/hill) by Rice Plants at Harvest as
Affected by EFBB

EFBB application rate (t/ha)

Nutrient
0 (5+5) (10+10) (20+20)

N 121d 209c 252b 369a

P 7.1c 16b 21.2a 22a

K 151d 338c 469b 906a

Ca 12.6d 25.7c 32.6b 56.7a

Mg 10.5a 22.9b 28.1b 44.8a

*
§ Means with different letter indicate significant difference at 0.05 levels by Tukey test

31
 3. Field Experiment: Biochar Amendment of
Marginal Rice Soil (FELCRA, Seberang Perak,
Malaysia)

Soil Properties
pH : 4.4
Organic Carbon : 0.83%
Total Nitrogen : 0.012%
Available P : 12.3 mg/kg
CEC : 8.38 cmolC/kg
Field trials
Exch. K : 0.14 cmolC/kg
Exch. Mg : 0.95 cmolC/kg 1.2 ha plot of the FTC SRI rice area with the
Exch. Ca : 1.88 cmolC/kg establishment of sub-plot A (without biochar)
Exch. Al : 1.89 cmolC/kg and B (with 45 t/ha biochar)
 Effect of EFB Biochar Application on the Rice Growth
Parameter and Nitrogen Uptake

40 DAT* 110 DAT

biochar application rate
Parameter biochar application rate (t/ha)
(t/ha)
0 45 0 45
Plant height (cm) 61.5a§ 66.7a 97.04a 101.85a
Number of tillers per
14.13 a 17.72 b 16.21 a 22.16 b
hill
Percent of
- - 76.37 a 77.06 a
productive tillers
Number of panicle
- - 15.25a 19.42b
per hill
Dry weight of panicle
- - 16.08a 17.18b
(g)
Percentage of fully
- - 74.50a 77.27a
filled grains per hill
Weight of 1000
- - 26.99a 27.16a
grains
Tissue N
- - 1.08a 1.22b
concentration (%)
N uptake (kg/ha) - - 42.01a 88.32b
 Effect of EFB Biochar on Grain Yield (t/ha)

The measured grain yield in the

biochar subplot was higher yield
than the control.

The means with different letter were indicates there were significantly difference at 0.05 level by Tukey test.
 Effect of EFB Biochar Application on Some Soil Properties

Amount of biochar (t/ha)

Parameter
0 45

pH 5.11 a 6.21 b

TOC* (%) 1.81 a 2.23 b

TSN† (%) 1.95a 1.83a

Available P (mg/kg) 52.01a 20.96a

Exch. K (cmol(+)/kg) 4.80 b 4.12a

Exch. Mg (cmol(+)/kg) 0.056 a 0.068 b

CEC (cmol(+)/kg) 8.22 a 9.36 b

*Total
organic carbon
†Total
soil N
§ Means within the row with different letter indicate significant difference at 0.05 levels by Tukey test
1. Issues
 Availability of biochar in market?
 Identification of effective/good biochar
feedstock for soil amendment?
 Optimum biochar application rate?
(Single or repeated application?)
 Cost of biochar application (price, transportation,
soil incorporation work)
2. Challenges
 Require a lot of research on different types of
biochar before it can be applied by farmers
 Production of cost effective sustainable biochars
 Monitoring of sustainable biochar production
(Regulation and Enforcement)