The effectiveness of using biochar derivatives on

the establishment of oil palm plantations in the

Osa Peninsula in Costa Rica, Central America
Tamara J. Benjamin
Co-Authors: Soto G, Major J, Lerner R, Covell P, Garro F, Muoz
M, Muoz L, Solorzano A, Lin Y, Joseph S
Objectives
Perennial cropping systems (oil palm, cacao, coffee)
Biochar derivatives (aged, biochar mineral complex)
Long term study (3 years)
soil changes
biochar characteristics
plant physiological responses (growth, yield, and
induced resistance to disease and pests)
Look at all aspects of the study including production
and application of biochar, soil/plant research, life
cycle analysis
48,000 ha of oil palm (100,000 ha coffee,
40,000 ha banana, 27,000 ha pineapple,
50,000 ha sugar cane) in Costa Rica
Increasing pressure to plant more oil palm
(Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) due to an increased
demand (biofuel, food prices)
Costa Rica is one of the most efficient
countries to produce oil (4.4 MT/ha)
Private corporations (46%), Cooperatives (28%,
OSACOOP), Individuals (26%)
Highly weathered acidic soils
Established on degraded agricultural lands
Lowlands that had been rice paddies, abandoned
banana plantations, pastures
Upland pasturelands or scrublands




Area of Study

San Juan de Sierpe
Puerto Escondido
Establishment of 2 oil palm plantations in San Juan
de Sierpe (SJS) and Puerto Escondido (PE) in
August/September 2009




Very different soils,
SJS: acidic but high in organic matter
PE: high Ca, Mg, P, low clay contents
Inceptisol in PE and Ultisol in SJS
Site Texture pH Acidity Ca Mg K P Cu Zn Mn Fe N OC OM
%
Sand
%
Silt
%
Clay
H
2
O Cmol(+)/l mg/l %
San Juan 41.5 21.9 36.6
5.1
6
0.31 3.26 1.53 0.30 1.4 10.4 1.1 95.2 99 0.32 3.48 6.00
Puerto
Escondido
57.6 25.9 16.5
6.2
0
0.18 20.79 8.68 0.25 4.2 9.9 0.7 5.3 61 0.17 1.76 3.03
Available Biomass
Residue
Over 12,000 ha of melina
(Gmelina arborea) and teak
(Tectona grandis) plantations
Reforestation projects from the
1990s are being harvested
Depending upon the lumber
mill, generation of 40-60%
biomass in the form of bark,
shavings, sawdust, and small
pieces of timber.
Biochar Production
Melina biochar
produced at 500 C in
Foidl Kiln
Biochar crushed to
obtain a size smaller
than 2 x 2 cm.
Biochar not uniform
in size, some very
small particles and
other larger chunks.

Treatments Used
Puerto Escondido (PE)
Control (C)
Chemical Fertilizer (NPK:10-30-10) (F)
Biochar + Urea (BC)
Biochar activated with Phosphoric Acid and
Calcium Carbonate + Urea (BCP)
Urea (U)
San Juan de Sierpe (SJS)
Biochar Mineral Complex + Urea (BMC)

Biochar Mineral Complex
3-parts biochar (treated with phosphoric acid to
activate C-functional groups)
3-parts manure/organic waste (chicken litter and
oil-palm rachis)
3-parts clay (both blue and red clays were used)
1-part plant nutrient minerals (rock phosphate,
calcium carbonate)
Boiling water in sufficient quantities to permit
mixing/blending
Blend continuously for one hour at 80 C, then
increased and held temperature at 220 C for
several more hours while blending

**An additional 6 kg/plant of biochar (20 t/ha) was added to the BC, BCP, and
BMC plants in September 2011 at a 1-meter radius around the plant.
Treatment 4 plants per treatment
at a spacing of 8 x 8 m
F: 10-30-10 (NPK) 50 Kg 10-30-10 /ha ( 300 g/plant) = 5 Kg
N/ha, 15 Kg P
2
O
5
/ha, 5 Kg K
2
O/ha
U: Urea 65 g/plant (5 Kg N/ha)
BCP: Biochar +
Phosphoric acid and
calcium carbonate
1.5 kg/plant (20 t/ha)
BC: Biochar 1.6 kg/plant (20 t/ha)
BMC: Biochar
Mineral Complex
1.5 kg/plant
C: Control No additions of biochar or chemical
fertilizer
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x
x = palm trees
Orange = control (C)
Green = NPK (10-30-10) (F)
Yellow = Urea (U)
Blue = Biochar + Phosphoric Acid (BCP)
White = Biochar (BC)
Planted on 29 August 2009
L
i
v
e

F
e
n
c
e

African Palm Oil Plantation: 8 years old
Puerto Escondido Farm
Random Block Design
R
i
c
e

P
a
d
d
y

Rice Paddy
Oil Palm Measurements
Tree height (cm)
Tree diameter
(cm)
Number of new
leaves
Leaf area index
Number of
flowers
Number of fruit
bunches
Fruit bunch
weight (kg)
Oil Palm Tree Height: Puerto Escondido
A A A A
A
A A A A
A
A
A
A
A A
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
U BC BCP C F
c
m

2009
2010
2011
- No statistical differences between treatments (p=0.4817)
Altura plantas de palma: San Juan de Sierpe
C F BMC U BCP BC
2009 165.53 185.13 186.99 195.28 203.4 203.48
2010 247.81 266.45 267.24 275.7 283.09 296.23
2011 341.17 348.84 352.58 382.58 384.73 405.39
A
AB AB
B
B B
A
AB B
B
BC
C
A
A
AB
BC BC
C
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
c
m

- From the onset, two biochar and urea treatments were different from control
- Chemical fertilizer was never different from control. (p<0.001)
Oil Palm Tree Diameter: Puerto Escondido
A
AB
AB
AB
B
A
AB AB
B
B
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
C BC F U BCP
c
m

2009
2010
- Biochar with P treatment different from control in first year (p<0.05)
- BCP and U treatments significantly different from control in second year.
Oil Palm Tree Diameter: San Juan de Sierpe
C U F BCP BMC BC
2009 21.82 22.77 24.68 25.18 25.58 25.93
2010 29.43 31.73 32.58 32.97 36.69 36.92
A
AB
BC
C
C
C
A
AB
AB
B
C
C
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
c
m

-All three biochar treatments were significantly different from the control and urea
treatments in both years. (p<0.0001)
San Juan de Sierpe
Puerto Escondido
C BCP F U BMC BC
30.58 31.42 32.25 35.58 36.33 36.67
A
AB
ABC
BCD
CD
D
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

n
e
w

l
e
a
v
e
s

U C BCP F BC
28.08 28.75 30.5 31.58 31.83
A
AB
AB
B
B
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

n
e
w

l
e
a
v
e
s

Leaf Area
Index
BCP C U F BC
Series1 0.87 0.91 0.93 0.97 1.03
A
AB
BC
CD
D
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
San Juan de Sierpe
BCP C U BC F
Series1 0.93 0.97 0.98 0.99 1.09
A
A
A
A
B
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
1.1
1.15
Puerto Escondido
- F in PE significantly different than
others (p< 0.0001)
- BC different than U, C, and BCP in
SJS (p< 0.0001)
Number of Flowers in San Juan de Sierpe
C U F BC BCP BMC
Series1 4.33 5.92 7.92 12.08 15.83 21.67
A
A
A
AB
AB
B
0
5
10
15
20
25
- Biochar mineral complex (BMC) significantly different than the control, urea
and chemical fertilizer treatments (p<0.001)
Number of Fruit Bunches in San Juan de Sierpe
C U BCP F BC BMC
Series1 2.58 4.42 4.67 6.17 9.25 11.58
A
AB
AB
ABC
BC
C
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
- BMC is again significantly different than the control, urea and now BCP
treatments (p<0.001)
Oil Palm Fruit Weight in San Juan de Sierpe
- No statistical differences due to low numbers of trees with fruit bunches (p<0.05)
- However, the trend show that BMC is now the lowest and BC and F have higher yields.
BMC C BCP U F BC
Series1 0.23 0.28 0.71 1.55 2.27 4.06
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
k
g

Soil Data for Puerto Escondido and
San Juan de Sierpe in May 2012

Biochar Particle
Microorganism and surrounding
biochar layers with a film of
nutrient rich materials (K, Ca, P)
Si
P
C
K Ca
Mn Fe
Conclusions
Site variation played a key role in the impact of biochar
on growth measurements.
Growth measurements correlated well with yield
measurements, biochar alone had larger trees and a
larger yield in SJS.
Results cannot be explained merely by soil fertility
measurements.
Long term studies are necessary to understand the
responses of perennial cropping systems to biochar
additions.
A combination of physical, chemical and biological
factors impact agroecosystems when biochar is
applied, there is a need for interdisciplinary research.
Muchas gracias!