THE PRO AND ANTI BIOCHAR DEBATE IS JOINED July 23 2009

There has been sustained criticism of biochar from different groups culminating in a declaration from www.regenwald.org signed by over 150 NGOs from around the world titled: ‘Biochar’, a new big threat to people, land, and ecosystems" . We believe that many of the criticisms that they make are valid and should be taken on board by the biochar movement to make sure that biochar is not co-opted and subverted by the "business as usual" crowd, but we also strongly feel that they are mistakenly trying to throw a very precious baby out with the bathwater. That is, we agree with many of the points that they make but disagree with the conclusion that they reach.

Some of the criticism of biochar concerns potential impact on forests of an unrestrained conversion of trees into charcoal (we believe that this is highly unlikely, one of many "straw men" triumphantly blown down by biochar opponents). However, the presence of many forest protection groups on the list of signatories to the declaration, some of whom we helped create and have worked alongside for over 20 years, gave rise to some sorrow,

Much of the research on which Regenwald's and other criticisms are based has been conducted by very able and eloquent researchers at Biofuelwatch . When we were approached by Almuth Ernsting and Deepak Rughani asking us to rethink our support for biochar, it seemed an opportune time to debate the issues.

They agreed to a public debate to be published on both our websites. It is our hope that a consensus might be reached through such debate leading to Biofuelwatch helping define the social and political framework and safeguards that will allow biochar to fullfill what we believe to be its immense promise while avoiding the many pitfalls which certainly lie in wait.

This week they agreed to our proposal that our starting point for this debate be a recent CSIRO report (with three UK co-authors) which seems to us very important in beginning to explore existing peer reviewed studies into the efficacy of biochar. It identifies where more research is needed in order to better understand where biochar can augment agricultural productivity, reduce the need for artificial fertilizers and reduce emissions of NO2 and other greenhouse gasses from agricultural land. With over 150 references, we believe it shows about 95% positive results with biochar.

We have asked Biofuelwatch and Regenwald to contact the 150 signatories to their declaration to notify them of the debate.

Here is Biofuelwatch's first response. Our reply will follow in a few days time,

for the Earth

John Seed, Geoff Moxham and Rainforest Information Centre's Biochar team.