Is biochar really carbon negative
Biogas generator Uk
This episode is about my last big day on "Renewable Energy for the Farm: Coal Production for Power & Fertility" where we have three main themes: Coal & Biochar Production, Renewable Energy and Lumber Lot Management. The Pennsylvania Sustainable Agriculture Society and Village Acres Farm made this field day possible. Before we start, I'd like to share a little with both of you.
The, abbreviated by the locals as PASA, was created in 1992 as a way to encourage profitable farms that produce healthy foods while preserving the natural environment. PASA is the largest state-wide, member-based sustainable agriculture organization in the United States. This organization does a ton of good work in Pennsylvania with a variety of programs, but the two that have the most impact on me and I think of value to other permaculture practitioners is the Farm Based Education and Agriculture for the Future Conference. The farm based training is how I went for your farm event of energy and PASA keeps these type of activities all the time. Some come as I write this: "Forest Agriculture for Wild Edibles: Ramps, Nettles, Fiddleheads, and More", "Animal Handling Workshop for New & Beginning Farmers" and another one for renewable energy for the farm with an emphasis on micro Hydro. All of these have application to people who are into permaculture, and let farms out and see them in operation. This last part is important because if you aren't farming, or near a rural area, it's hard to get an understanding of the broadscale picture. You can also attend these events with people networking in the field of sustainable practices.
All of these ideas are in play with PASA agriculture for the future conference. Held just after the New Year in central Pennsylvania, this conference condenses what you can do throughout the year about Farm Based Education into four glorious days of workshops, lectures, keynotes and other events. Not to mention that this event draws around 2,000 people from all over. You're likely to find someone who knows more about a particular interest you might have related to sustainable farming, and is ready to share what they know.
But none of these resources would be available without the help of the farmers who make it possible. At this last workshop, I was. An organic farm in Mifflintown, PA owned and operated by Roy and Hope Brubaker, they recently switched to partnering with Debra, Roy's daughter, that this is a multi-generational operation that is even intergenerational than other family members own and run Blue Rooster farm nearby and provide meat for the on-farm CSA. Another interesting aspect of the farm, and one thing I wouldn't have learned without this farm based experience, was the foodshed. Although a simple name, the building encapsulates this name is a beautiful half-timbered design with a floor, passive solar lighting and other energy efficient and sustainable features. Here they serve food from the commercial kitchen and hold a variety of events. This is where we had lunch that day and I was very grateful to the family members who served us the understanding of food allergies.
We're almost at the material from the workshop, but remember, this show is listener supported. Find out how to lend a hand by clicking on: and remember to like the show on Facebook, or follow me on Twitter :.
Well, the day field. In covering this, I mainly focus on the question and answer material that we covered during class. I say this because coal and biochar production is something that should be experienced to get an understanding of it. So, give a listen, check out the pictures on the website, check out some videos, and sign up for a workshop. This is a great hands on project for any gardener, farmer, or permaculture practitioner.
Our workshop was taught by Gary Gilmore, a ranger for the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and identified as someone that day, a "char vangelist". He is passionate about the possibilities of charcoal and organic signs for a more productive, local and thriving culture. So much so that it's almost contagious. His background combined with the science involved by his current occupation combined so that the session was science and numbers heavy. I am also the pieces that I understood enough to write down and contain all that I can.
We started the day, after introductions, with charcoal and organic label production.
What is charcoal or biochar?
Both are essentially the same: carbon, along with some oxygen, hydrogen and minerals, are left over after burning the feedstock in a low-oxygen, or oxygen-free, environment. They are very similar to end products and the distinction is how we use them.
Charcoal is larger and mostly used as fuel. If you are thinking about lumps of charcoal, not the briquettes, this is about what charcoal produced at home looks like when it comes to getting the stove out. Mr. Gilmore, during the second part of the class, showed us his grinder that he used the coal to make a uniform size for gasification.
Organic mark, on the other hand, is very fine, to the point it resembles black dust or powder, which in turn is used as a soil conditioner by digging it in the garden. This fine material has a much larger area volume and provides more nutrient retention, water retention, and the other benefits that are currently being explored.
Although the terms can be used interchangeably for this conversation, charcoal is used as a fuel, and has a number of characteristics and biochar used for soil improvement.
What is direct and indirect production?
Direct production is where you burn wood directly to produce charcoal. This can be done as simply as using two metal barrels, one on the floor, to hold the wood with holes in the base for the primary air supply and another larger drum to act as an afterburner to create a cleaner burn. This is known as a Top Light Up Draft Carburetor, or TLUD, as the fire is lit from above and burned down, causes the gasification, and the gases up and ignited. The primary air from the holes in the bottom of the barrel allow the wood to burn, while secondary air coming through the gap between the two barrels where they meet, the secondary air flows that aids the final combustion. This construction is very, very clean combustion. Once it started there was little smoke to be seen. All of the demonstrations in this workshop were with this TLUD style of direct production.
Indirect production is what you get to see where there is a barrel inside another, or a specially built biochar furnace, where a fire from the outside is applied to
Material can be converted into organic characters. In this case, external heat is applied to "bake" the material inside, expelling volatile gases and turning it into charcoal.
What can I do with coal or biochar?
Mr Gilmore recommended making charcoal from wood that had been air dried for a year, which means it has about 20% moisture content, significantly lower than freshly cut wood. The wood should come from the heart of the tree and not have a lot of bark in it, as bark has more minerals in it, which leads to more ash. Instead, bark is excellent for biochar.
With indirect production, you can simply refuse to use any garden you want because the process does not require the material to be turned into biochar directly to fuel the process. Material with a higher mineral content, such as wood, bark, or green plant material, will work well in this case as the mineral content helps build the soil.
What is the difference between high temperature versus low production temperature?
High temperature production, by the indirect method, creates higher quality fuel because pyrolysis releases more of the oxygen, hydrogen and other materials. High temperature production is not appropriate for bio-char use. Low temperature production, in the 600-800 degree range, creates a material that is about 70% carbon, 30% other materials, and is useful for both fuel and soil improvers.
The direct method uses some of the feedstock as fuel, leaving you around 60% of the starting weight in coal. The indirect method is more efficient at converting charcoal, giving you around 70% of its starting weight but requiring external energy to produce it, leading to a potentially less efficient system. I've seen indirect methods that cycle the volatile exhaust gases back into the combustion chamber to increase efficiency. Time and testing will tell which one works better, but to get you started the direct method is great.
I am interested in biochar production as a way to multi-turn rose and mile-a-minute into something useful for my garden as they are more likely to be harmful to non-locals that will spread quickly and choke other vegetation. In my interest, to design the system out so that it can reduce in my area, is important when the system justifies itself and can better minimize this type of attachment from spreading quickly.
How much coal or biochar can you get from your source material?
I don't have a number on garden waste because how much this plant varies from plant to when you cut it, etc. But for wood, it's a little more straight forward, although of course your end results will vary, but your end result is about 40% based on what weight you start with.
For those of you interested in the numbers, I came to this figure because Mr. Gilmore recommended using wood that had air dried for a year that contained about 20% moisture, then burned by direct production. Fresh wood is around 50% moisture. So if you start with 10 lbs of freshly cut wood, after 1 year you will have 7kg of wood ready to go in the oven. You lose another 40% through pyrolysis, 20% being expelled from the moisture and 20% being used as fuel, which ends up being about 4kg of coal.
Coal, Biochar, and Climate Change.
When we hear conversations with people like Connor Stedman or Eric Tönsmeier about taking action to mitigate climate change, with things like carbon agriculture, what role does coal production and biochar play in that?
Coal represents, to the best of my understanding, a carbon neutral source of energy, if and that, if very important, we also use lumber yards and industrial waste, as sawmill manage refuse to provide the base material in a way where we grow what we do burn at an equal replacement rate while using the material for both fuel and charcoal. For every pound of material harvested, we need a pound of growth to replace it. In this way, the charcoal takes the air out to grow, and is there when burned. It's a simple recycling of the material. Where this doesn't work, when using fossil fuel to burn material is specially grown for charcoal or bio-char production.
Where things get more interesting is where this is used as a soil conditioner. Carbon, in the form of biochar, is very, very stable in the soil and can last for centuries. There is evidence that the terra preta, from which the idea of biochar arose, is pre-Columbian in nature and dates back more than 1,000 years. That's a long time for them to be locked in the earth. According to Mr. Gilmore, for every pound of carbon released in this way, we are keeping upwards of 3.5lbs of CO2 formation due to the breakdown of the original material. And it can be done on a home scale.
However, and I hope this references the question about whether or not this is really carbon negative, a point from Brent Virrill on the Facebook page increased this episode of the announcement the value Mr Gilmore gave is right over £ 1 ( 454g) of carbon sequestration around 3.5lbs (1.66kg) of eventual CO2, a number given by two confirmed friends who know a lot more about chemistry than I do, is an ideal theoretical maximum conversion of carbon to CO2 that doesn't reflect what the biological actually happens through cycling processes that lock-up and then release CO2, so the actual ratio of sequestration is likely lower than the 3.5lb figure. Also, as low temperature biochar production results in one product being 70% carbon and 30% others, you'd have to bury 1.4lbs of organic characters to mask that 3.5lbs.
In creating biochar, because it is carbon negative, the inputs must be small enough to be in C output, relative to the storage potential, so that the inputs, do not outweigh the sequestration value, which is one of the issues of small-scale production industrial can be of organic signs. Gasoline releases 19lbs of CO2 per gallon burned, while diesel releases around 22lbs. With gasoline equivalents, natural gas requires around 128cu / ft for the same amount of thermal energy (measured in BTU) that releases 15kg of CO2 when fully burned, and bituminous coal requires 10kg and gives 28.6lbs of CO2.
Now, with all of these numbers rolling around, you can see why gasoline or diesel can be transported with the material to a central location, then moving the end product back out where it will be used, and then using machines to dig it in with the benefits quickly deplete biochar to bury in the ground for sequestration on an industrial scale. Once you are using fossil fuels to create this material, there is even greater loss in terms of how much carbon is stored compared to that created.
Although this was a quick shot the number is hard, I'm going to break a lot more of the math here to infer how coal and biochar converts production between these different energy sources, but I wasn't sure I had done everything right. The few pieces I could find that gave numbers don't show the work from point A to B, and I don't want to extrapolate that. If anyone knows the numbers behind how much energy is needed to convert wood to charcoal and can do a comparison between the different fuels, let me know.
But, organic signs has other values to us when burying more than just carbon sequestration.
Biochar in the ground.
So what does biochar do when we add it to the ground? The reported benefits are many, here is an example:
Improved plant growth. Suppressed methane emission. Reduced nitrogen oxide emissions. Reduced fertilizer requirements. Reduces nutrient leaching.
These last three were of particular interest to Mr. Gilmore because of the effect they had on the waterways in terms of nutrient runoff. As I mentioned earlier, reducing the total daily exposure to runoff in streams and rivers in my turn is very important because of the impact it has on the Chesapeake Bay. Integrating biochar and reaping these benefits is one way to do this.
Two things you will need to do in order to use the biochar. The first is to make sure it is a small size, like dust or grains of sand. This is where you come in with the garden waste for converting because grass and leaves are easily pitted with and might be finer to start with. Whatever you need to do to get them to this point, go for them. I think my 3yo son and a churn filled with charcoal is the ideal way to reduce charcoal to powder, but Mr Gilmore commented mixing it with wood chips and spreading it over a section of his driveway, letting vehicle traffic reduce it over time . His current process is to add the course coal to his horse stalls where the horses trample them down while their urine and manure is also mixed with the coal.
This leads to the second point recommended by both Mr. Gilmore and Dale Hendricks, another biochar enthusiast who attended the course to assist in calculating the bio characters. Loading will introduce an initial source of nutrients into the biochar before it gets into the soil.In addition to animal stalls, there was a suggestion to add biochar to a compost toilet instead of brown material or as a main absorbent in a urine bucket or mix it with compost or compost tea.
One thought Mr. Gilmore had, and I am interested in experimenting with, or hearing from you, if you have done this, is when you can use biochar loaded directly as a growth medium without the soil or other additives. Have you tried that? Let me know.
Gasification as energy
After lunch we talked about using coal as an energy source. Opening this conversation, Mr. Gilmore began by holding a can of gasoline and bundles of wood. The two fuels are roughly equivalent in energy: a gallon of gasoline to 25 pounds of air-dried, seasoned wood. Burning wood directly gives you roughly the same amount of energy. But you can also use the wood in a generator wood gas to create syngas, short for synthesis gas, to produce coal and biochar through the pyrolysis process to expel the volatile gases into the wood, which an internal combustion engine can use directly with little to no use no change. Another option is to create charcoal and use it for gasification in syngas to run an engine. Of these three methods, Mr. Gilmore prefers to use coal gasification, since the coal gas generator system is less complicated than a wood gas generator and will still run his engine directly.
Rather than getting into full details of the difference between these two systems, what I can say is that the advantages of a wood gas generator is that it is more efficient in time because you don't have to convert fuel into wood charcoal and is more efficient at generating it of gas because you wouldn't lose the 20% of the way you would burn the wood to charcoal. However, the wood inflator is more complicated because you will need to include traps in the system for the moisture to be expelled, as well as the expulsion of ash, tar, and other materials that rubber or an engine can break down. Also, because of inconsistencies between the exits from different woods, a way to control the flow of gas into the engine is also important.
If you want to learn more about wood gasification, there are websites dedicated to it, and there is also a book recommended during the workshop called "Will Have Wood Travel" written by Wayne Keith. You can buy it direct from Wayne on his website, for the price of $ 50. See what Mr. Wayne is already doing for others turning in my opinion by driving on wood gas, on the road.
But what I got to see the day of the workshop was Mr Gilmore's carburetor feature coal that he ran out to show us that yes, this works, and how everything was set up.
The base of the system was a barrel the coal to burn in, with an air inlet consisting of a piece of 1 "threaded pipe, which I believe was stainless steel, going through a homemade bulkhead into the barrel, about 1/4 the way from the bottom On the outside of this pipe was a valve. Inside, this was covered with a larger piece of iron pipe about a quarter of its circumference removed lengthways, creating a shield to cover the inlet. Charcoal added on top and shaken in down The lid is then added, which has an outlet that can be attached to a filter via a piece of plastic pipe.In the interior of the filter, from top to bottom, a piece of woolen cloth is sewn with a metal wire shaped to the top There is a thick section of open cell foam rubber underneath, and scraps of wool underneath, Mr. Gilmore uses wool as part of his filter bases nd on some research he read of the Australian coal carburetors that wool is one of the better natural filters. The filter connects around more hoses to an electric fan that draws the gas from the carburetor through the filter to the engine, with the hose from the blower running directly into the carburetor for intake by the engine. The exhaust from the engine is then returned to a valve with the inlet so some of the exhaust can be recirculated to produce cleaner combustion. The valve allows for control of this gas flow being returned to control the combustion temperature as the exhaust gas is produced hotter than the coal gas. From there, the last of the gases run out through a combined cooler and exhaust.
One note is that the coal gas is pretty cool for most of the combustion, below 120 degrees. The piece of plastic pipe Mr. Gilmore uses to connect the gasification keg to the filter is one of his failing safes because it melts at 120 degrees. If something happens that the system temperature rises too high, this pipe will fail and prevent damage to the other components.
Once everything is setup and connected, it is lit through the inlet pipe near the bottom of the charcoal barrel. Within maybe a few minutes of lighting the system, Mr. Gilmore started the gasoline engine on the charcoal gas and allowed it to run for 15 or 20 minutes while we talked about it and examined how it worked.
The engine connected to the system was a standard, unmodified 10HP gasoline engine. With coal gas, the system generates around 8hp because coal gas generates less energy than gasoline with a resulting loss of around 20 to 25%. He estimates he could run this engine on around 6kg of coal for about an hour to an hour and a half while he has a larger 25hp engine, with a resulting 20hp output that works for about 30 minutes on the same amount Fuel runs all out He showed us the basic system with a 1 "inlet and outlet for air and gas flow. He believes that a 25 hp base engine is over the limit for a 1" flow setup, but that through the inlet and outlet Increasing size easily scales, with a similar increase in fuel economy as well, so you would need to include a larger carburetor unit, filter, blower, and so on as things get bigger.
What I really like about this system is the potential to do actual work with unmodified or slightly modified machines without using fossil fuels. These are not novelty applications, as Mr. Gilmore spoke of running his 25HP walking tractor on coal gas, and he even ran a vintage air-cooled Beetle Volkswagen on it, traveling about 11 miles in his tests. That's one side, the other is that this electricity can be used to generate electricity as we looked at from a pair of lights and run away from the coal gas demonstration system. This is small portable solution that could now be used in emergencies, or in off-grid arrangements as back on sun and wind, or as a possible long-term solution for local generation of electricity.
And, as has been noted several times in the workshop, cool and cold weather is the time to produce charcoal and biochar from last year's brush and scrap wood so you could possibly build a kiln as a heater so as not to leave all that energy to waste. Creativity with good design leads to many, many yields in this system. A participant in the workshop commented on heating and collecting the exhaust gases from a carburetor with the CO2 content in a greenhouse. Although I am sure that safety precautions would have to be taken so as not to cause safety issues due to the carbon monoxide and other gases in the exhaust, it is a possibility.
Which, is where the warning goes, so that either of these systems is not inherently dangerous, but there are risks. If you are uncomfortable with something, don't do it! Work with someone more experienced to build or design your solution and learn to use it safely.
Nor will I argue that these are the most powerful systems around by any means for the production of useful work, creating electricity, or the time required to do so, but they remain options that make a difference for the decisions made we can turn into our desire to create a better world. It's not about a one-size-fits-all solution, but rather a number of options where appropriate to build more flexible alternatives to use.
That goes for another use of gassing, and that was a TLUD stove design Mr. Dale Hendricks shared with us from that day. The particular oven he brought out is called a Champion TLUD and is based on an award-winning design from a cleaner burning stove competition. The idea behind this is the same as wood gasification to make charcoal, and the stove also produces a small amount of charcoal, except in this case which is designed to be used on a small scale for cooking.
One note here is that if you use this type of oven to cook and produce charcoal, you will want a bucket of water several times that size of the oven with water in it to clear the charcoal in when you are done cooking . Lifting a handle on the stove and too will likely help move it. In his demonstration sir, Hendricks uses compressed hardwood pellets as fuel, and I thought it was an easier way to use pellets that might have been damaged by moisture and no longer usable in a normal wood pellet stove. I say this because I have several bags right now sitting around me a friend gave up after their basement flooded and an oven like that easily fits on my mind.
This TLUD cooker is another option for emergencies, or possibly to replace other forms of ovens in off-grid or no-grid situations. There is a wealth of information available on how to build your own if you are interested, as well as people who are available to purchase them for. Consider experimenting with this and share your experience with the growing pool of knowledge about these simple, yet revolutionary, systems.
That brings us to the last part of the workshop material that was woodlot management. As a forester through training, Mr. Gilmore shared with us how to apply the way a forester thinks with our production of coal and biochar.
To that end, we started with a conversation about invasive species that kill trees like the emerald ash borer here in Pennsylvania and other parts of the US knowing your surroundings and what threats there are to your trees can help you make decisions. If a tree is very likely to be killed, you can harvest it before that happens and make use of what you can, or be prepared to bring down if it doesn't die and know what you'll do under the new conditions.
From there we went to a woodlot in the Village Acres Farm and began by looking up the cap or via history to see trees which won the war for sunlight. The losers could be selectively more of the canopy at this point to begin opening, harvesting and using the developed tree for making charcoal or other means.
But before making that choice, look up, we have to identify the trees that were there. To see which ones are rare should be kept so, which ones are unique for some reason, like trees have a unique or pleasing shape that those you might consider invasive and want to remove, or which ones might be valuable for coppicing. With the help of this information, then make decisions on which to stick and which to remove those on your overall site plan and usage habits.
While at it you don't mine in the forest for resources because then could be a process that will be sustainable extractive. Rather, make the decisions so that you can regenerate the forest as you make use of it. One point Mr. Gilmore made was not to remove the downward wood material on the forest floor. The twigs, sticks and limbs we find resting against the ground play an important role in soil fertility in the preservation and support of mushrooms, so should be left alone. I got the impression that removing and using trees on the forest ecology had less of an impact than flushing what was found on the forest floor.
Going back to the invasive or non-native or exotic plants for a moment I'm of a mind that some of the harmful ones you remove area in order to recreate the succession of local forests is important and also provide a resource for bio-char production by the indirect method which could be very useful for changing soil while keeping trees and other dense wood material in place. I know the native / non-native native / invasive, indigenous / exotic conversation is still too much debate open and that we'll keep circling for a while. For me, thinking about the problem as the solution, and in turn getting a yield, converting this material that I don't want into something that I do plays a role in my long term strategy.
And since I mentioned the word of a hot topic, we got the contact on coppicing, but up to that point in the day information was thrown around faster than I could take notes. So here is what I have to pick up:
- In Pennsylvania and other northern hemisphere cool temperate climates, the time for trees to coppice is during the plants dormancy period, which is the months R: January, February, March, April, September, October, November, December. - Evergreens like pine or hemlock-do coppice are not. - Deciduous trees generally do. - Foliage should be those that do not form root brood, such as grasshoppers or aspen. There was also commented that beech and birch coppice weren't good, but I didn't notice why. - Trees mentioned that coppice do well: maple, oak, ash, willow, hickory, black walnut, hazelnut, and Chinese chestnut. - To coppice, you want to cut the tree down to a stump almost at the bottom, maybe a few inches high, and at a slight angle so the water will drain off and not rot the stump. This forms a new crown that additional growth emerges.
Coppicing wrapped up the conversation and brought the workshop to an end. We walked out of the woodlot, said goodbye, and went our separate ways.
Well, the listeners' questions asked by Brent through the Facebook page.
Hill culture vs. biochar
"I would like to understand more about why hill culture is highly recommended for colder climates while biochar is recommended for warmer climates. I understand why you might not want to bury wood in tropical areas. Since there is no cold cycle, bacterial and fungal effects." is amping in tropical soils and breaking down all organic matter faster. But I don't see why biochar wouldn't work as well in colder climates as it does in warmer climates, maybe even in conjunction with wood. "
When asked specifically regarding non-tropical regions: Biochar works and there is no reason not to implement it as part of your overall strategy if appropriate. Using the permaculture zone model, I would not dig them in zones 3, 4 or 5, but would certainly also put them in the hole for trees and shrubs when planting them, and incorporate them completely into gardening and producing beds in the zones 1 and 2.
More generally speaking, I think what's going on with hill culture compared to biochar is that hill culture is more widespread than technology and less intense to implement, while still providing benefits such as a raised bed, improving garden conditions and building the soil is understood. Even though you can dig a trench to bury the wood material for the bed, it is not necessary. Pile everything in place, dump soil and compost on it, mulch it, let it age if so inclined, and finally plant in it. I like hill culture because my kids and I can collect the material in one place while playing in the yard, or I can start building a new bed as I find things without filling out everything at once . Hill culture can also be taught in an hour or two and people can go home and start right away.
Biochar, on the other hand, takes time to collect the materials, some equipment to create it in, even if it's just a pair of metal barrels, and then still use it to manage the combustion. Yes, you can do other work while it is burning, but should stay with him on fire watch. Once that's done, it needs to be reduced to a powder, filled in and then dug into the A and B horizons of the soil. That is significantly more work than hill culture and implementation of borders on a larger scale.
Brent also asked whether or not biochar is really carbon negative, which I think I addressed to some extent earlier. If you'd like more research and speculation, let me know and I can work with something in more depth.
"I marvel at the wisdom of single purpose biochar kilns. I see things on the internet, YouTube videos, instructables, even products you can buy, and especially stoves that nonprofits make for developing countries, and I shudder. Everyone That energy that would have been wasted for something would be wasted to make biochar. Biochar is great and all, but wouldn't it make sense to use all that heat?
I agree with you on the idea of finding other solutions and ways in which we can harness this heat, but from the designs I have seen from a single purpose: biochar kilns are they are potentially an efficient way of making non-woody material like that Convert grass, dry leaves, or at the end of the season of plant stems and so on, into biochar because they are usually an indirect means of production with a sealed chamber heated by an external source that allows moisture in the plant material to be boiled and then convert what is left over into charcoal in a controlled manner, something that is not that easy to make with this finer material in a direct system. These also allow the ash and the mineral content contained therein, as an added benefit, to be collected to build up with soil biochar.
This goes back to one thing that Mr. Gilmore and Mr. Hendricks mentioned several times during the workshop: Coal and biochar production is based on old systems we are rediscovering in the modern era.
What this leads me to is that making charcoal and biochar isn't difficult. Where the difficulty lies when we start to think about how to use all of our knowledge in the current age and those big brains of us get the widest range of yields to eek for the system, like the most efficient stoves or determining which biochar is more effective for ground building. The designs that exist at this moment represent some of the earliest, easiest ways we have come with us as we all find out. As this construction advances and we continue to learn, we should be able to produce more with less and increase the benefits of taking advantage of all possibilities.
Or at least that's what I thought about it. Which one is yours I would love to hear from you. If you have a comment or a question about this show, a guest request, or want me to cover a specific topic, please feel free to contact me through one of the many ways freely available:
E-mail: Show [at] thepermaculturepodcast [dot] com Phone: 7one7-8two7-6two66 A direct message on Twitter: A message on Facebook:
General Electric Biogas Generator Biogas Generator GCSE Bitesize
- What motivates you to practice
- Should tanning salons be illegal
- How powerful is Supreme Kai
- Which antidepressant is best for motivation
- Which is better IIEST or BIT Mesra
- Is depo Medrol harmful to cats
- Can WiFi identify people through walls
- What does RAC 81 RAC 53
- What was Dropbox's 2010 and 2012 sales
- What is the generalized Riemann hypothesis
- What is the fishing department
- How many types of energy are there
- How are transgender people treated in Egypt
- Has anyone ever dived
- What kind of stews can you do
- Who invented the surnames 1
- What are facades in architecture
- Can astrology save a marriage?
- What is important from Maruti Suzuki
- How is art a four-letter word
- How is the bar exam assessed
- Is masturbation harmful?
- Requires Wi-Fi line of sight
- What's your favorite drop shipping platform