Re: RE: GAS-L: Tree fertilizing...

[LINVENT@aol.com]

Mr. Mark Ludlow
Dr. Tom Reed

Dear Sirs,
    Thank you for the positive response on the tree and other biomass 
fertility comments I made. 
    Perhaps one of the most significant impact of the nutritional programs 
can be shown at the South American Ludwig project which failed because the 
trees did not grow.  Over $1 billion was invested in this project and was 
scrapped out because of the trees not growing as fast as they were alleged to 
in other environs.  This can be modified for the tree to promote rapid growth 
by nutrients and knowing well the rhizosphere in which the root system must 
live. 
    More to home, if the plant nutrition is correct, the plants will produce 
more carbohydrates, i.e., sap, which is the heating value component of the 
tree and less mineral content which is inert as ash.  Besides growing much 
faster, the quality of the tree is better, less disease, less management is 
required.  This represents a significant cost savings. Soil conditions in the 
right positive levels will also result in less erosion.  
    There is plenty of experience in this field to prove these points. 
Sincerely,

Tom Taylor
The Gasification List is sponsored by
USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml