Browsing by Author "Pourhashem, Ghasideh"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Policy support for biochar: Review and recommendations
    (Wiley, 2018) Pourhashem, Ghasideh; Hung, Shih Yu (Elsie); Medlock, Kenneth B. III; Masiello, Caroline A.; James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy
    Significant evidence has accumulated demonstrating that soil biochar amendment has many environmental benefits; however, adoption has been slow. This raises the question of how to align the environmental benefits with commercial motivations to drive more widespread implementation. Here, we examine the role that government policy can play in accelerating production and use at commercial scale. We identify three types of programs that can support biochar production: commercial financial incentives, nonfinancial policy support, and research and development funding. We also describe how these programs are currently used to support biochar production. For example, financial incentives can motivate immediate changes in business practices while nonfinancial policies can be important mechanisms to educate consumers and expand market demand. Research and development support can provide the necessary funding for early‐stage innovations that may one day become commercially viable options, even without other types of policy support. There are different risk–reward profiles for each policy mechanism, and these must be considered when evaluating a policy direction. Finally, we offer broad recommendations to the development of policy that maximizes the net benefits of biochar adoption. Key recommendations include improving policies that allow for the monetization of environmental benefits and avoided costs, recognizing soil as a resource through national preservation policy, and developing a broadly accepted set of product standards for biochar.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Valuing the Air Quality Effects of Biochar Reductions on Soil NO Emissions
    (American Chemical Society, 2017) Pourhashem, Ghasideh; Rasool, Quazi Z.; Zhang, Rui; Medlock, Kenneth B.; Cohan, Daniel S.; Masiello, Caroline A.
    While it is clear that biochar can alter soil N2O emissions, data on NO impacts are scarce. Reports range from 0 to 67% soil NO emission reductions postbiochar amendment. We use regional air quality and health cost models to assess how these soil NO reductions could influence U.S. air quality and health costs. We find that at 67% soil NO reduction, widespread application of biochar to fertilized agricultural soils could reduce O3 by up to 2.4 ppb and PM2.5 by up to 0.15 μg/m3 in some regions. Modeled biochar-mediated health benefits are up to $4.3 million/county in 2011, with impacts focused in the Midwest and Southwest. These potential air quality and health cobenefits of biochar use highlight the need for an improved understanding of biochar’s impacts on soil NO emissions. The benefits reported here should be included with estimates of other biochar benefits, such as crop yield increase, soil water management, and N2O reductions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Water cost savings from soil biochar amendment: A spatial analysis
    (2021) Kroeger, Jennifer E.; Pourhashem, Ghasideh; Medlock, Kenneth B. III; Masiello, Caroline A.; James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy
    While a large body of literature exists on the ability of biochar to retain water and nutrients, little research exists connecting these benefits to biochar qualities, water retention mechanisms, and optimal locations for agricultural use. More information is needed for biochar stakeholders to make informed decisions about where deployment should occur. Specifically, we need to know the biochar characteristics that drive changes in soil water properties, how these effects vary geographically, and what financial benefits farmers can expect in their specific region to identify where biochar can be deployed for optimal results. We conducted a meta‐analysis of the relationship between biochar properties, application rates and observed change in water holding capacity (WHC) as a function of soil texture. Then we mapped our results across US counties to determine where biochar application could yield the largest improvements in soil water properties and added an economic model designed to predict how biochar‐driven changes in soil WHC drive irrigation expenses. Limited data drove our focus to sandy soils, and among these locations, our results suggest that biochar application will be especially effective in the southeast, far north and northeast, and western United States. In a prototype application of our model we predict a 37% reduction in irrigated water use for an instrumented site in Nebraska. Our combined statistical and economic models will be useful for future field experiment proposals, farmers purchasing biochar, and decision makers working to incentivize agricultural advances.