6. The BEAM Approach

No video

6. The BEAM Approach

Рет қаралды 27,753

Күн бұрын

Dr David Johnson shows how the BEAM (Biologically Enhanced Agricultural Management) Approach can significantly improve the productivity of agricultural land, in addition to many other benefits.

Пікірлер: 23

@Horse237 4 жыл бұрын

I have been studying for 2 years. This and his other lecture on building a Bioreactor for composting.

@benriggan5267 2 жыл бұрын

Remarkably underappreciated information.

@vickib4063 6 жыл бұрын

Loving what you are showing and talking about.

@ElanaT1 7 жыл бұрын

Terrific presentation. Thank you for posting this

@lesliensdetontonbastoune9705 5 жыл бұрын

What's the difference in practices between BEAM and advanced BEAM that produced the results shown on the graphs ?

@FinanceFixer 5 жыл бұрын

The difference is the length of time and cover cropping over that time

@davideforesti7556 3 жыл бұрын

The results are really interesting but the system seems not to be different from traditional farming practices to me. In the Alps people collect the waste from the stable ( mostly a mix of straw, hay and manure ) compost it on piles and after 1 or 2 years spread it in the fields. Although farmers think about it as an amendment rather than an inoculum, what’s the difference in practice? Are you comparing yields with degraded or poor managed lands?

@brunetyannick1174 Жыл бұрын

Many differences. One : compost piles are usually turned, atleast once, sometimes several times. Each turning destroys fungal network and promotes bacterial growth -> lower F:B ratio. Piles are not at a constant desired humidity, so that must impact the microorganism succession. Piles are not using his technique for constant and quite homogenous oxygenation (the tubes)-> not the same species again, less oxygen, more pathogens. Quite a lot of differences innit ? Mind you, he didn't try his techniques on healthy prairies ecosystems (I think), even though few of these remain. I guess the more pristine the ecosystem, the less positive impact these practices would have, still the point is to regenerate the millions upon millions of hectares of degraded land.

@garymacdougall6775 4 жыл бұрын

I have a question I hope someone can answer. David says when Gabe Brown and him see their organic matter get above 3% they see a soil carbon building 5 x's faster. Does that mean plants are sequestering more co2?

@legalfarm8234 4 жыл бұрын

It means the soil is sequestering more CO2, in conjunction with the plants.

@realfoodman 3 жыл бұрын

Video 4 in this series talks about it too. Once the soil passes that 3% threshold, more of it goes into the plant, so the plants can put more energy into their own growth instead of giving up so much of their energy to the roots.

@Dav3523 5 жыл бұрын

How do you deal with the cover crops to prep for planting? And when you are "wet inoculating" seeds with compost, is there a trick? Is it just applying high quality fungal compost? Is this any different than planting in vermicompost (with probably a similar fungal to bacteria ratio)?

@Nuskeros 2 жыл бұрын

Is there any way some of the principles could be meaningful on established groves?

@MetallicAddict15 3 жыл бұрын

8:00 This is confusing to me. In part 4, you pointed out that additional SOC storage seemed to flatline above 3% SOM, implying that from that point on, the additional C captured goes into the plant instead of the soil. In Gabe's case, however, the SOC content seemed to increase expontentially rapidly at exactly 3%. These two things seem contradictory. What's the explanation for this?

@peterclark6290 2 жыл бұрын

The introduction of livestock; plus Dr. Johnson does not have data as yet, his are early projections; and he doesn't to my knowledge use herbivores in his work. Secondly, there is an essential carbon cycle, plants absolutely need airborne CO². It also raises the possibility that there is a maximum SOC? A research project for you?