Fertiliser

Abstract

A dry and solid fertiliser in the form of discreet particles is provided. The particles of the dry and solid fertiliser comprise a homogenous mixture of organic and inorganic materials. The inorganic material comprises at least one of the NPKS nutrients. The organic material comprises a carbon-labile substantially sterile product of organic waste.

Claims

1. A method of preparing a solid fertilizer, comprising: heating an organic material by subjecting the organic material to heat at about 100° C. to less than 400° C. for less than 30 minutes, wherein the heating provides a product substantially free of biochar carbon; mixing at least one of an inorganic or synthetic material comprising at least one of N, P, K, or S with the organic material to produce a mixture; and forming discrete particles of the mixture, wherein the organic material and the at least one inorganic or synthetic material are uniformly distributed throughout each of the particles.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein heating the organic material provides a predominantly labile carbon product.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the product provided by the heating is substantially sterile.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the discrete particles comprise prills, granules, or pressed particles.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the organic material is heated in the absence of oxygen.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the organic material is heated at about 150° C. to less than 400° C.

7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: milling the organic material and the at least one inorganic or synthetic material together.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the discrete particles comprise 1% w/w to 10% w/w leonardite.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein an average hardness of the discrete particles is at least about 2.0 Kg/granule.

10. A method of preparing a solid fertilizer, comprising: heating an organic material at a temperature and time sufficient to form a substantially sterile carbon product, wherein the heating at the temperature and time does not result in the formation of biochar; mixing at least one of an inorganic or synthetic material comprising at least one of N, P, K, or S with the substantially sterile carbon labile product to produce a homogenous mixture; and forming discrete particles of the homogenous mixture.

11. The method of claim 10, wherein the discrete particles further comprise a binder.

12. The method of claim 11, wherein the binder comprises at least one of leonardite or calcium lignosulphate.

13. The method of claim 11, wherein the binder is mixed with the substantially sterile carbon product.

14. The method of claim 10, wherein the organic material is subjected to heat at about 150° C. to less than 400° C.

15. The method of claim 10, wherein the organic material is heated for less than 30 minutes.

16. The method of claim 10, further comprising: milling the substantially sterile carbon labile product and the at least one inorganic or synthetic material together.

17. A solid fertilizer in the form of discrete particles, wherein each particle comprises: at least one of an inorganic or synthetic material comprising at least one of N, P, K, or S; and a heated organic material; wherein the organic material and the at least one inorganic or synthetic material are uniformly distributed throughout each of the particles, and wherein the particles comprise a mixture that is substantially free of biochar carbon.

18. The fertilizer of claim 17, wherein the organic material is subjected to heat at about 150° C. to less than 400° C.

19. The fertilizer of claim 17, wherein the organic material is subjected to heat for less than 30 minutes.

20. The fertilizer of claim 17, wherein the discrete particles comprise 1% w/w to 10% w/w leonardite.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

(1) Embodiments of the invention will now be described with reference to the accompanying drawings which are not drawn to scale and which are exemplary only and in which:

(2) FIG. 1 is a table showing proposed fertiliser formulations and their organic and inorganic content in terms of percentage.

(3) FIG. 2 is a graph showing the % of absolute signal intensity of different Carbon types in an organic waste material torrefied according to the process described herein.

(4) FIG. 3 is a C13 NMR spectra of an organic waste material torrefied according to the process described herein.

(5) FIG. 4 are C13 NMR of (a) lignite and (b) green waste compost for comparison. Solid-state 13C NMR spectra of lignite is shown in panel A and spectra of green waste compost is shown in panel B. The labelled peaks correspond to carboxyl (Peak 1), aromatic (Peaks 2, 3), polysaccharide (Peaks 4-6) and aliphatic (Peak 7) groups (Schefe et al. 2008).

(6) FIG. 5 is a simplified block diagram of a process according to an embodiment.

(7) FIG. 6 is a detailed process flow diagram for an embodiment.

(8) FIG. 7 is Table 1 showing the % breakdown of the organic material (post-torrefaction) including pathogen testing results.

(9) FIG. 8 is Table 4 showing formulation and nutrient content of different torrefied organic bases.

(10) FIG. 9 is a graph of the crush strength of the granules following use of calcium lignosulphanate as a binding agent.

(11) FIG. 10 is Table 5 showing expected and measured nutrient content of sample B1.

(12) FIG. 11 is a graph showing coliform count, crush strength and moisture content.

(13) FIG. 12 is Table 6 showing an example of a torrefied organic base recipe.

(14) FIG. 13 is a table showing the composition of fertilisers according to embodiments of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION

(15) The following description focuses on an embodiment in which the organic waste is chicken waste and the sterilisation process is torrefaction. It should be understood that these are used as examples, and other organic wastes could be subject to the process. Furthermore, torrefaction is most preferred, but the skilled person should appreciate that other sterilisation techniques could be performed. Nevertheless, torrefaction does provide a significant advantage in the present process by using low temperature and therefore retaining much of the carbon lability of the organic waste. The carbon labile product optimises soil health and works synergistically with the added nutrients to provide a particularly advantageous fertiliser. The core process described herein in the making of a base material (a torrefied chicken waste) into a powder that can then be mixed with other ingredients to deliver a ‘designed’ nutritional outcome. The torrefied product is optimised for ‘soil conditioning’. The inorganic additives add nutrient intensity and target improved plant productivity. Raw organic wastes (broiler litter, layer manure, broiler mortalities) from nearby chicken farms can be delivered to the site in bulk. These wastes will vary in nutrient and carbon content based on source farm, available bedding materials, and seasonal changes. The ratio of feeds can vary slightly based on nutrient content and desired product. In time, other organic raw materials may be used as feedstock and stored and handled at the site.

(16) Prior to the torrefaction process, the animal waste can be stored in steel or concrete bunkers. Preferably, the waste is stored in such a way as to reduce any possible biohazard. Animal waste can be particularly hazardous to humans, particular if the subject animal is also human, so stringent health and safety measures should be taken prior to sterilisation. A batch ribbon mixer can be used to mix the poultry waste such as manure, bedding and carcasses (spent chickens). If necessary, the raw organic material can be conditioned in a shredder and or a hammer mill prior to being conveyed to the torrefier for treatment.

(17) A Front End Loader (FEL) can load the inputs into hoppers at the desired ratios, where they can pass over weighfeeders to then be mixed in a ribbon mixer. The mixed material can be conveyed to a shredder to break the material up prior to feed into the torrefier. Torrefaction heats the material to 250-350 degrees C. in the absence of oxygen. The torrefier does this by heating material passing through a screw conveyor via radiation and conduction from a burner system underneath. This achieves two outcomes: Removal of the bulk of the moisture from the material. Denature any pathogens that may be present in the animal waste feedstock.

(18) The process may achieve these outcomes but retains the carbon in a labile (usable) form as the temperature does not reach a pyrolysis point

(19) Steam and other volatile gases can be flashed off, captured and condensed in a gas cleaning system, with low nutrient loss from the bulk solid to the condensed vapours. The torrefier can be any apparatus fit for purpose. In one embodiment, the torrefier is a small screw conveyor, operated “choked” to provide an air seal. The custom-designed close-tolerance screw auger torrefier can have gas-fired external heating. The screw conveyor can be mounted above the torrefier for waste heat recovery. In operation, a torrefying temperature can be decided upon. The temperature selected is based on prior experience with the material to be torrefied. The temperature can be in the range of from about 100 degrees to about 350 degrees C. The controller will set how much power to apply to the heating elements to maintain the temperature. A thermostat may be employed to ensure that the temperature remains within a set range. After the temperature reaches the desired level, the wet bio solids (organic waste) can be introduced in a continuous fashion through the inlet port of the torrefier. The organic waste can be picked up by the screw conveyor and transported into the torrefying chamber. The rate at which material passes through the torrefier will depend on the speed of rotation of the conveyor. The heat is applied through conduction through the outer walls and via radiant heating applied to the solids during transport.

(20) In an embodiment, the torrefier can be comprised of three screw conveyors in series with different purposes: a pre-heating screw whereby waste heat from the main burner heats the material prior to the main screw; a main screw, which has a bank of burners firing underneath it; a water jacketed cooling screw to lower the temperature so the torrefier product can be stored.

(21) Double knife-gate valves can provide a gas seal on the inlet and outlet from each screw. The torrefier feedrate can be controlled via feedback loops that regulate the temperature of main screw outlet, which provides an inferred product moisture content (˜7-10%), based on the feed material. The outlet temperature setting can be adjusted based on moisture analysis and can be limited to minimise pyrolysis of the feed material to an acceptable rate.

(22) All torrefier inputs and the torrefier units themselves can be located in a dedicated building. This may assist in managing the risk of contamination of finished products with pathogens that may be present in raw organic material delivered to the site.

(23) There can be three torrefier units in parallel (single feed system, single condensate system).

(24) Once the solids have been torrefied, the treated organic material can be transported out of the torrefier. The material can fall under gravity from the torrefying chamber into a suitable container. The torrefied material can be cooled to at or just above room temperature to aid in further handling. Optionally, the cooling is the post torrefaction cooling via the water jacketed screw conveyor. The container filled with torrefied material can be a bag supported by a bag unloader. At predetermined intervals, the torrefied material can be tested to ensure that it meets the sterilisation requirements and moisture content. If there are any testing problems, the process can be stopped and the parameters in the torrefier can be adjusted.

(25) The torrefier product can be conveyed to the adjacent granulation building for storage in intermediate silos. These silos can be designed to allow retrofit of an infeed system to support a future “hub & spoke” supply of torrefied material from on-farm torrefaction units.

(26) The resultant torrefied product can then be sent in batches to a ribbon mixer and a hammer mill where it is ground. The material can be ground until it is a homogenous consistency. At this stage, the inorganic materials including solid and liquid inorganic nutrients can be added to the torrefied product in an industrial blender to achieve a homogenised mix. Inorganic fertilisers (eg RPR/SOP blends, Urea, DAP/MOP blends) can be delivered to site in bulk and offloaded via screw conveyor to storage silos. There can be facility for other trace nutrients (eg Zn/Cu/Mo materials) to be delivered in 1 tonne (T) bags and stored for use as needed in the future. Leonardite can be added in an amount of at least about 2, 5, 10 or 15% of the total product. Leonardite can be delivered to site in 1 tonne (T) bags and stored for use as needed. The leonardite can be added post torrefaction as it is a pathogen free material, and it is added due to its high carbon content and presence of humic acids which is thought to aid granulation and to contribute to soil heath.

(27) To obtain finished product granules that contain a homogenous mixture of torrefied organics, leonardite and inorganic fertiliser, the materials are mixed and ground in a hammer mill to achieve the desired size reduction, then sent to the pelletisation or granulation process. Pelletisation involves transporting the mixture into a pellet extruder and cutting machine. Granulation can involve balling mills, optionally three arranged in series. At all appropriate stages, liquids can be sprayed to reduce dust.

(28) The feed, mixing and milling processes can be continuous so to deliver a continuous stream of ground feed to the wetting mixer. Some mixtures are more suited to pelletisation that others. The skilled person can try pelletisation and granulation, to see which suits the mixture employed.

(29) The principle of pelletising is to wet all feed to the pelletiser to a set level to achieve sufficient combining of material under pressure with sufficient lubrication to pass through the die. Not enough or too much water can result in plugging/bogging of the roll-heads and die, as well as weak product and excess fines.

(30) For products made using pelletisation, the raw milled feed can enter the wetting mixer with recycled undersize product and water (or torrefier condensate) added to wet the mix down prior to pelletising. The pelletising/balling process is anticipated to yield approximately 70% on-size product, so about 30% of all material fed to the pelletiser is returned back as recycle (a 0.43:1 recycle ratio).

(31) The wetted material can be fed to parallel pelletisers (2×50% duty) to generate small cylinders of product, and then to a series of balling mills to round the sharp edges of the pellets and change their shape to spheres. The balling mills are comprised of a rotating disc which throws the product into a vertical wall around the disc, which imparts a rolling action into the bulk material as it spins around the mill. Water (or torrefier condensate) can be added to aid the softening of the edges and to plasticize the pellets to change shape. Balling will also yield combination of some fines into larger on size particles. The rounded material can then fed to the downstream dryer and screening processes.

(32) A gas burner can be used to heat air which is fed into the dryer drum to dry the granules. The dryer exhaust gases can be captured via a bag house, with an extraction fan venting the cleaned gases to atmosphere. The dry solid fertiliser product can be screened (2 deck vibrating screen). After oversize screening, the product can pass through a fines screen to remove undersize. On spec then passes through a rotary cooler drum and then a polishing screen to remove dust. Undersize from the fines and polishing screens can be recycled back to the pelletiser. The dry solid fertiliser product optionally in the form of granules can have a moisture content less than about 10, 8 or 5% (preferably less than 5%) moisture for shelf stability and to prevent (or at least reduce) the regrowth of pathogen in the granules.

(33) Post cooling and polishing screen, the product can be conveyed to onsite storage silos for despatch into bulk trucks or fed into the on-site bagging line to be stored in 1 T bags. The finished product can be sent to final product screening. Assuming the product meets all the required standards, it can be sold in bulk or bagged and marked for sale and use.

EXAMPLES

(34) Embodiments of the invention will now be exemplified with reference to the following non-limiting examples.

Example 1—How to Determine the Expected Nutrient Content of a Fertiliser

(35) In order to determine the effectiveness of a fertiliser formulation, various formulations can be created in accordance with the present disclosure. The skilled person can then determine which formulation is best for use on which type of soil and for which type of plant intended to be grown in that soil. By way of example, different formulations are proposed and these can be labelled A to M for internal reference. As an example, fertiliser formulation A can be prepared by the torrefaction of organic material comprising chicken manure litter, layer manure and, spent hens. The organic material can be stored and then conveyed to a torrefier. A temperature of 150 degrees C. to about 350 degrees C. can be employed for about 5 to about 30 minutes to torrefy the waste. Once the solids have been torrefied, the treated organic material can be transported out of the torrefier and cooled before being collected into a container. Batches may be taken from the container and sent to a ribbon mixer where the torrefied material will be mixed before being ground in a mill (e.g. hammer mill) for e.g. up to 20 minutes although shorter times can be employed. Liquid and solid inorganic fertilisers such as Ammonium sulphate and APP may be added to the ground product and mixed. The organic component can be about 20-80%; binder about 5-10%; and the inorganic component about 20-70% of the total weight of the ground material. The mixed organic and inorganic materials can be sent for pelletisation.

(36) The expected breakdown of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), potassium (K), sulphur (S) and calcium (Ca) in the fertiliser is shown in Table 1 of FIG. 1. Table 1 of FIG. 1 also shows the proposed formulation of compositions B-M that can be prepared in a similar way to that described above.

(37) In addition to the different formulation, the time spent in the torrefier may be varied from 30 minutes to 15 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours. Furthermore, the effect of temperature will be explored from 150 to up to 350 degrees C. Also, the time spent grinding may be more or less than 20 minutes.

(38) Each of the fertilisers can then be tested on soils to determine their efficacy in promoting plant growth and overall health.

Example 2—Analysis of the Torrefied Product

(39) The sterile nature of the torrefied organic component of the formulation is shown in FIG. 7.

(40) An analysis of the carbon labile nature of the torrefied material was undertaken. The results are shown in FIG. 2. The torrefied material contains a range of carbon forms. The key forms of interest are:

(41) Carboxyl C—This includes carboxylic acids, including short chain organic acids. These contribute to soil processes impacting on nutrient availability. These are easily decomposable by soil microbes.

(42) Aryl C—These include aromatic C compounds incorporating a benzene ring structure, which is a function of more ‘mature’ organic materials. While these compounds also contribute to nutrient availability, they have a longer residence time in soil due to their ring structure being more resistant to microbial degradation. They may contribute to C sequestration.

(43) O-Alkyl C—This class includes all polysaccharide (sugar-type) and carbohydrate compounds. These will stimulate localised microbial activity as they are easily-available microbial substrates. This material may also have a ‘priming’ effect whereby it stimulates mineralisation of other, not so available soil C sources.

(44) Alkyl C—This class includes fatty acids, lipids and other long-chain aliphatic compounds. While these are likely to be consumed by microbes as sources of energy, they don't contribute to nutrient release or C sequestration.

(45) The 13C NMR spectrum is shown in FIG. 3, with the various C classes being measured as groups of peaks at different ‘chemical shifts’. The large peak at about 70 ppm is the polysaccharide/carbohydrate peak. This shape of spectrum is similar to that seen in other compost-type organic amendments. So, the torrefaction retains many of the benefits of other organic processing, such as composting, while concentrating the carbon and removing pathogens. Another NMR example is shown in FIG. 4, compared with lignite and compost.

Example 3—a Specific Example of Preparation of a Fertiliser According to an Embodiment

(46) The flow diagrams of FIG. 5 and FIG. 6 present a schematic view of the process from the raw materials to packing of final granules. The steps are outlined below and are labelled in FIG. 5. 1. Organic raw materials (chicken litter, chicken manure, and chicken carcasses were received in separate bays). 2. All the organic raw materials were fed into a ribbon mixer at the specified ratio (e.g. Table of FIG. 13) and well mixed before entering the shredder. 3. The mix was shred into small and consistent particle size before entering the torrefaction process. This step allowed for a uniform torrefaction (heat distribution) due to consistent size. 4. The shredded mix was introduced to a torrefier unit where the mix was exposed to an elevated temperature of 330° C. in the absence of oxygen. The torrefaction process reduced the moisture of the mix significantly (from 40% moisture content to less than 10% moisture content). 5. The torrefied organic material was then introduced into a mixer with inorganic fertiliser granules and binding agent at a specified ratio e.g the Table of FIG. 13 (as per product formulation recipes). 6. The mixture of organic and inorganic material was then introduced into a hammer mill to grind the particles and further mix the material for homogeneity. An example of the homogeneity of the composition of the final mixed pellets is shown in FIG. 10. 7. The milled and homogenised mix was then introduced to a wetting station where a liquid (water or liquid fertiliser or condensate from the process) was added to the mix to prepare for pelletisation. 8. The wet mix is then introduced into the pelletiser for granulation. 9. The granules from the pelletiser were introduced to a polisher along with a liquid (water or condensate from the process) to further polish the granule surface and produce uniform spherical granules. 10. The polished granules were introduced into a drier to remove the excess moisture content. The moisture was reduced to be in the range of at least about 1% to at most about 9%. 11. The dried granules were then cooled to storage temperature possibly by ambient cooling or a fan. 12. The cooled granules were further screened for lumps and large particle size before dispatch to storage or packing.

Example 4—Choice of Torrefied Base

(47) The animal waste used for the products was torrefied in various proportions to produce “bases”. Nutrient analysis results for four of these bases are shown in Table 4 of FIG. 8. The moisture content of the bases does vary and is increased according to the presence of manure/carcass (wet) and decreases according to the presence of litter (dry materials). It has been found, however, that other than variations in moisture content, the overall nutrient content of the organic feedstock does not significantly impact the amount of labile carbon in the finished product. This means that the improved fertiliser can tolerate varying percentages of the litter/manure/carcass in the torrefied base provided the resultant carbon content is in the range of from about 30 to about 40% of total.

(48) Three batches of organic waste materials were also analysed post torrefaction by an independent laboratory (SWEP) for nutrients, carbon and pathogens. The results are shown in Table 1 of FIG. 7. As can be seen in Table 1, the torrefied product is substantially sterile due to the absence of E. Coli, Salmonella and Listeria (total coliforms (<3)). The lack of coliforms can also be seen in the graph of FIG. 11. The fertilisers labelled as B1 and B4 has no coliforms, desired hardness and desired moisture content.

Example 5—Hardness/Crush Strength

(49) Crush strength which is a measure of granule hardness is used a granule performance indicator. Experiments were conducted using Lignosulphonate as granulation binder to further improve the crush strength (granule hardness). FIG. 9 shows results from one such experiment. It can be seen from the data in FIG. 9 that at a moisture content of less than 10% the hardness of the granules with calcium lignosulphanate is significantly higher than without the binder.

Example 5—Improved Fertiliser Formulations

(50) A number of formulations were produced using a torrefaction and granulation process to manufacture fertiliser pellets including organic and inorganic materials. The torrefied organic material was then mixed with inorganic fertilisers in varying mixtures and ratios and the mixture was granulated. The compositions are shown in the Table of FIG. 13. The final granules were sent to the laboratory for nutrient, moisture and compositional analysis.

(51) Soil incubation and glasshouse experiments were conducted in sandy soil and clay soil to understand the effect of the fertiliser product(s) in different soil structures and nutrient compositions.

(52) Soil Incubation Breakdown of organic material was observed in both soil types, however this was more clearly seen in the sandy soil due to the lower nutrient loading, organic matter and microbial activity compared to the clay Release of cations was observed over the experimental period, which was reflected in the relationship between CEC, C:N ratio and Labile Carbon Mineralisation of Potassium and Phosphorous was seen, with increased mineralisation occurring with Torrefied Organic products compared to their controls Torrefied Organic products were observed to have similar Ammonium and Nitrate over the experimental period compared to their controls, which showed no major Nitrogen immobilisation was occurring in both soils Due to the high organic content and microbial activity, Ammonium N was observed to convert rapidly into Nitrate N Some Torrefied Organic products were observed to have a slower, more controlled release on N compared to their controls

(53) Glasshouse Performance of the product(s) is better than soil for both corn (clay) and lettuce (sandy), providing increased yield and higher nutrient uptake The agronomic effects are more evident in the sandy soil than clay soil due higher fertility of the clay soil Different application rates for the product (B4) were trialed, and an optimum range was identified Two application rates were trialed for all other treatments. Varying responses were observed by product

(54) Field trials were treated with additional composted chicken manure while pot trials were treated with additional raw chicken manure. The manure/compost was added for comparison with the ABF products (e.g. B1, B4, B5, B6, B7, D5 etc) with separate applications of manure or compost followed by an application of conventional NPK fertiliser. The expectation would be that nutrient availability would be similar from either raw manure or composted manure—the composted material simply having less pathogens and in some cases a bit less nitrogen (which was lost during composting).

(55) The % dry matter yield is dry matter (grams per pot) divided by the control (no fertiliser applied).

(56) Hypothesis 1: Torrefied Organic Material Will Perform as Well or Better than Manure/Compost

(57) Finding: True

(58) TABLE-US-00001 % dry matter yield increase v's control Lettuce Pot Corn Pot trial sandy trial clay Field trial Field trial Treatment soil soil lettuce broccoli Manure or compost only.sup.1 51 2 6 51 C1 (torrefied organics) 65 0 9 52

(59) The C1 torrefied organics does not have inorganic material added (yet). This experiment is intended to demonstrate that the labile carbon in the torrefied organic material is superior to manure of compost when used alone. As can be seen from the results, the % dry matter in field trials is generally increased by the use of the torrefied material adding support for its use in an improved fertiliser composition.

(60) Hypothesis 2: Co-Granulated Torrefied Organics/Inorganic Chemical Fertiliser Compound Will Perform as Well as Manure/Compost+NPK Chemical Fertiliser Blend

(61) Finding: True

(62) TABLE-US-00002 % dry matter yield increase v's control Field trial Field trial Treatment lettuce broccoli NPK blend 23 119 NPK blend + compost/manure 24 107 B4 (torrefied organics 13 104 compounded with NPK) B5 (torrefied organics 18 120 compounded with NPK) B6 (torrefied organics 35 115 compounded with NPK)

(63) B4, B5 and B6 compositions according to embodiments of the invention each have 32.5% torrefied organic base and 67.5% inorganic material. The suffix 4, 5 and 6 are used to denote that each of the B formulations has a slightly different inorganic formulation. The exact nutrient % of the formulations are shown in the Table of FIG. 13.

(64) When considering the performance overall, it should be borne in mind that in NPK blend+compost/manure, the formulations have to be delivered in two separate steps which is a disadvantage as described in the background section above. The improvements seen for field trial lettuce and field trial broccoli are therefore considerable improvements since the fertiliser according to an embodiment of the present invention B4, B5 and B6 was added in one step.

(65) Hypothesis 3: Co-Granulated Torrefied Organics/Chemical Fertiliser Compound Will Perform as Well or Better than Manure/Compost+NPK Chemical Fertiliser Compound

(66) Finding: True

(67) TABLE-US-00003 % dry matter yield increase v's control Lettuce Pot Corn Pot trial sandy trial clay Field trial Field trial Treatment soil soil lettuce broccoli Nitrophoska 87 −1 27 111 Nitrophoska + compost/manure 26 107 B7 (torrefied organics 71 −4 31 136 compounded with NO.sub.3PK)

(68) NO.sub.3PK is sometimes referred to by the trade mark Nitrophoska. The improved results with B7 when compared to Nitrophoska used alone or in combination with compost/manure should be clear from the results shown in the Table. The % dry matter yield for lettuce increased from 26% to 31% when using the improved fertiliser B7 according to an embodiment of the invention. The % dry matter yield for corn increased from 107% to 136% when using the improved fertiliser B7 according to an embodiment of the invention.

(69) Hypothesis 4: Co-Granulated Torrefied Organics/SOA Compound Will Perform as Well or Better than SOA

(70) Finding: True

(71) TABLE-US-00004 % dry matter yield increase vs control Lettuce Pot Corn Pot trial sandy trial clay Field trial Field trial Treatment soil soil lettuce broccoli Sulphate of Ammonia (SOA) 66 36 B2 (torrefied organics 138 66 compounded with SOA)

(72) The improved results with B2 when compared to SOA used alone should be clear from the results shown in the above Table. The % dry matter yield for lettuce increased from 66% to 138% when using the improved fertiliser B2 according to an embodiment of the invention. The % dry matter yield for corn increased from 36% to 66% when using the improved fertiliser B2 according to an embodiment of the invention.

(73) Hypothesis 5: Co-Granulated Torrefied Organics/MAP-S—Zn Compound Will Perform as Well or Better than Granulock Z

(74) Finding: True

(75) TABLE-US-00005 % dry matter yield increase v's control Lettuce Pot Corn Pot trial sandy trial clay Field trial Field trial Treatment soil soil lettuce broccoli Granulock Z 100 32 B3 (torrefied organics 138 56 compounded with MAP-S—Zn)

(76) MAP-S—Zn is referred to by the trade mark Granulock Z which is a registered trade mark of Incitec Pivot. The improved results with B3 when compared to MAP-S—Zn used alone should be clear from the results shown in the above Table. The % dry matter yield for lettuce increased from 100% to 138% when using the improved fertiliser B3 according to an embodiment of the invention. The % dry matter yield for corn increased from 32% to 56% when using the improved fertiliser B2 according to an embodiment of the invention.

(77) Hypothesis: Co-Granulated Torrefied Organics/Urea Compound Will Provide Significant Yield Increases, More so with Add Si & DMP Inhibitor

(78) Finding: True

(79) TABLE-US-00006 Lettuce Pot Corn Pot trial sandy trial clay Field trial Field trial soil soil lettuce broccoli D1 (torrefied organics 38 77 with urea) D5 (torrefied organics with 77 86 urea + silicon + Zn + DMP)

(80) The improved results with D5 having the addition of silicon, Zinc and DMP can be seen when compared to the formulation D1. The % dry matter yield for lettuce increased from 38% to 77% when using D5 according to an embodiment of the invention. The % dry matter yield for corn increased from 77% to 86% when using the improved fertiliser D5 according to an embodiment of the invention.

(81) Any promises made in the present description should be understood to relate to some embodiments of the invention, and are not intended to be promises made about the invention. Where there are promises that are deemed to apply to all embodiments of the invention, the right is reserved to later delete those promises from the description since there is no intention to rely on those promises for the acceptance or subsequent grant of a patent unless the context makes clear otherwise.

(82) In the claims which follow and in the preceding description of the invention, except where the context requires otherwise due to express language or necessary implication, the word “comprise” or variations such as “comprises” or “comprising” is used in an inclusive sense, i.e. to specify the presence of the stated features but not to preclude the presence or addition of further features in various embodiments of the invention.