I'm really curious what economists, or business-people, think about biochar. Not only is it apparently inexpensive but it also improves plant yields! That seems too suspiciously like a $100 bill lying on the sidewalk. Why has no one picked it up yet?

The following paper doesn't explicitly state that this is the case, but it certainly seems like biochar is not as relatively effective a fertilizer, or fuel source, as alternatives and that therefore it's relative advantage when compared to its alternatives or substitutes lies in its ability to sequester carbon:

- http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40095-014-0106-4

So I guess it's really a $0 bill until the price of carbon rises (for whatever reason).