The alternative(s) to TerraCottem

A lot of tests have proven the technology of TerraCottem. More then 20 years of research have made TerraCottem an optimal solution for arid regions or horticulture with similar problems.

TerraCottem is a complex product as it is made up of a mixture of more then 20 different elements, about 40% hydro absorbing polymers and around 50% lava. See product specifications (2,5 Mb!)

The main disadvantage of TerraCottem is its price. The main question here is: is TerraCottem really the most optimal product available of its kind? Several producers of hydro-absorbing polymers have some information on their websites explaining the purpose and use of this kind of polymer in gardens etc. However, other than TerraCottem NV , no other firm could really show me that they had experience in real arid regions..

TerraCottem NV have set-up tests themselves in which TerraCottem always produces a superior effect compared with pure polymers together with fertilizers. TerraCottem claims to have a superior mixture of different elements, and they certainly do. Following their tests, all of these elements are needed to get to the same result.

But I am wondering if there is no other alternative which offers a better optimum growth, production and cost of the product. What if we use only organic fertiliser and pure polylmer? This would mean a cost of about 4,5 EUR/kg. 1 kg would consist of 80% polymers and the rest fertiliser. We just leave the lava out. We would only need 50 g of this “light” version of TerraCottem to have the same value of polymers and fertilizers. When we leave all other costs & commercial margins even (in absoluut terms), we would be able to sell this around 9,75 EUR on the Burkina Faso market. This is about 6400 CFA against 6250 CFA now. But as we need only 50g/m², this would turn out to be less then 320 CFA/m² instead of 625 CFA for TerraCottem itself!

This kind of investment would demand much less cash. If we get more then 50% of the extra yield of TerraCottem, economically this would be a better investment.

This alternative looks nice on paper but it still has to be proven! TerraCottem NV has done tests themselves (without fertilizers) and their result was negative growth in the case of pure polymers! In tests done by TerraCottem where TerraCottem was compared with polymer and fertilizer, TerraCottem came out as superior with about 25%. A control test - without anything - was not mentioned. These tests were done in a lab environment.

Calculating with these figures, we could say that “TerraLight” would generate 18 % more yield than normal. This would bring us towards a lower financial performance but also a lower risk. (See Calculations)

We may not forget that TerraCottem brings another advantage with it: security against a dryer than normal rainy season. If we can put this into practice on a much wider scale, then we have a better safety- net against hunger!

Note: TerraCottem is not protected with patents, but with experience. TerraCottem tried to protect the product with a patent, but withdraw this demand a bit later. (See patent demand)