We definitely encourage leaving the barrel accessible, not covered in cob. We have a class exercise handout on decorating the barrel using various compatible materials - available by request for those interested.
Regarding using biochar for insulation: My impression was the whole point was to use it as soil-building material for carbon sequestration. (I have my own speculation about the popularity of the biochar process; I think it's an attractive / viral meme for several reasons, most of which have nothing to do with the explanations that are sold with it, and everything to do with humanity's susceptibility to certain fascinations.)
The carbon will burn out if it's used to insulate a high-temp flame path, just not necessarily all at once, and there might be a point where anything remaining doesn't burn out because it's insulated from the fire.
I saw some examples of charcoal-clay "vernacular insulative ceramic" bricks, made in a rocket cookstove project in Uganda, and fired in a kiln before use.
Here's a couple of links to projects that may be related:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/taxonomy/term/1727
http://www.stoves.bioenergylists.org/taxonomy/term/374?page=1
I think what I originally saw was this PDF summary of the project, over a decade ago now:
http://www.aprovecho.org/lab/rad/rl/stove-design/doc/29/raw
There are a lot of other PDFs linked from the same menu on the Approvecho website:
http://www.aprovecho.org/lab/rad/rl/stove-design/category/1
Bear in mind that the Approvecho cookstoves are generally quite short, risers about 12 inches in many cases, or up to 2-3 feet in a few large-scale cookers. They are also more accessible for repairs or brick replacement; and in many cases are designed to be portable and used outdoors. They are not burned as hot or as long as a whole-house heater. So making metal shells and filling with insulative ash or burn-out materials has been the most widespread version, with insulative ceramics researched mainly in places where clay is more readily available than metal parts.
We have stayed with the perlite-clay version mostly because it seems to work well. Although it is not super-durable even when made excellently, it is about the cheapest effective material, and the most durable cheap material.
(I like the idea of smearing a hard-coat liner on the inner form, I would recommend something like earthen plaster or a refractory cement that's compatible with the clay or whatever binder is used for the rest of the insulation.)
Ianto Evans uses perlite for insulation around his stoves in workshops. I've been told that sawdust, straw, and other gap-forming materials were used with clay, with disappointing results. The material tended to become crumbly on firing, and though that could just be poor pottery technique (firing before completely dry), most of the insulative materials and gap-forming burnout materials also hold moisture and complete drying is a big part of the challenge. An extra step of firing in a home kiln, to high-grade for the materials that don't become crumbly, would be both time- and energy-intensive.
I have come to believe that the insulative kiln bricks widely used by hobby and professional potters for making kilns, and the refractory insulation used by industry for lagging, are probably reasonably priced. This is considering the value of time and energy it would take to re-create them at a home DIY scale, and the energy savings that would result from doing larger-scale production in dedicated facilities. Like ovens, an occasionally-used home kiln will be far less efficient on fuel than a commercial, regularly-used, large-batch kiln. If you're going to fire bricks or refractory tubes at home before building, it's probably going to save time and money to just order some bricks online and have them shipped.
Except maybe in that Indian Himalayas situation. I could see shipping being extremely expensive in that case.
The certification and ratings of refractory products probably do add to their cost, as would liability insurance for such commercial producers, but I think it might roughly offset the additional time and energy costs of making your own.
The energy costs of processing refractory cements also add to their cost - which I think is why Ianto avoided them. Embodied energy, uncertain chemistry (some refractory cements are far less toxic than Portland cement, but it's a new learning curve for each one), plus having to actually shell out money for a project, would all be a real turnoff for Ianto.
We do find that perlite-clay insulation around the heat risers, either as a stand-alone or (more durably) around a brick liner, is pretty darn effective.
We will also use refractory blanket (rock wool, cermic-fiber blanket) where it's available, as it insulates very well with a thin layer. Think I've described the other options we routinely use elsewhere on these forums, with thicknesses and all.
Vermiculite and pumice seem to be less effective - clay fills the spaces in vermiculite, and it doesn't bond well at densities light enough to remain insulating. Vermiculite in a refractory cement might work out better.
We are still very interested in improved solutions. I have been talking about the cast-around-a-cardboard-core for some time now, and tried it on the burn-tunnel castings we did last year with some satisfactory results. Delighted to see a tall, working heat riser. I would be tempted to make one in sections, like a Grecian column, so that if it did get bumped your prospects for salvage and repair are better.
My understanding with clay /ceramics is that there are several weak points before you get to the final, hardens-with-heat ceramic set:
1) Water: trapped moisture will cause spalling or small steam explosions wherever the heat finally finds it. In insulative materials, this can happen as a series of small spalling explosions as the heat penetrates each successive layer of material. Commercial refractories are often held at around 100 F (65 C) to dry them thoroughly before raising the temperature above 212 F (100 C) for firing-in or curing.
2) 600-800 F, or up to 1200 F (roughly 400-600 C - this is my general recollection anyway so look it up if it matters to you):
I've heard reports that some clay materials can go through a weak phase at this temperature, one reason why kilns are heated slowly and gradually. If material is heated only to this temperature and no further, such as in certain parts of a fireplace back, you may see irrigation or crumbling of the materials. This is about the point where Portland cement gives up, also, so materials that contain impurities like lime or hydrated minerals might go through a second, steam-spalling phase in this range.
3) Ceramic firing-in: usually in the range around 2000 F (1000 C) or so. When brought slowly to this phase and held for enough time , the clay bonds into stone-like hardness. Vitrification (glassy-ness) happens in here; glazes or other inclusions can change state in interesting ways. In some cases, the hardest firing is just before the melting point, which makes me think that 'sintering' (fusing of particles as they melt at the edges, but not all the way through), might be what's happening in the extreme case of ceramic hardening.
4) Melting point: Many common clays like brick-clay and terra cotta, known in the pottery world as "low-fired" clays, will melt if their temperature exceeds a certain point. For brick clay I think it's around 2600 F, but it would vary a lot. Firebrick is made with fire-clay grog (essentially a fire-suitable clay that's fired once for use as sand or aggregate in the brick works), then the whole brick is fired again. They are rated for higher temperatures, can handle that 2600 F in most cases. But if you did get them hot enough they would melt too - maybe up around 3000? depends on the brick, check the rating if possible.
High-fired clays like porcelain will not melt at temperatures that would melt terra cotta, and will need somewhat hotter firing to achieve the most desirable hardening and effects. Porcelain contains talc, as does soapstone. It would eventually melt, if raised hot enough; everything does, which is why the earth's mantle is liquid.
-Erica W