Tx_Crinum

Has anyone noticed that the OP who started this thread has evaporated into thin air?

Richard

Whenever someone starts capitalizing, bolding, and especially color-bolding to make a point, I become very skeptical of the writing and the perceptions behind it.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

momoese

Hey I resemble that.

But I only do it when I believe someone has not read what I wrote. Nothing at all wrong with some skepticism though.

As for the OP I think it's been shown that (he?) is a salesperson. On the other hand there are also many Straw Men that go around posting to various websites to further their agendas.

supermario

Indeed. that's the second "organic" guy I've called out on this forum. Some "organicprojim" came on recommending some "TurfPro" product for all your plants. A quick search revealed he was the head of the company! He even went as far as posting fake reviews on Dave's Garden Watchdog!

The jerk that started this thread seemed to be trying to sell everyone on some lab called "soil food web". I'm actually not sure if he really is a salesman though...cause I've worked in sales the majority of my life and know better than to insult or attack a potential customer in any way. I think it's more likely he was one of the "soil food web's" clients and got sick of everyone pointing out his inconsistencies. He's probably planning a demonstration with PETA as we speak.

Richard

A recent report by the Food and Drug Administration says there's no evidence that organic food is any safer than conventionally grown food: Feds Say Organic Food Not Safer Than Food Grown Conventionally | KPBS.org

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

momoese

The sickest I've ever been was from drinking unpasteurized organic pomegranate juice from a farmer that I had known and trusted for a very long time. You just never know. I still buy from him but I did let him know that his product almost killed me. I'm sure it was the juice because at the time I was dieting and that was the only thing I had consumed that day before becoming violently ill.

supermario

I've had similar negative experiences when purchasing food anywhere other than my usual grocer. That is why I make no exception when I shop for meat, chicken, fish, etc. I may stray from the typical commercial grocer when it comes to fruits and veggies, but that's about it.

Here in Miami, FL.. Sedano's is a very successful grocery chain. I personally will NEVER shop there again unless I am buying something that I can easily judge the quality of for myself(some ethnic canned foods as well.)..The reason why is because I purchased some milk there once... tasted it the same day and it was grainy! YUCK! I guess they left it out too long before refridgerating it again! The milk didn't even expire for another two weeks!

Tx_Crinum

Okay, now that insult was not called for one bit. I am proud to be a card carrying member of PETA. People Eating Tasty Animals.

permaculturekidd

I'll say my bit and I'm done.

We all know pestcides and artificial fertilizers are bad; you eat them they'll kill you. You breathe to much in you can get cancer, you put some types on your skin it can burn you or leave you with a rash.

But many don't care; they have mouths to feed and more importantly money to make.

We have just as many people preaching the miracle grow dogma aswell as the composting commandments; its a battle to me. Those resistant to change and those rebuking a regrettably successful fix (on the short-term).

There is no point to argue, much like all other things that affect people's choices there will be those who simply enjoy to make other people's choices there own.

It's absolutely mind boggling to be on the sidelines and reading what some people say.

Anyway I'm done; carry on.

Richard

Beer is a pesticide when used to control snails and slugs. The term "pesticide" has no bearing on whether a material is naturally occurring, synthetic, or toxic to humans. Legally, it only relates to use.

Lemon juice is a herbicide when used to kill weed seedlings. Again, the term "herbicide" only relates to use and has no bearing on whether the substance is naturally occurring, synthetic, or toxic to humans.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

sbl

Both methods have negative consequences and positive benefits. Artificial fertilizer? What does that mean? N fertilizer is made from air by nature in 2 ways; lightening and in the nodules of plants that contain nitrogen fixing bacteria, plants and bacterial then transform it into various forms, ammonia, nitrate, protein. Man makes N fertilizer from air using the Haber-Bosch process using natural gas, heat and electricity (modeled after Mother Natures method - lightening). After the N is fixed, it can be transformed into various forms, like nitrate.

P and K cannot be "created" by man (except in nuclear reactors--at cost that would make it more valuable than gold.) P in modern fertilizer is mined from animal graveyards where bones have turned into phosphate rock. The phosphate rock can be powdered and used directly or transformed into various forms. Most K in nature is found in rocks- (it is radioactive with a half life of 1.5 B yrs by the way and responsible for most of the background radiation we all recieve--especiall if you live in a brick home). In manmade fertilizer, K comes from extraction of rocks with acids to obtain various salts of K.

As I said earlier, the real downside of concentrated fertilizer is that it helps natural soil bacteria consume the organic matter that is there. In soil, when a plant dies, the C to N ratio is lower than what is needed to support bacteria, that N get used fairly rapidly leaving even lower C to N ratio--almost pure organic carbon. This material helps in soil drainage, aeration and maintains a healthy soil. The addition of fertilizer alone will speed up the degredation of the organic matter, it does not kill the bacteria, it provideds them with the nutrients to consume the carbon. If you do not add additional organic matter, the soil will become compacted and depending on soil type, low in minerals.

However, if you continuously add organic matter, you can maintain a healthy soil and more productive plants.

As for pesticides, I understand the concern for use of chemicals that we know little about, especially in a long term sense. We may know that there is low probability of acute toxicity, but how do we know there are not some long term negative effects like cancer or birth defects. But just because a pesticide was made by Mother Nature does not mean it is safe. The most toxic compounds know to man were made by Mother Nature.

The best way to control pest is to maintain a healthy population of predatory insects. To do that I use pesticides very sparingly, and I only use pesticides that have very short half lives (some organic some manmade--mostly malathion and permethrins) and I limit application to problem areas to avoid killing beneficials. I often use soap--a manmade chemical--because it only kills what I put it on.

momoese

Found this and thought I'd share.

First, there's the environmental damage and impact on human health caused by chemical N-P-K fertilizers.

Then, there's the problems of overuse. Excessive doses of some nutrients is a direct cause of other nutrient deficiencies.

And there's the build-up of chemical Salts. Because these fertilizers are by definition SALTS. Everyone knows Salt is BAD for agriculture.

On top of all this is the terrible toll that fertilizer manufacturing takes on the environment and the people who live near the factories. They pollute; they're dangerous. Remember the Bhopal fertilizer plant explosion in India in 1984? The Toulouse fertilizer plant explosion in France in 2001? On our own shores, the worst accident involving fertilizer took place in 1947 in Texas, when 600 people were killed and 3,500 people were injured; it was part of the testimony presented in July 2005 before the Senate Homeland Security Committee, which was studying national security risks:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/securi...50713-poje.pdf

Let's look first at the ingredients in a balanced fertilizer: N-P-K.

N, Nitrogen, is the most common element in our atmosphere. It comes in different forms: Elemental N, NO3- (Nitrate), NO2 (Nitrite), NH4+ (ionized Ammonia), NH3+ (poisonous Ammonia gas) and others. Nitrogen is also an essential nutrient; all plants and animals need it to survive. It's essential to the Chlorophyll molecule.

Too much, or the wrong kind of N, will damage or kill these organisms.

news-service.stanford.edu/news/1998/august26/yaqui.html

N is especially toxic to fish and invertebrates. It's also toxic to humans; people who depend on rural, private wells for their water source have one of the higher rates of a condition called Methemoglobinemia, aka Blue Baby Syndrome, which damages blood cells and is traced to high Nitrates.

Articles in Science Magazine submitted by the International Nitrogen Initiative last May inspired 'Reactive Nitrogen: The Next Big Pollution Problem' on the Wired Science website. It describes a litany of problems and warns us, 'Nitrogen pollution could eventually render entire stretches of ocean dead, as is now the case in the Gulf of Mexico, where fertilizer runoff has created a 5,800 square mile dead zone.' Here's the URL:

blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/05/reactive-nitrog.html

More data appears in an essay posted by a company in New Jersey, Alpha Water Systems, titled 'Nitrate Pollution of Groundwater'. You can read it online:

NITRATE POLLUTION OF GROUNDWATER

None of this is new. It's just worse.

And that's just the N.

Unlike Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium are immobile in Soil.

Feldspars and Micas contain most of the Potassium in our Soil. K in fertilizers is almost always applied as Potassium Chloride from mines in Canada.

K dissolves in Water. P does not.

Instead, it binds to Soil particles and stays put until some nice microbe comes along and un-locks it. Clay Soils tend to keep the strongest grip on it; Sandy Soils are looser and let it drizzle through.

Phosphate and Potash fertilizers don't just raise the chemical P and K levels; they also add damaging Soil Salts. And although most Soils in the U.S. have perfectly adequate levels of Phosphorus and Potassium, and even though they don't need any more from your fertilizer, people use them anyway. This is a problem because too much Phosphorus locks other nutrients OUT of plants.

Iron and Zinc deficiencies are common in Soil over-loaded with non-dissolving P. A fatal disease in livestock called 'Grass Tetany' -- a complex condition linked to Mg deficiency in cows and other ruminants -- is examined by French author André Voisin: 'Excessive and repeated dressings of Potassium fertilizers cause Magnesium deficiencies in plants, particularly Grasses...' It's even bad for the animals that depend on them; they too develop Mg deficiency:

'GRASS TETANY' Chapter 6

Organic Phosphates provide energy for chemical reactions in plant and animal growth and cell reactions. But too much and you end up with growth out of control.

When this happens in a lake, you find so much growing going on that they run out of Oxygen; you end up with a lot of dead plants and animals.

Phosphate pollution is so bad in some areas, people are pushing for a 'Phosphate Fertilizer Act' to deal with it. Phosphorus would be legal only if a Soil Test showed it was needed; only if you were planting new Seed or installing new Sod; or if you're a licensed greenskeeper at a golf course.

You can see how hard fertilizer companies would push to block this law. Their profits depend on getting people to use fertilizer ALL the time, not just when they need it.

Making Phosphate fertilizer is no picnic, either. That's a big problem in Florida, where it's a billion dollar industry. Phosphate fertilizer contains radioactive lead and polonium.

Mine the Phosphate and you end up with radioactive byproducts. As environmentalist George C. Glasser points out, 'Phosphate fertilizer manufacturing and mining are not environment friendly operations... People living near the fertilizer plants and mines, experience lung cancer and leukemia rates that are double the state average.' You can read his article, 'Fluoride and the Phosphate Connection', in the online Pure Water Gazette:

Fluoride and the Phosphate Connection* by George C

Potassium (K) is essential for plant growth. K is generally not considered an environmental problem; in parts of the world where high levels were recorded, industrial waste (and not fertilizer) was blamed. Plants absorb K very efficienty when it's dissolved in the water in your Soil. As with P, too much K in your Soil will chemically lock out other important micronutrients. Calcium and Magnesium are 2 elements upstaged by too much K in Soil.

Now, we all know that Salt damages plants. A Chemical fertilizer is, technically, a Chemical Salt: an Ionic Compound. It can be produced by the reaction of an Acid and a Base; by combining a Cation (positively charged Ion) and an Anion (negative charged Ion) or a Metal and an Acid.

A Salt gets its name from the Cation, followed by the name of the Anion. NaCl - Sodium Chloride, aka Table Salt, is a Sodium Cation bonded to a Chloride Anion. (NH4)2SO4 - Ammonium Sulfate, the preferred N fertilizer for Lawns and Golf Courses, is an Ammonium Cation and a Sulfate Anion. Ca(NO3)2 - Calcium Nitrate, a Calcium Cation and a Nitrate Anion. CO(NH2)2 is Urea, the most inexpensive Nitrogen fertilizer, made of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Anhydrous Ammonia (NH3) (Ammonia bonds directly with Acids to form 'Ammonium Salts').

That, in a very large nutshell, is the problem with chemical fertilizers.

supermario

I'm going to attempt to summarize the below information in as simple a way possible...

Do not apply too much fertilzer. Do not eat the fertilizer nor drink water that may contain runoff..

Did I hit?.. or miss?

Although the info does not provide a solution to the proposed problem, it seems as if one tests their soil regularly and applies only what is needed...there will be no problem.

sbl

I agree wholeheartedly with you regarding the environmental consequences of excess fertilizers--it is what I spent a significant part of my career working on. However, even natural sources of fertilizer can be responsible for eutrophication--case in point--I remember a river in the Pacific NW where the source of the eutrophication was traced to salt spray from the ocean that acted as a cation exchange to release natural N in soils formed by N fixation in Aspens.

In the Gulf of Mexico, 70% of the excess N in the Mississippi River comes from the corn belt---much of the remainder comes from municipal inputs.
As a scientist, I also think that much of the problem comes from removal of the consumers--In Chesapeake Bay in the 1600s, oysters filtered the entire volume of the bay in 3 to 4 days--now it takes 300-400 days.

I also agree with the damage caused by mining (all mining), but we just need to make the mine companies put up the money for restoration before they do the mining--the mines can be restored --it just takes money.

Last, the argument about salt killing microbes is highly overstated. It is not the presence of salt, it is the concentration of salt. All animals, plants and microbe require salt, but when the concentration inside or outside is too high, it can be lethal.

There are many differences in requirements depending on the soil and environmental or climatic conditions. We have very sandy soil with very low natural nutrient/mineral levels. There are several plants that won't grow here due to salt (IN THE AIR). Our high rainfall (5 to 6 ft a yr) washes out salts and nutrients. Addition of organic matter helps retain nutrients and add trace minerals, but unless you have a farm lot full of animals, it is almost impossible to maintain a productive healthy garden without frequent additions of commercial fertilizers.

Richard

Table salt, yes. The majority of salts do not have the property of table salts and are acidic, not alkaline. A large number of naturally occuring salts are beneficial to plants.

The water soluble fertilizer shown in the bottom photograph is not available from The Scotts MiracleGro Company. The color of the compound is from naturally-occuring Copperas:



All of the fertilizer samples in the image below contain chemicals: some non-synthetic, some synthetic.

1. Granular "Triple-15". Does not qualify as an "Organic Fertilizer". In the fertilizer industry, granular refers to a nutrient that is cast on the ground, typically where the irrigation water will hit it. In this particular case, several university studies have demonstrated that soil biology is adversely affected when triple-15 (and some similar products) are applied directly to bare soil. However, when applied to a thick layer of mulch the results range from negative to positive depending upon (a) the underlying soil, (b) the nature of the mulch, and (c) the leaf-fall from surrounding plants.
2. Pelletized "Pure-N-Natural". Qualifies as an "Organic Fertilizer". Pelletized means that a combination of materials were pressed or baked into a solid, then crushed or pelletized, and sometimes coated (e.g., osmocote). These again are intended to be applied directly to the soil. This particular product contains nutrient chemicals -- both major and minor, non-nutrient chemicals -- e.g., humic acids, plus mycorrhizae and beneficial bacteria all coexisting in the same compound. It is one of several excellent soil conditioners and inoculants on the market. Note that once you inoculate your soil -- you need not do it again for many years if ever ... especially if the soil is maintained with a top layer of mulch. Five to seven years ago I inoculated my orchard soils with this product and since then annual soil tests have shown that no further biotics need be added.
3. Water Soluble 20-5-5. Qualifies as an "Organic Fertilizer". Water soluble means that the product was designed to be dissolved in water before applying to plants. If you were to apply them directly to the ground, a large percentage of the nutrients would simply escape to the atmosphere. Most agricultural water solubles (including this one) are beneficial to organisms in the soil -- in fact the water solubles often count on microbes to process some of the minerals into a form useful by plants.
4. Neem Seed Meal. Qualifies as an "Organic Fertilizer". A meal is a ground or shredded plant material. In this case, Neem Seed Meal is comprised of seed casings and fibers left over after Neem Seed Oil is pressed from the seeds. The meal is high in nitrogen for a plant material (~ 5-1-1) and has been used in south Asia for centuries. It is not a significant insecticide but the strong odor will drive away some varieties of insects, bugs, and most teenagers.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

momoese

So for the most part you two agree with what this person posted?

SBL, when you say " it is almost impossible to maintain a productive healthy garden without frequent additions of commercial fertilizers." are you 1, referring to the sandy soil in your area, and 2, what is your definition of "comercial fertilizers"? Are you in this specific post talking about chemical ferts or anything packaged and sold at a profit that feeds the plants including organic (non chemical and non synthesized) plant food.

Richard, I see you quoted me and want to make clear that is not my writing, it's something I found while surfing.

Richard

No. It is replete with over-generalizations and phobic undertones.

__________________
Back in business at plantsthatproduce.com

sbl

What who posted? I have not read the links in your last post.

[/quote]
SBL, when you say " it is almost impossible to maintain a productive healthy garden without frequent additions of commercial fertilizers." are you 1, referring to the sandy soil in your area, and 2, what is your definition of "comercial fertilizers"? Are you in this specific post talking about chemical ferts or anything packaged and sold at a profit that feeds the plants including organic (non chemical and non synthesized) plant food.[/quote]



I am talking about our sandy soil as that is what I know about. The commercial fertilizers I am talking about are typical granular fertilizer used on farms. Various NPK ratios depending on the plants and needs--including things like Ammonium sulfate, ammonium nitrate, urea, diammonium phosphate, potassium nitrate.

The truth is if organic fertilizers like cottonseed meal were as cheap as available and as effective I would use them--I don't have anything against them, but I would have to drive 50 mile to get such materials in addition to the fact that they cost more and work more slowly. The most effective organic material I get is my neighbors grass clippings--once composted it is about as good as manure.

turtile

The problems with Nitrogen and Phosphorus will be the same whether they came from chemical fertilizer or an organic source. You're going to end up with nitrate from both organic and various chemical fertilizers. Nitrate is nitrate.

Salts exist in organic material as well. Chemical fertilizers don't remain salts either. As long as the salt doesn't build up in the soil, it isn't a problem. Dry areas have the problem the most. Naturally, desert areas have high amounts of salt in the soil.

Most of the problems mentioned are due to poor management and will exist with organic fertilizer as well. For instance, I've mentioned before that the main problem with phosphorus in my area is application of chicken manure. There is tons of it and it needs to go somewhere.

You're going to end up providing unneeded chemicals to your plants by using only organic materials since you can't pick and choose the exact nutrient you want to use. With "chemical" fertilizers you can provide exactly what is needed.

__________________
http://www.unusualplants.net/

sbl

As for the environmental consequences of excess nutrients, much of the problem could be reduced by better land management--buffer zones to absorb runoff, retention areas and reduced application rates. Many corn farmers over apply fertilizer for that 1 yr in 5 when the have sufficient rainfall to use the extra fertilizer.

As Turtile said P from intensive animal farms (hogs, chickens and cows) is as much of the problem as row crops. However, I still think that in coastal waters, overfishing is as much of the problem as nutrient input.