Could we survive without chemical fertilizer?

Only in theory---corn is used to produce ethanol. The spent mash is fed to livestock. The manure from livestock is used to fertilize the corn fields.

Large commercial feed lots put manure on their cropland if they own and raise their own crops.

We should worry more about the water used to produce ethanol than the corn or fertilizer requirements for such. I'm of the opinion that Kansas should only sell a load of ethanol to those that will provide an equal amount of water in return.

Family farms can survive,and chemicals are faster but not safer.I think that chemicals are like asking someone who sells something for advice -they will always tell you , you need them- but I think many things are wasted that would work very good as fertilizer.And too many things are used that hurt more than they help. C.G.

It wouldn't be as difficult as you propose. it couldn't be done over night, but it could be done seamlessly.

I produce bumper crops in my near 2000 square feet worth of raised beds and half barrel containers, and I have NEVER used a chemical fertilizer.

My neighbors just till the regular clay soil and then spray on the chemicals. Fertilizers, herbicides, fungicides, insecticides -- their crops are nothing more than recycled petrochemicals.

The interesting thing is that I can produce more tomatoes from 20 plants that grow in a rich organic soil than they do with 50 plants grown in regular soil with chemicals. They ask me how I do it, and I tell them, and they seem to be impressed.

Yet the next year, they will go back to tilling the soil and dumping the chemicals.

Me? I NEVER till the soil -- I feed my soil organic material, which encourages earthworms and beneficial micro-organisms to move in. The earthworms till the soil for me, and provide free earthworm castings (poop) to help fertilize the soil at the same time. The organic material improves the tilth of the soil as well as provide natural nutrients that the beneficial micro-organisms and my plants feed on.

After the first two years or so, I find that I do not have to fertilize my organic raised beds at all -- I just mix in the organic mulch I've used during the growing year into the soil around Halloween -- along with some Starbucks coffee grinds, or else some alfalfa meal or cottonseed meal -- and then let that mix compost in the soil over the winter.

By spring time, here in zone 7, the mulch and that extra organic nitrogen I added into the soil around Halloween will have composted enough to plant in. It will complete the composting process in the springtime, providing plenty of organic nutrient for my growing plants.

I do that every year, and it eliminates need for any kind of purchased fertilizer.

Oh, two other things I do: 1, I spray the plants occasionally with liquid seaweed extract and/or fish emulsion (for an organic foliar feeding) and 2, once every 5 years, I mix some kelp meal in my soil to add extra minerals into the soil.

Yeah, but the problem as I understand it is that it takes so much extra chemical nitrogen to feed the corn plants -- chemicals that are made out of the very same petrochemicals that we are trying to conserve -- that by the time the process of making ethanol is completed, we have actually burned more petrochemical carbons to make the ethanol than we will save adding the ethanol into our auto fuel supply.

If that is the case, then ethanol is a BAD way to go.

I should have mentioned that corn is the last crop to be used for cellulose based alcohol. Switchgrass, Reed Cannary grass, Willow sapplings... None of it corn. You can even use the stems from alfalfa plants. Leaf meal goes to the cows/animals/production, and the stems go to the ethanol plant. Since its nitrogen fixing, no fertilizer inputs needed. (except trace amounts, if you're a purist...) If set up right, there is even a possibility of yard waste being used.

Michael

artificer, you've got it backwards. In the US, corn is the first product used for ethanol production.

http://www.ethanol.org/index.php?id=37&parentid=8

No, I don't think it's backwards. We currently use corn because it is easy and cheap to use. Nobody had developed a cellulosic ethanol production system yet that is economically feasible. (they're close, and possibly building now) Once one is developed, however, biomass will be the feedstock of choice. (grasses, stover, willows...)

Take a look at the poultry forum. The price of chicken feed keeps going up. Its largely corn based. As more corn is used for ethanol, the prices will rise. As the price of corn rises, so to will the price of many foods. (revolts in Mexico over rising tortilla prices...)

I believe we are in a transition period of ethanol production. Many see ethanol as the way of the future. Since so little of it is being produced (in relation to oil consumption) we have a distorted idea of the costs of it.

As an aside: I like the growing trend of corn based ethanol producers adding corn oil extracting to the processing plants capabilities. The corn oil then goes into biodiesel production. More energy from the same amount of plants.

To swing this back to the thread topic: one idea of natural fertilizer is a nitrogen fixing cover crop. You could harvest some of the crop as biomass, and the rest gets tilled in as green fertilizer. This system requires the cellulose based alcohol production to be economical.

My dad was talking to some corn growers out west a couple winters ago. SOme of them found that pig manure works just as good as commercial fertilizer. Some of them have started pig farms. They make a profit selling pigs, and they save money because they dont have to spend anything on fertilizer for their corn.

I am planning to get a few brood sows in the next few years.

__________________
http://lownfamilymaplesyrup.com/ max@lownfamilymaplesyrup.com
Professional Tool. 1220 Woodmere Ave,Traverse City, MI. 49686. 231-941-8003. http://professionaltool.com/

The source of all nitrogen used to produce food, feed and fiber (whether it’s backyard garden, organic framing or agri-business) is either from the atmosphere or recycled sources. The lion’s share of the recycled sources is animal manures, human biosolids, food-processing wastes. There is no way that the recycled sources of nitrogen could ever sustain all agricultural production. It’s that simple. There is not enough to go around. Even if there was enough, it would take enormous amounts of fuel to transport the recycled forms of nitrogen around the country. Most of the recycled organic sources contain less than 1% nitrogen and more than 80% water. It gets economically infeasible to transport such dilute forms of nitrogen very far from their source.

The other source of nitrogen is the air. We all know that legumes can fix nitrogen from the air. The source of nitrogen for all manufactured fertilizer is also the air. So, our chemical fertilizer industry is performing the same function as legumes are. And yes, it takes energy to produce nitrogen fertilizer, but it’s much less costly to produce and transport nitrogen fertilizer around the country than legumes.

I suppose some enterprising individual could compete with the chemical nitrogen industry and grow legumes specifically to sell as organic fertilizer (this is being done on a small scale). For instance, soybeans may contain up to 5% nitrogen. If someone to where to One would have to pay the transportation cost for 100 pounds of soybeans (1.67 bushels) to get 5 pounds of nitrogen. If soybeans are sold for $7.50/bushel, the value of the nitrogen in the beans would be about $2.50 per pound of N. This nitrogen cost does not include the transportation charge.

On the other hand, anhydrous ammonia is 82% nitrogen. If anhydrous sells for $400/ton, the cost per pound of N is $0.25 and all you have to transport is 1.2 pounds of fertilizer for every 1 pound of nitrogen.

Another thing that amazes me is how some believe that chemical nitrogen is toxic and get soils “hooked.” I suppose anhydrous is toxic if you breathe it and urea is toxic if you eat it. But hey, the crops grown using these chemicals are not any more toxic than crops grown with an organic fertilizer.

__________________
This is the government the Founding Fathers warned us about.....

I was watching a show the other night that compared different crops. Switchgrass was rated very high and corn was rated as inappropriate.

I wonder why TPTB are concentrating so much effort on using a crop that is so inappropriate?

Think of it like this... if you had to burn 20 gallons of gas to acquire 19 gallons, how long would you be in business? That's about what they are doing by using corn to make ethanol. On the other hand, if you could burn up 10 gallons to acquire 19 gallons, you'd be making progress. So again I wonder, why are they using corn instead of switchgrass?

Because it is just so easy to do it. Moonshiners have been doing it for years.

Michael

Moonshiners did it mainly because of prohibition. When you've got to have your hootch you do what you have to get it. Besides, the leftover mash was usually fed to the hogs which produced manure to use to fertilize the corn fields.

artificer, what I meant by it being backwards was you said corn is the last crop to be used. In the US it is the first and main crop for ethanol production. Now if there was some way to use the waste product instead of the main crop, ethanol would be a viable option. But here they don't use waste products.

CF, you have hit the nail on the head as to part of the reason why waste is not recycled for use as fertilizer. Transportation. Here in Ohio, Buckeye Egg produces more chicken waste than can be used on surrounding fields (not too many either, most of the surrounding area is close housing). They are having to find ways to reduce the overall mass so the waste product can be incinerated or hauled to the dump !!!! Thanks to a few idiot haulers and a bunch of overzealous NIMBY's the waste cannot be hauled to another area for use as fertilizer.

I really think that with a concerted effort and cooperation of ALL parties involved, the biological waste turned fertilizer would work very efficiently. Unfortunately too many people see poop as something to be disposed of (where to, I mean it has to go SOMEWHERE, why not somewhere useful?????) and never mentioned again. I often wonder how many of these same people play golf on courses fertilized with human waste and never even realize it. How many would stop playing golf if they realized they are walking on their own waste? Kind of funny if you ask me.

Yes Danaus29, I agree. If we want to use a truly sustainable approach to all food production, every bit of organic waste must be used efficiently. Let’s say, for whatever reason, that all industrial nitrogen manufacturing and all phosphate and potash mining was discontinued. And let’s also say that we, as a nation, had the goal to maintain food, fiber and feed production at present levels. In this scenario, only two major sources of fertilizers would remain: (1) waste products (biosolids, septage, manures, food-processing wastes, wood ash, etc.) and (2) nutrient-fixing plants (legumes, seaweed, etc.). The value of waste products would skyrocket. Because of the increased value, generators could afford to dewater and dry the waste by-products which would concentrate the nutrients and make them less costly to transport.

Danaus 29, I know all about Milorganite and how it’s been used on probably every golf course in the USA over the past 70 years. Milorganite and Houorganite and other biosolids products are heavily used to fertilize citrus crops in the southeast. About 50% of the biosolids production in the US is utilized, the other 50% is wasted (landfilled or incinerated). And yes, there is a lot of NIMBY out there when it comes to waste recycling on land. A little background, I was a Water Environment Federation spokesperson for biosolids recycling. I’ve attended numerous public meetings and hearings, been written up in local newspapers, and interviewed on TV news in regards to public controversy over the use of sewage sludge as a fertilizer. I’ve spoken to farmer groups and others all over Minnesota and Wisconsin about the safe and beneficial use of biosolids. I am one of the biggest proponents of nutrient recycling in the Midwest.

Ford Major is correct; the use of biosolids is heavily regulated and tested. Heavy metals concentrations are 90% less than they were 30 years ago. Nowadays, cities regulate industries that use the sewer system. Heavy metals concentrations in biosolids are about the same as they are in natural soil (yes, all soils naturally contain heavy metals). Biosolids are treated to reduce pathogens and odors. And all of this concern over pharmaceuticals, antibiotics and hormones in unfounded. Soil is the best place to put these compounds because the soil is an environment where they will easily decompose. Besides, most of these compounds are too large to be taken up by plant roots. At any rate, biosolids use could be expanded greatly in this country.

__________________
This is the government the Founding Fathers warned us about.....

These are some good sites, DJ. Many, many, many years ago, as a dum kid in the late 60's and early 70's, I tried my hand at growing pot. Every year about the time the plants were ready to get harvested, the deer ate them to the ground, except the last year I fooled with it.
Someone told me to pee on them and the smell of human urea would scare the deer away, so as the years before, I checked them once a week to water them and I fertilized tham without even knowing it.
I had 5 plants every year but that year they shot up so fast it scared me. I kept clipping them and they kept spreading like crazy. All 5 plants had nearly two pounds of buds on them and I never changed anything I was doing except peeing on them. Same holes every year. Same creek water, but huge plants. I never figured out what the difference was until now. My urea. Trying to get rid of over 9 pounds of pot scared me so bad that was it. I even stopped smoking it, lol. I've never fooled with it sense. Jail time isn't my way of life.
I think I will be useing a jug this year.
Thanks for the sites, DJ

Yes we could do without chemical fertilizer yes it will be more work

you talk about feeding 6 billion people the food is there already more food than needed it is absolutly sicining the amount of food wasted every day at restarounts groceries in houses and schools

a freind of mine was at walmart the other day and noticed that after cutting the wrapper off the luch meat to be sliced the deli person then takes a few slices off to get rid of the end and make all the slices they sell you the same size.

at mcdonnalds they used to have time limits to how long a burger could sit before it had to be thrown away company polocy it could not be given away my aunt worked there for a few years while in school the found that if she took that food and put it in a large to go bag then took it out and set it ontop of the dumpster she wouldn't have to clean up around the dumpster when when the homless people dugg thru it
a win win for her and them she had no extra cleaning they get clean food that is not at peak taste but not dangerouse.

and if you wanted to get technical everything more then your daily maintinace callories are waste too but we need not even wory about that waste

but it may be nessacary to stop wasting land when i drive thru neighborhoods i see wasted land every houses yard could be growing food rather than grass that needs to be cut small anamals like goats could be grazed , fruit trees could be planted all over the place from medians to city parks ,winter rye could be used much more extensivly there is a farm on my way home theyplant winter rye in the fall then cut mid may when it is about 14 inches high this provides many tons of feed for their beef
then they till under what is left after the hay bine is through and plan corn the next daythere is plenty of time to get 2 crops even here is southern wis

also legume cover crops could be planted then pigs could be grazed on them

we do need to stop bringing he feed to the live stock and move the live stock to the feed a hundred pigs on a field and there is almost no need to till

take a look at this site it explains how a family used pigs to reclaim land that had been severly damaged by the use of chemical ferilizers
http://www.journeytoforever.org/farm.../turner17.html

as for human waste here in south central wisconsin the suage treatment plants proccess the human waste till it is safe to put in to the feilds then the waste water utility has trucks with plows on the back that inject the slurry into the feild.

in milwakee the dry it and bag it and sell it retail it works great if you are planting shrubs ot trees just dig the hole toss in a few handfulls then put the root ball on top and fill in.


i agree if you are trying to keep your farm profitable so you can afford to keep it then all sorts of developeres want it to build more mc mantions temples of waste on it then yes it would be very difficult to make the switch.

the reason people starve in this world has everything to do with politics an very little to do with food
much of the food sent to africa is captured by warlords or held by corupt goverments

as long as we are talking about using humane and animal waste to provvide the nitrogen back into the soil why not capture the metaine to fuel the cars and make electricity a ew dairy farms produce enought manure waste to power small towns 2 or 3 farms to 800 houses sounds like an equation we could work with.

That's something I hadn't thought about in years. Sense I was in school I guess. The indians used to put a fish in with every corn plant. Just a few years ago, when we were fishing alot, we would go down below one of the dams here and net shad. We could catch 4 or 5, five gallon buckets full in 30 minutes there are so many of them there.
It seems I am trying everything I can so I might as well see if I can find my old net. It's probably dry rotted. But a new net won't cost any more than a bag or two of fert does. Plus it's more fun than the feed store. It's something I need to teach my daughter anyhow.

I am enjoying this thread. And learning from it and relearning some things I had forgotten. This is one of the better threads I have seen. Thanks all.

This reminds me of a conversation I had last summer. I was working with a kid who was studying at Chicago Botanical Gardens.

When I mentioned compost and natural fertilizers, he oh-so-proudly informed me that his instructor told him that "plants do not know the difference between artificial and natural fertilizers."

I looked at him in shock, and replied, "But the soil knows! When you grow things, you are not feeding plants; You're building soil!"

Short sightedness.

We have become too used to the Quick Fix. Our culture is wasteful, and looks to short term, false economy. We are in far too much of a hurry to have cheap food and have it NOW.

We must slow down in order for the earth and OURSELVES to heal.

Pony!