 |
|

05/01/07, 10:30 AM
|
 |
Shepherd
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central NY
Posts: 1,658
|
|
|
This is an interesting thread.
The idea that there are only 2 sources for obtaining nitrogen is based upon old insufficient science. We are learning all the time that our understanding of our world is meager, and yet we place all of our faith in
underinformed/misinformed scientists... even as they are proven wrong time after time.
Azobacter is a bacteria that, like legumes, takes nitrogen from the air and makes it available to plants. Current studies show that the nitrogen transportation problem may become irrelevant if we can rebuild the proper
bacterial levels in the soil. (Ironically, use of chemicals was a part of reason the bacteria do not thrive in our current, sorry soil...)
The question is, will we rebuild our soil, or will we use this information to overbuild the soil, much in the way we abused the discovery and use of chemical-based nitrogens?
Over and over, we acquire these small bits of understanding, mere bits of the puzzle, and we run with them, like little kids running with knives. We have to learn to anticipate that we are likely to create yet another, unanticipated issue.
I think the question should have been can we live WITH chemical fertilizers- and the answer seems to be clearly - no.
The abundant food that results is a deception- it's lack of nutrients means that we would need ever increasing amounts of it just to sustain life. And though we may be alive, we will never achieve optimal health eating that junk.
The question of addressing the needs of the ever increasing population
is self explanatory. The population cannot continue to grow. It's that simple.
The planet is like a barrel. it WILL overflow eventually.
All signs seem to indicate that "eventually" is now.
|

05/01/07, 10:52 AM
|
 |
Fair to adequate Mod
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Between Crosslake and Emily Minnesota
Posts: 13,721
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by minnikin1
....The idea that there are only 2 sources for obtaining nitrogen is based upon old insufficient science....
|
The two sources are (1) the air and (2) recycled forms. I must of missed something in your post. What is the third source?
__________________
This is the government the Founding Fathers warned us about.....
|

05/01/07, 11:01 AM
|
 |
Shepherd
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central NY
Posts: 1,658
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cabin Fever
The two sources are (1) the air and (2) recycled forms. I must of missed something in your post. What is the third source?
|
You suggested recycled or via legumes, you did not mention the
potentially unlimited bacterial vector or others that we don't necessarily understand yet.
Also, I did not quote your post becasue I was answering in general. Among all the posts, there was no mention of azobacter that I could see.
|

05/01/07, 11:21 AM
|
 |
Fair to adequate Mod
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Between Crosslake and Emily Minnesota
Posts: 13,721
|
|
|
I wouldn't hold out too much hope for the N-fixing capabilities of Azotobactor or any other N-fixing microorganism (like mychorizae...please excuse my spelling). These organisms are present in all soils and do fix a few pounds of N per year. If the conditions were condusive to fixing more, they would be doing it. Even if a person could improve soil conditions for N fixation by organisms other than Rhysobium (sp?) and doubled the amount of N fixed, it still wouldn't amount to much.
I do, however, hold out much hope for the use of genetic engineering in the area of expanding the possibilities of symbioses between plants and N-fixing microorganisms.
__________________
This is the government the Founding Fathers warned us about.....
|

05/01/07, 11:48 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: missoula, montana
Posts: 1,407
|
|
|
We can feed the world just fine without chemical fertilizers.
Cuba lost something like 98% of their petroleum when communism in russia crumbled. They switched over to organic techniques and permaculture practices.
Before, their soil became worse and worse with each passing year and they needed more and more synthetic fertilizer.
Now, their soil is becoming richer and richer every year and they get more food for less work.
Here in the united states, there is no big company that makes big money if farmers use permaculture, so there is no four color brochures mailed to you to tell you this.
The chemical companies that supply us with fertilizers spend millions on advertising and lobbying with the government.
|

05/01/07, 01:12 PM
|
 |
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: WISCONSIN
Posts: 6,695
|
|
|
why use the poop to replace the nitrogen when what we need is energy
why not use the methane and still have the nitrogen left over to grow with
i think one of the biggest reasons for the corn ethonal is that it is making money
farmers know how to grow corn people need energy if we can sell corn to people as energy then they rely less on forieng oil and boost our economy so at least in part the push for ethonal is to boost the US economy
here is what i envision as a possability methane digesters being installed to capture and power gerneation sites both in farming areas and as a part of large city sewage treatment plants then the spent slurry being used to amend soil to grow crops for food and anamal feed all waste human and animal manuer left over food ,leaves, and other execess organic matter from within reasonable areas surrounding these sites be transported to then to be proccessed and then returned back to the soil
for areas not a reasonable distance from these sites people should compost , spread and practice good rotation
we will not likey ever get completely away from chemical ferilizers but it i belive the question was could it be done not could it be done at todays production levels
where so much waste is produced what happens to all of that food at the grocery that gets to it's expiration date. that is just a small part of the waste
i was just talking to a co-worker whos wife works in a restaunt they use thousands of eggs yes they have fresh eggs brought in from the farmer a few times a week
but where do the shells go the land fill why it would be to inconvienient to have 2 trash cans one for organic matter the other for actual garbage packaging and such in the kitchen
|

05/01/07, 01:32 PM
|
 |
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: WISCONSIN
Posts: 6,695
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paul Wheaton
We can feed the world just fine without chemical fertilizers.
Cuba lost something like 98% of their petroleum when communism in russia crumbled. They switched over to organic techniques and permaculture practices.
Before, their soil became worse and worse with each passing year and they needed more and more synthetic fertilizer.
Now, their soil is becoming richer and richer every year and they get more food for less work.
Here in the united states, there is no big company that makes big money if farmers use permaculture, so there is no four color brochures mailed to you to tell you this.
The chemical companies that supply us with fertilizers spend millions on advertising and lobbying with the government.
|
i belived the convesation has moved from merly feeding to replacing the nitrogen in soil so they can grow corn to power cars
so what if we cut the high fructose corn syrup out of everything it is in as a sweetener and used beat sugar we could rotate that in to the mix.
but realisticaly one man with a good tractor,planter and combine can plant spray and harvest corn by himself same with beans
|

05/02/07, 05:45 AM
|
 |
construction and Garden b
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: east ont canada
Posts: 7,380
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GREENCOUNTYPETE
here is what i envision as a possability methane digesters being installed to capture and power gerneation sites both in farming areas and as a part of large city sewage treatment plants then the spent slurry being used to amend soil to grow crops for food and anamal feed all waste human and animal manuer left over food ,leaves, and other execess organic matter from within reasonable areas surrounding these sites be transported to then to be proccessed and then returned back to the soil
|
while a good idea, activated sludge waste water plants use the methane they produce too heat the sludge so it will produce methane and break down the bio solids, some times they also have to use nat gas as well too suppliment. the resulting slurry smells like wet earth. there are systems that dewater the solids and create a sterile pellet that has a higher nutrient content but that system is costly too run as well. there are cellulose systems that create food, ethanol and cellulose for building products. iogen is a local company involved in this pocess, link should be in the alt energy board.
__________________
àigeach carnaid
chaora dhubh
" Don't raise your voice, improve your argument."
cruachan
|

05/02/07, 06:56 AM
|
 |
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Mountains of Vermont, Zone 3
Posts: 8,878
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DJ in WA
So chemical fertilizer, especially nitrogen, takes alot of energy to make, so getting more expensive with higher energy costs.
|
We don't use chemical fertilizers on our farm. Never have. They're too expensive. It is far cheaper to plant legumes like clover that will suck nitrogen out of the air. It is far cheaper to have livestock that graze the pastures and generate high quality manure for gardens and pastures - far better than the incomplete and expensive chemical fertilizers.
It isn't a matter of surviving without chemical fertilizers, we thrive without them. Of course, we thrive without TV too...
Cheers
-Walter
Sugar Mountain Farm
in the mountains of Vermont
http://SugarMtnFarm.com/blog/
http://HollyGraphicArt.com/
http://NoNAIS.org
__________________
SugarMtnFarm.com -- Pastured Pigs, Poultry, Sheep, Dogs and Kids
|

05/03/07, 07:08 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 472
|
|
|
Why don't we just not grow corn? I don't need it. If I wanted some I would just grow it. Save tons of oil energy in the production (from planting, fertilizer, sprays, harvest, storage, processing ) and help the enviroment at the same time. Grow food we can eat directly. Actually grow food in the US to feed the US not import from who knows where. Keep production local. Keep money local. Have you ever heard the saying >as goes farming, so goes the economy<. We should worry more about how to do with less. Learn how to get more out of what we have like better milage. Maybe try to live responsibly. For this country to survive all the people in it must learn to do for themselves and not just rely on a handout. Tom
__________________
Tom Lavalette, Garden Farmer
Owner Toms Tractors, Buy, Sell, Trade Garden Tractors and Implements. Custom Built machinery by order.
If Farms were Smaller, Communities would be Closer.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:31 AM.
|
|