Do Your Plants Know the Difference Between Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers?

[Green Cross]

No, I don't think chemically induced fertilizers are a health concern. The true health concern is the additives placed in the food after harvest. It's the processing which is killing us all...

With organic and chemical ferts, the two methodologies and processes may vary, but they both end up at the same place... NPK.

Chemical Fertilizers Linked to Brain Cancer

You may want to rethink your opinion

Plants do know the difference; I've yet to cause a plant to go into shock, or burn... using organics.

 

[CrackerJax]

That may indeed be true, but the alternative is to grow 30% more food.... not possible using organics.

It also came off as an opinion piece.... I would prefer to read the actual study and medical conclusion, which he did not source, unless I missed it. Do you have it?

I always keep an open mind, but reality is a stern mistress.

 

[delerious]

That may indeed be true, but the alternative is to grow 30% more food.... not possible using organics.

What's the source for this 30% figure?

Anyone wanting to learn a little more about organic soil can start with this link http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/concepts/soil_biology/soil_food_web.html . A google search on sustainable agriculture will bring up some interesting links if you want to research things more.

 

[smppro]

Chemical Fertilizers Linked to Brain Cancer

You may want to rethink your opinion

Plants do know the difference; I've yet to cause a plant to go into shock, or burn... using organics.

sorry couldnt get past the second paragraph, lol

Over the years, the demand to grow, maintain and even sustain foods with longer shelf life has been taken to a new level. (The more research done, the more scientists realize that these farming techniques, emphasizing quantity rather than quality, means fewer nutrients found in the produce we buy from our local grocery stores.)

well that absolutely false, there is no proof that organic is better than synthetic plus synthetic usually contains more nutrients people need not organic.

 

[CrackerJax]

The hard truth is there is no turning back to organics in the future for farmers. They simply could not produce enough food for everyone.

No the next "fix" for the chem fert dilemma (if indeed it is a dilemma) will be Bio tech modified crops.

Upwards and onwards, the 1800's are gone and it isn't coming back..... unless the bombs drop on everyone.

 

[mariapastor]

The hard truth is there is no turning back to organics in the future for farmers. They simply could not produce enough food for everyone.

No the next "fix" for the chem fert dilemma (if indeed it is a dilemma) will be Bio tech modified crops.

Upwards and onwards, the 1800's are gone and it isn't coming back..... unless the bombs drop on everyone.

i beg the differ this way of like is unsustainable theres way to much people we ALL need to off grid and plant our own food and produce our own methane gass... lets go off grid people 2012 is coming

 

[mariapastor]

i beg the differ this way of like is unsustainable theres way to much people we ALL need to off grid and plant our own food and produce our own methane gass... lets go off grid people 2012 is coming

i ment to say life

 

[mariapastor]

chemical ferts actually take the fertility from the soil , it only fertilizes for that moment up to a month and organic fertilizes progressivly for longer periods for it continues to decompose matter much longer periods of time. it breaks up clay

 

[CrackerJax]

i beg the differ this way of like is unsustainable theres way to much people we ALL need to off grid and plant our own food and produce our own methane gass... lets go off grid people 2012 is coming

That's fine if you don't mind watching millions around the world starve on the tv news each night.

We feed the world...literally...it could not be so with organics.

 

[mariapastor]

i will beleive you when you say we feed the world, but we can barely feed ourselfs why do you think obama wants investors to invest in Renewable sourses everyone ships there goods and gets less for them thats dumb i rather grow organic for myself

 

[CrackerJax]

The reason Obama wants renewable energy is because he wishes to cripple big oil.

If you run real numbers on alternative energy, they don't add up to any savings at all. In fact, it will cost more and ruin the landscape to do it.

A coal plant needs 50 acres to build on..... solar needs 500 acres.
A coal plant produces electricity at a rate of 99.7% efficiency 24/7..... solar does not even come close. throw in bad weather and it gets even more costly.

They estimate if the alternative energy programs are passed in their entirety, electricity prices for YOU the consumer could rise 90%.... sound like a good deal?


Don't even get me started on wind power...... an environmental NIGHTMARE of an idea.

 

[Hayduke]

As for not being able to grow enough food...

The "green revolution" has backfired.

Using leftover weapons of war to kill the bugs (good and bad...not to mention the birds, reptiles, fish, and mammals!) and only NPK to treated hybrid seeds is starting to...imagine this...cause problems from plants and insects developing resistance to even the latest and greatest poisons.

A weed plant associated with cotton and other crops in the Southern US has developed resistance to it's herbicide and mutated in size. The plant is thick enough and strong enough to be called "combine Killer" as it breaks harvesters, leaving fields unharvested. Monsanto blames the farmers for over applying the herbicide.

Historically, pesticides have been used at many times their effective dose, and these poisons persist in the environment for years, and what's worse, when they do break down, it is often into MORE toxic compounds.

Our food is not nutritious even before they process it with stuff we cannot pronounce...they are only given NPK (good for plants, but plants we are not!)...oh yeah...and chemical mutagens!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(pesticide, herbicide...suicide, homicide, genocide...."cide" does not seem like a good thing!) I imagine we all now know at least one person with cancer.

Yes we can get an ~30% increase in crop yields using Monsanto's poisons...But we PAY farmers to NOT farm while paying subsidies to Corporate farms to cover the low price per bushel created by this increased yield. Grain rots in silo's awaiting a price which will allow the farmer to break even...so we feed it to animals that are supposed to eat grass.

We have been duped into believing that corporate farming is progress and is feeding the world. Most of the famines that led to the green revolution can be tied to politics and drought.

Lost top soil, selective nutrition in our food, mutagens bio-accumulating in our tissues and disrupting programmed cell death (cancer!), pests species requiring more and stronger poisons as they develop resistance, and plants which code in their own DNA for bacteria to kill caterpillars (which are developing resistance...I hope we do also....only our life cycle is not defined in days!)....Oh yeah...and we pay for this! though taxes for subsidies and the the increased prices due to the now necessity of the chemical regimens.

But hey...what do I know anyway...I'm pretty much just a pothead...I mean Towel!

 

[Hayduke]

The reason Obama wants renewable energy is because he wishes to cripple big oil.

If you run real numbers on alternative energy, they don't add up to any savings at all. In fact, it will cost more and ruin the landscape to do it.

A coal plant needs 50 acres to build on..... solar needs 500 acres.
A coal plant produces electricity at a rate of 99.7% efficiency 24/7..... solar does not even come close. throw in bad weather and it gets even more costly.

They estimate if the alternative energy programs are passed in their entirety, electricity prices for YOU the consumer could rise 90%.... sound like a good deal?


Don't even get me started on wind power...... an environmental NIGHTMARE of an idea.

OMG!

Well that is what we are being told!

A coal fired power plant may have a small foot print as it's smoke stacks tower into the air...but it takes entire mountainsides to run!

Native species, streams...entire watersheds! communities! Soil takes a millenia to form from rock through succession! turning a mountain upside down while at the same time putting entire communities out of work is a travesty.

Solar on unused roof tops that are currently absorbing and reflecting energy as heat...that we pay money to burn coal to cool down....hmmm my head is spinning

Yes there is A LOT of coal under the Appalachians...and yes some coal is appropriate...but if you have seen the Smokey Mountains....turning them into business parks, suburbs and golf courses (about all you can do following mountain-top removal mining) would be committing a crime on people...family... not yet born.

Yes poor poor big oil. It is supply and demand. Yes there probably is lots of oil left. They are ripping us off for refined products now. Reduce the demand...supply goes up...we can afford to drive gasoline cars...sort of.

 

[CrackerJax]

We have plenty of coal and the cost per KWH with coal as opposed to wind or solar is not even close. The facts are of course we have mountains and mountains of coal....so the supply is cheap and so is the conversion to electricity. NEXT!!!

The way to reduce the price of oil is to INCREASE supply, not lower it. There is NOTHING waiting in the wings that can do the heavy lifting without oil. That's a FACT.

yes, we have oodles and oodles of oil, and they are finding more every year. there were over 200 discoveries of oil alone this past year.

The idea that oil has peaked is a bad theory based on OLD science. No other country is slowing down their developments. Who do you think will pump oil out of the Arctic safer.... the USA or Russia? Think about it before you cave on all of the resources.... they will be pumped...by others. Others who care much less about the environment.
Big Oil despite the media spin has an EXCELLENT track record..... Russia sure doesn't. So do you care about the environment? reallY?

Reducing demand will drive the prices up up up.... big oil doesn't SET the price of imported oil and since the usa in ur scenario will be dropping demand, it won't have a big effect on global demand. China now drives the price of oil. they SCOFF at the environmental movement. they are either finishing or building a new coal plant every 10 days.... 10 days.

There will be a time in the future when you are unable to keep up with ur energy bills....you will think, where did the USA go wrong? This day is as good as any to mark on ur calendar to remind urself later.

 

[Straight up G]

thats not the Point We are Pulluting the earth by taking the Petrolium out and burning it causing flouro carbons co2 gasses and carbon monoxide and self enriched organic subtances are Self Sustainable ... That petroleum is there for a reason which i do not know, and perhaps no one in this room knows,but for what ever Reason Its there, right??? and we excavate it and pump it and it has consequences for that. global warming and others ..so pleases dont be ignorant and do something back for the planet, especially when doing something like planting, and do it in a true environmental friendly way. Nothing is environmentally friendly today NOT EVEN PLANTING A PLANT...Iknow the damge we done as humans at this point is irreversible but please be an example as bud smokers and be enviromentally freindly

Maybe you should stop exhaling for the cause too [jk]

 

[mariapastor]

something is something and chemical ferts harm top soil and yea your plants dont know the difference we seem to be the only creatures on earth with consciousness but giving earth backs its fertility is something

 

[Hayduke]

We have plenty of coal and the cost per KWH with coal as opposed to wind or solar is not even close. The facts are of course we have mountains and mountains of coal....so the supply is cheap and so is the conversion to electricity. NEXT!!!

The way to reduce the price of oil is to INCREASE supply, not lower it. There is NOTHING waiting in the wings that can do the heavy lifting without oil. That's a FACT.

yes, we have oodles and oodles of oil, and they are finding more every year. there were over 200 discoveries of oil alone this past year.

The idea that oil has peaked is a bad theory based on OLD science. No other country is slowing down their developments. Who do you think will pump oil out of the Arctic safer.... the USA or Russia? Think about it before you cave on all of the resources.... they will be pumped...by others. Others who care much less about the environment.
Big Oil despite the media spin has an EXCELLENT track record..... Russia sure doesn't. So do you care about the environment? reallY?

Reducing demand will drive the prices up up up.... big oil doesn't SET the price of imported oil and since the usa in ur scenario will be dropping demand, it won't have a big effect on global demand. China now drives the price of oil. they SCOFF at the environmental movement. they are either finishing or building a new coal plant every 10 days.... 10 days.

There will be a time in the future when you are unable to keep up with ur energy bills....you will think, where did the USA go wrong? This day is as good as any to mark on ur calendar to remind urself later.

Well maybe this will happen to most. I will be off grid in 5 years. China should not be our role model. Burning carbon that has be sequestered in the earth, rather than that which is a part of the carbon cycle is the problem. The cold water of the ocean has been able to absorb the excess for the last 50 years, but it is reaching a point where it is saturated at it's present temp and warming does not help. Carbon Dioxide in solution is carbonic acid...the acidity of the ocean has increased to the point where it is effecting the calcareous exoskeletons of diatoms, cocolithophores, copopods and the like...the bottom of the food chain.

Tug at a single thing in nature and find it connected to the universe ~John Muir...the problem is we are fucking the very thin layer of this planet we inhabit faster than natural processes can cover up for our short sightedness.

The argument against solar and wind is the cost...of course there is an initial investment...and of course there is periodic maintenance...but the sun keeps shinning and in turn creates convection and wind currents...we cannot stop it...we do not need to look for more...would the current energy companies take a loss?...if they do not diversify? yup...I have no love for my electric company...they triple bill me for being a good customer...fook 'em! huge opportunities for new entrepreneurs...the American dream! How about actually expecting Exxon to pay taxes!!!! Use the money for roof top grid ties...electric cars are on their way

And yes petrol will not go away...I do not want it to. I love old cars. But buying foreign oil is irresponsible and dangerous.

Coal has it's place though more is needed to scrub the exhaust. Mountain top removal however is corporate crime. It is a means to huge profits and an unemployed Appalachia. Tunnel bore mining is dangerous and more expensive, but at least it provides jobs and preserves the watershed...the essence of life.

I cannot comprehend how partisan politics makes the right, lovers of corporate criminals and the protectors of the tax bracket they can only dream of being able to bitch about...I guess it is a hero worship thing.

 

[CrackerJax]

China isn't trying to be a role model...their goal is to become number one.

Wind turbines are killing machines...... last year alone and JUST in california, wind turbines killed 80 Golden Eagles... You down with that?

 

[Hayduke]

China isn't trying to be a role model...their goal is to become number one.

Wind turbines are killing machines...... last year alone and JUST in california, wind turbines killed 80 Golden Eagles... You down with that?

I am aware of the problem, unaware of the stat. Sounds high, a few do migrate to socal...Tehachapi and Desert Hot Springs have wind farms that might be in the path. I would be ok with a certain # of loss, so long as it does not threaten a population. Bird strikes by planes and electrocutions...running into a 8' wide 60' long slow moving turbine blade...selection is a good thing!

I am going to look, but if you had the source I would be interested.

Edit: After looking a little...The Altamont wind farm is the source of this statistic. It is a large older wind farm right in the migratory path of many birds (sac and san joaquin river deltas). These older turbines are on 60-80 foot towers instead of 200+ like the modern ones. The blades come near the ground and conflict with swooping birds of prey.

The Altamont wind farm is an exception and it is being spun by opponents to make the public believe that these are the statistics for all wind energy. Don't get me wrong, I am not a T Boone supporter, as he just wants to drill for methane.

The actual study estimated 67 golden eagle kills and notes many problems with the methods of estimation which included an arbitrary # of scavenged carcasses which are not found (Bird Mortality in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, California K. Shawn Smallwood and Carl Thelander.
Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol. 72, No. 1, Jan 2008, pp. 215-223.).

 

[CrackerJax]

That is just one species I commented on..... tens of thousands of other birds are dying as well...... everywhere the turbines are built..... death follows.

They are destroying the local aviary populations.

I want you to imagine if Exxon killed 80 eagles last year.... what would be the "green" reaction? If turbines do it.... the greens just shrug.

Hypocrisy comes in many forms. Not just corporate.

Wind turbines are a TERRIBLE idea. It's not a passive energy source like solar.