+ Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516
Results 151 to 156 of 156

Thread: Another Troubling Climate Article

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Hoosick Falls
    Posts
    1,951

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eustis22 View Post
    aren't most fertilizers and pesticides petrochemicals? I believe that is the carbon footprint that's being discussed.

    >Floods of 100-200-500 year magnitude are happening more often but it can be directly connected to the increase of paved areas.

    cite?
    No there are numerous fertilizers that are not petrochemicals, rock phosphate, high mag lime stone..that supplies Ca and Magnesium. Even soybean meal is a source of nitrogen and is used as a fertilizer.

    It is said to see the change in the generations. Those from the twenties understood the depression though they were to young to comprehend it and now people need to be shown what is happening in their own communitee on paper for it to be truth and factual. "Cite" the Site is all across America there are fewer operating farms and more houses.

    Look at California. What happens when there is a 1" rain storm...the storm DRAINAGE SYETEM takes billions of gallons of water to the ocean. This water would have been absorbed into the ground 100 years ago. So the paved surfaces stop the water from entering the water table. Just a single acre of parking lot will produce approximately 325,000 gallons of run off water. When La is 469 and there is 640 acres in a square mile and over 90% of the city is paved or buildings per the 2010 census study. And if I did the numbers correctly that is 88 billion gallons of water lost per acre of rain. Granted this will only raise Lake Mead about .3 inches but it still increases the affects of the drought.

    It is far more important that people learn how to lessen their affect on the plant than to loss ones grasp on reality and predict the disappearance of cities and tens of thousands of acres that was said to happen before 2015 due to global warming. Since this didn't happen the name is now Climate Change. Well guess what as the last several posts have stated the climate is always changing and will long after we are all dead.

    Lets spend time more wisely and figure how to stop cancer, diabetes, and any of the other life threatening diseases that need the funds to investigate and find a cure; than flying to a foreign country to have a summit on Climate Change! And when that is moving forward we better fid a way to make our farm land operational again cause we are going to have a bunch more people to feed!

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    DeKalb, NY
    Posts
    1,599

    Default

    [QUOTE=BreezyHill;333357]No there are numerous fertilizers that are not petrochemicals, rock phosphate, high mag lime stone..that supplies Ca and Magnesium. Even soybean meal is a source of nitrogen and is used as a fertilizer.

    Breezy, do you have any numbers as to the percentage of fertilizers applied to our cropland as to how much is petrochemical based versus how much comes from sources such as rock phosphate and limestone?

  3. #153
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Center, Underhill Ctr, VT
    Posts
    3,505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by markcasper View Post
    What evidence the earth is 13,000,000,000 years old?
    The earth is not 13 billion years old. It is a mere 4.543 billion years old. The universe is calculated to be approximately 13.8 billion years. There are several independent lines of evidence for this. It has been calculated and subsequently more and more refined since about the 1920s. It is well established and generally accepted as fact.

    Interesting, several religions accept the "Big Bang" theory as consistent with their beliefs. Pretty much the only difference is they say God created the singularity that manifested itself in the Big Bang and subsequent Universe expansion and differentiation. Some scientists accept that addition, some do not.
    Dr. Tim Perkins
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Ctr
    http://www.uvm.edu/~pmrc
    Timothy.Perkins@uvm.edu

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Hoosick Falls
    Posts
    1,951

    Default

    [QUOTE=Thompson's Tree Farm;333360]
    Quote Originally Posted by BreezyHill View Post
    Breezy, do you have any numbers as to the percentage of fertilizers applied to our cropland as to how much is petrochemical based versus how much comes from sources such as rock phosphate and limestone?
    Sorry Thompson I will have to do some digging for that number; but the other side of petrochemical fertilizers is that it is in a water soluble form and is rapidly absorbed by plants. This reduces the affects of excessive amounts of elements in the soil that causes pollution.

    Case in point: Our front hill pasture is on a knowl and has a thin 6-18 inch soil structure above a bedrock layer. In some places there is exposed stone. This has been a pasture for the last 110 years the farm has been in my family. Prior to 1843 there was a house on the high point. This is a winter a spring pasture due to it being a very dry location. about 25 years ago I had all the soils on the farm sampled for a new fertilizer program. Potash is the 3rd number of a fertilizer name. The first two are Nitrogen, second is phosphorous. so 5-25-25 is 5% Nitrogen, 25% Phosphorous and 25% Potassium.

    in Cornells rating system 240 # of available potash/potassium/acre and above is excessive. Now this pasture has never had any manure mechanically spread on it or any fertilizer spread on it. Only the manure from the cows grazing or wintering over. The test cam back as 795#/Ac. I was floored. This immediately changed how and where we wintered cattle.

    But that then turned into an issue of not enough N per acre reducing the production of forage. So now what we have to do is to apply 75# N to increase production to where it was with just manure.

    To my knowledge there is no petrochemical that can be used to bring agricultural production land back from acidity other than gypsum, limestone and cement dust. The later is from hot lime so kinda is still a limestone product of sorts. There are other minor products that are used in regions like poultry litter witch as an elevated ph due to the amount of calcium Carbonate(lime stone) in laying hens diets.

    Urea and most all of the Nitrogen sources are derived from what some call petrochemical production. Urea is now used to reduce nitric oxide in diesel exhaust so the 151 billion tons produced annually is less and less for fertilizer. Urea is used in many industries.

    Take a look around the farmers fields right now and many will have a green plant growing. This is a cover crop to pull nitrogen from the soil and other minerals and be plowed or killed to feed the next crop. It is in the best interest of farmers to retain as much of the nutrients applied to a field to feed the current and future crops. This then reduces how much fertilizer is needed for the next crop. N being most affect in most cases.

    I probably left you with more questions and only 1/3 or less of your question answered. Sorry!

    But we apply under 4 tons of fertilizer annually to our farm and produce over 500 tons of forage to feed 100 beef cattle and 3 horses. And we are going into our second year of a cornell trial that has us applying 75# of Nitrogen/ Ac for a 6 times increase I forage production. Last year the results were tremendous. And already this year we are seeing the fields that were applied are growing much faster than those without an application. It the results persist then we will be able to feed more cattle on the same acreage or use some fields for other crops.
    Last edited by BreezyHill; Today at 07:50 PM.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Knapp, Wis
    Posts
    1,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrTimPerkins View Post
    The earth is not 13 billion years old. It is a mere 4.543 billion years old. The universe is calculated to be approximately 13.8 billion years. There are several independent lines of evidence for this. It has been calculated and subsequently more and more refined since about the 1920s. It is well established and generally accepted as fact.

    Interesting, several religions accept the "Big Bang" theory as consistent with their beliefs. Pretty much the only difference is they say God created the singularity that manifested itself in the Big Bang and subsequent Universe expansion and differentiation. Some scientists accept that addition, some do not.
    The Bible suggests that the earth and the universe is between 6-10,000 years old max. Nowhere in the Scriptures does it suggest anything of a "big bang", rather it states that the earth and universe were made in 6, 24 hour days. Any religion that teaches otherwise is teaching false doctrine and is not from the Holy Bible.
    Mark

    John Deere 4000, 830, and 420 crawler
    1400 taps, 600 gph CDL RO, 4x12 wood-fired Leader, forced air and preheater. 400 gallon Sap-O-Matic vacuum gathering tank, PTO powered. 10 bulk tanks.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    DeKalb, NY
    Posts
    1,599

    Default

    Ben,
    Can you answer a question that I ask or do you always have to answer one that was not asked. I don't care how much fertilizer you are using to feed your beef. I am curious as to what percent of our nations fertilizer used is made up of petrochemicals. Your previous post suggested that you might know something about that so I asked.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts