[Scpg] RE Chemical nitrogen vs nitrogen fixing plants

Tue Jun 10 07:57:34 PDT 2008

hi Cory
   just read the article below you posted. It is 
a great explanation of the history Chemical 
Nitrogen but like a lot of articles written about 
the wonders of Nitrogen to feed the world and the 
problems caused by nitrates in our environment at 
the end of the articles says  we have to continue 
there use or the world will starve.

Also it never talk about the drop in carbon in 
the food we eat , which Bill Mollison said at a 
PDC course was 14 % in 1900 and now below 3%, 
which our the building blocks of nutrition, as a 
result of modern farming we are producing food empty of nutrition.

         At the end of the posting  I have posted 
an explanation of what is nitrogen 
fertilizer/dangers/etc from Wikipedia 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urea and we use over 
100,000,000 tons per year worldwide. which is 
made primary from coal or from 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Hydrocarbons>hydrocarbons 
such as natural gas and petroleum-derived raw material

         The problem we never look at the impact 
of farming with nitrogen(urea ) at an Ecosystem 
level and how it effects the different ecosystem of the world.

But there are changes happening as a result of 
the  The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment which 
assessed the consequences of ecosystem change for 
human well-being. From 2001 to 2005, the MA 
involved the work of more than 1,360 experts 
worldwide. Their findings provide a 
state-of-the-art scientific appraisal of the 
condition and trends in the world’s ecosystems 
and the services they provide, as well as the 
scientific basis for action to conserve and use 
them sustainably. www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Synthesis.aspx

Out this report in 2005 an organization 
call  International Assessment of Agricultural 
Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) 
www.agassessment.org was formed  to look at the 
Ecosystem of the world and measure the impact of 
modern agriculture and to suggest 
alternatives  to stop this destructive practise 
which is the single most threatening human 
activity to to Ecosystem collapse. Bill Mollison 
co-founder of PC said the exact same thing  at 
the PDC course I attended in Ojai in 1997.

In April 2008 , International Assessment of 
Agricultural Science and Technology for 
Development (IAASTD) www.agassessment.org made their report.
I think you will find the case studies in the 
report that will answer questions Cory is asking 
below and I have posted the brief report from the 
final report from Johannesburg April 15

hope this helps wes

FROM CORY
would be interested in hearing people's reaction 
to this article. His premise is that we cannot 
replace our "Green Revolution" food growing 
methods with purely organic methods because those 
don't produce enough nitrogen.  He omits the 
concept of polycropping as a potential 
solution.  I'm especially interested in any 
case studies or documented examples that would refute his premise.

<http://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~cstevens/ES201/local/Smil%20-%20Global%20Population%20and%20the%20Nitrogen%20Cycle.pdf>http://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~cstevens/ES201/local/Smil%20-%20Global%20Population%20and%20the%20Nitrogen%20Cycle.pdf

FROM WES

Reinventing Agriculture  International Assessment 
of Agricultural Science and Technology for 
Development (IAASTD).in Johannesburg April 15/08
15 April 2008
Posted to the web 15 April 2008

Stephen Leahy
Johannesburg

The results of a painstaking examination of 
global agriculture are being formally presented 
Tuesday with the release of the final report for 
the International Assessment of Agricultural 
Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD).www.agassessment.org

The assessment has explored how agriculture can 
be reinvented to feed the world's expanding 
population sustainably in an era of multiple 
challenges -- not least those presented by 
climate change and a growing food crisis that has 
led to outbreaks of violence in a number of developing countries.

The expertise of some 400 scientists and other 
specialists was tapped for the IAASTD; 
governments of wealthy and developing nations 
also contributed to the assessment, along with 
civil society and the private sector.

Both scientific knowledge and traditional skills 
were evaluated under the IAASTD, which marked the 
first attempt to bring all actors in agriculture 
together to address food security. Contributors 
produced five regional assessments, and a 110-page-plus synthesis report.

Amongst the 22 findings of the study that chart a 
new direction for agriculture: a conclusion that 
the dominant practice of industrial, large-scale 
agriculture is unsustainable, mainly because of 
the dependence of such farming on cheap oil, its 
negative effects on ecosystems -- and growing water scarcity.

Instead, monocultures must be reconsidered in 
favour of agro-ecosystems that marry food 
production with ensuring water supplies remain 
clean, preserving biodiversity, and improving the livelihoods of the poor.

"Given the future challenges it was very clear to 
everyone that business as usual was not an 
option," IAASTD Co-chair Hans Herren told IPS. He 
was speaking at an Apr. 7-12 intergovernmental 
plenary in South Africa's commercial hub, 
Johannesburg, where the assessment findings were 
reviewed ahead of Tuesday's presentation.

While global supplies of food are adequate, 850 
million people are still hungry and malnourished 
because they can't get access to or afford the 
supplies they need, added Herren -- who is also 
president of the Arlington-based Millennium 
Institute, a body that undertakes a variety of 
developmental activities around the world. A 
focus only on boosting crop yields would not deal 
with the problems at hand, he said: "We need 
better quality food in the right places."

The notion that yield can no longer be the sole 
measure of agricultural success was also raised 
by Greenpeace International's Jan van Aken, who 
said that the extent to which agriculture 
promotes nutrition needs to be considered. A 
half-hectare plot in Thailand can grow 70 species 
of vegetables, fruits and herbs, providing far 
better nutrition and feeding more people than a 
half-hectare plot of high-yielding rice, he added.

The IAASTD further notes that experts in 
agricultural science and technology must not only 
work with local farmers, but also economists, 
social and health scientists, governments and civil society.

"We can't solve these problems in the agriculture 
department alone," observed the other IAASTD 
co-chair, Judi Wakhungu, who is also executive 
director of the African Centre for Technology 
Studies. The centre is headquartered in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi.

"Leadership will be needed to make this change," 
she added, in acknowledgement of the fact that 
most governments, research centres and others in 
sectors linked to agriculture are unaccustomed to 
joining hands, and often compete for funding.

The plenary was marked by some disagreement over 
the ever-controversial matters of biotechnology 
and trade: indeed, during a long and fraught 
debate over biotechnology, the meeting very 
nearly fell apart. U.S. and Australian government 
representatives objected to wording in the 
synthesis report that highlighted concerns about 
whether the use of genetically modified (GM) crops in food is healthy and safe.

This issue, along with challenges pertaining to 
trade, had been thoroughly debated over the 
three-year IAASTD process and the final wording 
reflected scientific evidence. The report says 
biotechnology has a role to play in the future 
but that it remains a contentious matter, the 
data on benefits of GM crops being mixed; it 
further notes that patenting of genes causes 
problems for farmers and researchers.Relevant Links

Syngenta and the other biotech and pesticide 
companies abandoned the assessment process late last year.

The impasse at the plenary was broken when the 
two countries agreed to a footnote in the report 
indicating their reservations about the wording. 
They also agreed to accept the report as a whole, 
along with Canada and Swaziland: "Our government 
will champion this even though we have 
reservations on some parts," the Australian delegate told the meeting.

The other 60 countries represented at the plenary 
took a stronger position, moving beyond acceptance to adopt the report.

"I'm stunned. I didn't think it would pass," said 
Janice Jiggins of the Department of Social 
Science at the University of Wageningen in the 
Netherlands, and one of the experts who worked to 
review the totality of agricultural know-how and 
the effects of farming around the world.

There was also broad endorsement from civil society.

"We have a very strong anti-GMO 
(genetically-modified organism) stance but agreed 
to accept the synthesis report findings because 
it was neutral," noted van Aken. "We're not happy 
with everything, but we agree with the scientific 
consensus in the synthesis report."

Now, the IAASTD moves from testing the endurance 
of researchers to trying the political will of decision makers.

"These documents are like a bible with which to 
negotiate with various institutions in my country 
and transform agriculture," the Costa Rican 
delegate told the Johannesburg gathering, through a translator.

Others were more circumspect about the prospects 
for the assessment, but still hopeful.

"We're all headed in the same direction now, even 
if some are walking and some are running," said Wakhungu.

Interview with Robert Watson (IAASTD Director) 
Africa: 'Increase Agricultural Productivity While 
Reducing the Environmental Footprint'

'Increase Agricultural Productivity While Reducing the Environmental Footprint'

http://allafrica.com/stories/200804150172.html

Inter Press Service (Johannesburg)

INTERVIEW
15 April 2008
Posted to the web 15 April 2008

Johannesburg

Over the past few years, Robert Watson has had 
what must qualify as one of the world's tougher 
assignments: heading an initiative to help 
agriculture cope with the substantial challenges 
it faces presently, and the even bigger hurdles ahead.

The three-year International Assessment of 
Agricultural Science and Technology for 
Development (IAASTD) www.agassessment.org
:"has sought to evaluate agricultural knowledge 
across the spectrum, with the help of 
governments, civil society, the private sector, and hundreds of experts.

Watson initiated the project while chief 
scientist at the World Bank; he currently serves 
as director of the IAASTD -- also as chief 
scientist at the British environment and agriculture department.

The findings of the assessment are being formally 
presented Tuesday, this after they were reviewed 
at an intergovernmental plenary held in 
Johannesburg, South Africa, from Apr. 7-12. IPS 
environment correspondent Stephen Leahy chatted 
to Watson at this meeting about the landmark IAASTD.

What is the significance of the IAASTD findings for global food security?

The significance of the IAASTD is that for the 
first time governments from the developed and 
developing countries, civil society, scientific 
authors from natural and social sciences all 
worked together to address the critical issue of 
how to get affordable and nutritious food in way 
that is environmentally and socially sustainable.

The IAASTD clearly states that business as usual 
in agriculture is not an option. Why is this the case?

The IAASTD builds on the findings from two 
previous assessments. The Millennium Ecosystem 
Assessment found that 15 of the planet's 24 
natural ecosystems are in trouble or in decline, 
in large measure due to degradation of land and 
water -- mainly because of agriculture. The 
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 
concluded that agriculture is a major contributor 
to human-induced climate change, and climate 
change will have a major impact on agricultural productivity.

If we only focus on boosting food production it 
will only come at the expense of further environmental degradation.

What do IAASTD findings say about the current 
food prices, which are at record highs?

There are many factors involved in food prices -- 
climate variability resulting in declines in 
harvests in some areas, higher energy costs, 
biofuel production and speculation on the futures 
market. Now is the time to ask: how can we 
increase food production, keep food affordable 
and ensure farmers can make a decent living? The 
IAASTD is our best attempt to answer that important question.

You led the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change initiative and Millennium Ecosystem 
Assessment. How is the IAASTD different to these assessments?

It was absolutely critical to bring together an 
understanding of the natural sciences with an 
understanding of institutions, human behaviour 
and policies. Most previous assessments have 
failed to grasp the importance of social 
sciences. While they might capture the economic 
perspective they don't capture the other 
non-economic, social science knowledge.

It is not enough to look at the science and 
technology of how to grow more food without 
looking at its impacts on natural ecosystems and on social systems.

Does IAASTD call for the end of large-scale monocultures?

If monocultures can be modified so they are 
environmentally and socially sustainable, then 
they're OK. You can't undermine agriculture's 
natural resource basis -- the soil, water, 
biodiversity and so on -- because eventually it will collapse.

Why was there so little debate about climate 
change during the intergovernmental plenary?

Climate change is well recognised now as a 
serious environmental, development, human health 
and security problem. It is no longer a 
controversial issue. The challenge for us now is 
how to maintain and increase agricultural 
productivity while reducing the environmental 
footprint, emissions of greenhouse gases and 
fossil fuel use in the agricultural sector. At 
the same time we have to adapt agriculture to the 
changing climate. The IAASTD findings point the 
way in terms of the kinds of knowledge, science 
and technology we need to change agricultural 
practices to cope with this reality.

You've called the IAASTD a "unique social 
experiment". What do you mean by that?

All key sectors of society were involved: 
governments, civil society, industry, farmers, 
academics, and major international organisations 
like the World Bank and FAO (United Nations Food 
and Agriculture Organisation). If everyone is 
affected by the issues of food, environmental and 
social sustainability, then everyone should be at 
the table to bring their knowledge and experience 
to help solve our common problem.

Given the diversity of viewpoints, it was an 
incredibly difficult and complex process. However 
I strongly believe this process is the way for 
the future and can be applied in any context, be 
it local, regional, national or international.

I can't think of a single important issue today 
that doesn't involve multiple sectors.

         AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over

 From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urea

Urea  (nitrogen Fertilizer)

Synthetic production

Urea is a nitrogen-containing chemical product 
that is produced on a scale of some 100,000,000 tons per year worldwide.

For use in industry, urea is produced from 
synthetic 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Ammonia>ammonia 
and 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Carbon_dioxide>carbon 
dioxide. Urea can be produced as 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Prill>prills, 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Granules>granules, 
flakes, pellets, crystals, and solutions.

More than 90% of world production is destined for 
use as a 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Fertilizer>fertilizer. 
Urea has the highest 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Nitrogen>nitrogen 
content of all solid nitrogenous fertilizers in 
common use (46.7%). Therefore, it has the lowest 
transportation costs per unit of nitrogen 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Nutrient>nutrient.

Urea is highly soluble in water and is, 
therefore, also very suitable for use in 
fertilizer solutions (in combination with 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Ammonium_nitrate>ammonium 
nitrate: 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/UAN>UAN), 
e.g., in 'foliar feed' fertilizers.

Solid urea is marketed as prills or granules. The 
advantage of prills is that, in general, they can 
be produced more cheaply than granules, which, 
because of their narrower particle size 
distribution, have an advantage over prills if 
applied mechanically to the 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Soil>soil. 
Properties such as impact strength, crushing 
strength, and free-flowing behaviour are, in 
particular, important in product handling, storage, and bulk transportation.

[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//w/index.php?title=Urea&action=edit&section=11>edit] 
Commercial production

Urea is commercially produced from two raw 
materials, 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Ammonia>ammonia, 
and 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Carbon_dioxide>carbon 
dioxide. Large quantities of carbon dioxide are 
produced during the manufacture of ammonia from 
coal or from 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Hydrocarbons>hydrocarbons 
such as natural gas and petroleum-derived raw 
materials. This allows direct synthesis of urea from these raw materials.

The production of urea from ammonia and carbon 
dioxide takes place in an 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Equilibrium_reaction>equilibrium 
reaction, with incomplete conversion of the 
reactants. The various urea processes are 
characterized by the conditions under which urea 
formation takes place and the way in which 
unconverted reactants are further processed.

Unconverted reactants can be used for the 
manufacture of other products, for example 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Ammonium_nitrate>ammonium 
nitrate or 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Sulfate>sulfate, 
or they can be recycled for complete conversion 
to urea in a total-recycle process.

Two principal reactions take place in the 
formation of urea from 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Ammonia>ammonia 
and 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Carbon_dioxide>carbon 
dioxide. The first reaction is exothermic:
2 NH3 + CO2 H2N-COONH4 
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//w/index.php?title=Ammonium_carbamate&action=edit&redlink=1>ammonium 
carbamate)

Whereas the second reaction is endothermic:
H2N-COONH4 (NH2)2CO + H2O

Both reactions combined are exothermic.

The process, developed in 1922, is also called 
the 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Bosch-Meiser_urea_process>Bosch-Meiser 
urea process after its discoverers.

[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//w/index.php?title=Urea&action=edit&section=12>edit] 
Uses

[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//w/index.php?title=Urea&action=edit&section=13>edit] 
Agricultural use

Urea is used as a nitrogen-release fertilizer, as 
it 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Hydrolyse>hydrolyses 
back to ammonia and carbon dioxide, but its most 
common impurity, 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Biuret>biuret, 
must be present at less than 2%, as it impairs 
plant growth. It is also used in many 
multi-component solid fertilizer formulations. 
Its action of nitrogen release is due to the 
conditions favouring the reagent side of the equilibriums, which produce urea.

Urea is usually spread at rates of between 40 and 
300 kg/ha, but actual spreading rates will vary 
according to farm type and region. It is better 
to make several small to medium applications at 
intervals to minimise leaching losses and 
increase efficient use of the N applied, compared 
with single heavy applications. During summer, 
urea should be spread just before, or during rain 
to reduce possible losses from volatilisation 
(process wherein nitrogen is lost to the 
atmosphere as ammonia gas). Urea should not be 
mixed for any length of time with other 
fertilizers, as problems of physical quality may result.

Because of the high nitrogen concentration in 
urea, it is very important to achieve an even 
spread. The application equipment must be 
correctly calibrated and properly used. Drilling 
must not occur on contact with or close to seed, 
due to the risk of germination damage. Urea 
dissolves in water for application as a spray or through irrigation systems.

In grain and cotton crops, urea is often applied 
at the time of the last cultivation before 
planting. It should be applied into or be 
incorporated into the soil. In high rainfall 
areas and on sandy soils (where nitrogen can be 
lost through leaching) and where good in-season 
rainfall is expected, urea can be side- or 
top-dressed during the growing season. 
Top-dressing is also popular on pasture and 
forage crops. In cultivating sugarcane, urea is 
side-dressed after planting, and applied to each 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Ratooning>ratoon crop.

In irrigated crops, urea can be applied dry to 
the soil, or dissolved and applied through the 
irrigation water. Urea will dissolve in its own 
weight in water, but it becomes increasingly 
difficult to dissolve as the concentration 
increases. Dissolving urea in water is 
endothermic, causing the temperature of the 
solution to fall when urea dissolves.

As a practical guide, when preparing urea 
solutions for 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Fertigation>fertigation 
(injection into irrigation lines), dissolve no 
more than 30 kg urea per 100 L water.

In foliar sprays, urea concentrations of 0.5% – 
2.0% are often used in horticultural crops. As 
urea sprays may damage crop foliage, specific 
advice should be sought before use. 
Low-<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Biuret>biuret 
grades of urea should be used if urea sprays are 
to be applied regularly or to sensitive horticultural crops.

[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//w/index.php?title=Urea&action=edit&section=14>edit] 
Storage of urea fertilizer

Like most nitrogen products, urea absorbs 
moisture from the atmosphere. Therefore it should 
be stored either in closed/sealed bags on 
pallets, or, if stored in bulk, under cover with 
a tarpaulin. As with most solid fertilizers, it 
should also be stored in a cool, dry, well-ventilated area.

Hazards

Urea can be irritating to skin and eyes. Too high 
concentrations in the blood can cause damage to 
organs of the body. Low concentrations of urea 
such as in <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Urine>urine are not dangerous.

It has been found that urea can cause 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Algal_bloom>algal 
blooms to produce toxins, and urea in runoff from 
fertilizers may play a role in the increase of toxic blooms.[3]

Repeated or prolonged contact with urea in 
fertilizer form on the skin may cause dermatitis. 
The substance also irritates the eyes, the skin, 
and the respiratory tract. The substance 
decomposes on heating above melting point, 
producing toxic gases, and reacts violently with 
strong oxidants, nitrites, inorganic chlorides, 
chlorites and perchlorates, causing fire and explosion hazard

a
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.permaculture-guilds.org/pipermail/southern-california-permaculture/attachments/20080610/b38058f9/attachment.html>