[Scpg] RE Chemical nitrogen vs nitrogen fixing plants

[Cory Brennan]

Wes,  Thanks much for this.  It took me a bit to respond because I read most of the millenium report which was very interesting.  Still getting through the articles on the other site.  It's encouraging that these types of documents are out there to use and refer to.  I knew about nitrogen damage to the environment, but had no idea it was considered such a major problem at UN level.  
http://www.greenfacts.org/en/ecosystems/millennium-assessment-3/99-main-findings-0.htm#3p1 (see chart on direct drivers)

By the way, on a related subject, there is an organization in California dedicated to creating local food supplies of sustainable, organically grown crops called "Roots of Change" (rocfund.org) that looks pretty interesting.  May be something permaculturists should be involved in.  I went to one meeting, spoke to them about permaculture which they knew little about but were interested in, but my schedule has not allowed me to participate further.  They have made some inroads on the "local food" issue.

Cory



--- On Tue, 6/10/08, Wesley Roe and Santa Barbara Permaculture Network <lakinroe at silcom.com> wrote:
From: Wesley Roe and Santa Barbara Permaculture Network <lakinroe at silcom.com>
Subject: [Scpg] RE Chemical nitrogen vs nitrogen fixing plants
To: scpg at arashi.com
Date: Tuesday, June 10, 2008, 7:57 AM


 
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
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.&nbsp; He omits the concept of polycropping as a
potential solution.&nbsp; 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



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 productionUrea 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
ammonia and
carbon
dioxide. Urea can be produced as
prills,
granules,
flakes, pellets, crystals, and solutions.


More than 90% of world production is destined for use as a
fertilizer.
Urea has the highest
nitrogen
content of all solid nitrogenous fertilizers in common use (46.7%).
Therefore, it has the lowest transportation costs per unit of nitrogen
nutrient.



Urea is highly soluble in water and is, therefore, also very suitable for
use in fertilizer solutions (in combination with
ammonium
nitrate: 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
soil. Properties
such as impact strength, crushing strength, and free-flowing behaviour
are, in particular, important in product handling, storage, and bulk
transportation.





[
edit] Commercial productionUrea is commercially produced
from two raw materials,
ammonia, and
carbon
dioxide. Large quantities of carbon dioxide are produced during the
manufacture of ammonia from coal or from
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

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
ammonium
nitrate or
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
ammonia and
carbon
dioxide. The first reaction is exothermic:

2 NH3 + CO2 H2N-COONH4
(
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

Bosch-Meiser urea process after its discoverers.






[
edit] Uses





[
edit] Agricultural useUrea is used as a nitrogen-release
fertilizer, as it
hydrolyses
back to ammonia and carbon dioxide, but its most common impurity,
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
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
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-biuret grades
of urea should be used if urea sprays are to be applied regularly or to
sensitive horticultural crops.






[
edit] Storage of urea fertilizerLike 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.


HazardsUrea 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
urine are not
dangerous.


It has been found that urea can cause
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 


_______________________________________________
Scpg mailing list
Scpg at arashi.com
https://www.arashi.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/scpg


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.permaculture-guilds.org/pipermail/southern-california-permaculture/attachments/20080612/ac28391e/attachment.html>