Synthetic Vs. Organic: Not So Black And White

[Psychonaut47]

so what is wrong with leonardite?

they way it's extracted and stored, the extraction destroys the life in the material and the ph alone in storage kills what's left...

 

[NightsWatch]

Organic vs Synthetic ok here is my take, organic means minimally processed material where as synthetic is 100 percent processed.
Synthetic ferts are classified as fertilizer where organic is labeled as soil conditioner . meaning nutrient ratio's are unknown
Compared to chemical nutrients which are analysed to exact ratio's

Organic nutrients have to follow mother natures way so it needs to be broke down to be usable for plants ,
Where as chemical is immediately available for plants

Organic = more expensive compared to the cheaper chemicals prices

Overall growth rates being organics needs microbes to break down the matter for plant food many times you will see deficiencies and ph fluctuations in the beginning

Chemical nutrients have a ph buffer in them to maintain ph levels , immediate growth and no deficiencies but are easy to over feed and burn plants

Lab soil tests cannot cannot tell you how much bone meal or compost to add they go buy pounds per acre usually on the chemical criteria of NPK //

So again its hard in organic even after soil tests are done to correct them with NPK in organic form being again it varies in NPK not all composts are the same or manures you cannot expect crap going in one end of the cow coming out better on the ass end

 

[Wisher619]

they way it's extracted and stored, the extraction destroys the life in the material and the ph alone in storage kills what's left...

do you have any sources verifying these statements?

 

[Wisher619]

Organic vs Synthetic ok here is my take, organic means minimally processed material where as synthetic is 100 percent processed.
Synthetic ferts are classified as fertilizer where organic is labeled as soil conditioner . meaning nutrient ratio's are unknown
Compared to chemical nutrients which are analysed to exact ratio's

Organic nutrients have to follow mother natures way so it needs to be broke down to be usable for plants ,
Where as chemical is immediately available for plants

Organic = more expensive compared to the cheaper chemicals prices

Overall growth rates being organics needs microbes to break down the matter for plant food many times you will see deficiencies and ph fluctuations in the beginning

Chemical nutrients have a ph buffer in them to maintain ph levels , immediate growth and no deficiencies but are easy to over feed and burn plants

Lab soil tests cannot cannot tell you how much bone meal or compost to add they go buy pounds per acre usually on the chemical criteria of NPK //

So again its hard in organic even after soil tests are done to correct them with NPK in organic form being again it varies in NPK not all composts are the same or manures you cannot expect crap going in one end of the cow coming out better on the ass end

the only thing I would have to disagree on is the fact that you keep using the words

"Synthetic" "Chemical"

they are actually called mineral salts
usually mined although some are a byproduct of other industries

but
whether mineral salts or organic

the end result that enters the plant is +/- ions.....period
so really it is a matter of personal preference and beliefs not whether one is better than another

I guarantee you would not be able to tell the difference between a vine ripened hydroponic tomato and an organic vine ripened tomato

all elements being equal

as long as the plant gets the exact elements it needs it will grow to its genetic potential
whether it be taste, height, pest resistance, fruit size...etc

 

[Psychonaut47]

do you have any sources verifying these statements?

ya I'll look for them, what my personal studies show is composted organic material through time creates the best source of humic and fulvic...

 

[Taylor Smith]

Organic vs Synthetic

Organic nutrients have to follow mother natures way so it needs to be broke down to be usable for plants ,
Where as chemical is immediately available for plants

Organic = more expensive compared to the cheaper chemicals prices

organics isn't always more expensive, obviously shipping products around that have almost no value and yet probably travel around the world( my neemseed meal came form india and was processed in the states then sent to a distributor then to the retailer and then to me in Canada plus a butch of fees I had to pay for importing it) this really makes organics costly and radically increases the carbon footprint. However some organic methods are about recycling your nutrients and fixating the nitrogen from the atmosphere, and potassium and phosphorus from the rock that is abundant everywhere. many people can grow amazing cannabis without having to purchase fertilizer inputs. To me organics makes the most sense when the nutrients are local. when you buy organic fertilizers whether it is liquid or single ingredient meals, your basically just paying for the cost of shipping things like carbon, hydrogen, oxygen ( from water), silica (rock dusts). These are what makes up the majority of the mass of organic fertilizers and yet are readily available and abundant on every corner of the planet.

 

[Taylor Smith]

I'm not sure if a conclusion can ever be made on synthetics or organics but one think it seems both soil and hydro synthetic or organic people agree on is the biological aspects. few people grow hydro in a sterile reservoir that constantly has peroxide in it. I consider myself a biological grower and I don't do anything that I think will harm the biome. For some people that may settle things (thinking that synthetics kill microbes) but at least from my research synthetics can only harm the microbes through direct toxicity ( which could also harm your plants)or through osmosis( pulling water out of the cells of microbes and even disrupting the plants ability to draw water and nutrients) these things don't happen at 1000 ppm (ocean water has 10000 ppm of sodium alone).
Only when your medium drys up or you feed too much and dont allow enough run-off can the salts concentrate enough to cause harm so if I use any salt like potassium sulfate (omri) I
always feed straight water before I let things dry up.
when synthetics are used in an organic soil with a high humus content. The high ion exchange capacity of humus can actually pull ions out of the solution and if there is too much if a nutrient and will exchange for something that there is not much of, humus has both positive and negative exchange sites so it not just cations its anions too . this is what makes soil so forgiving you don't have to worry as much about dangerous build up. so I believe synthetics can be used as a supplement to an organic system without negatively effecting the soil and even if there is a slight suppression of microbrial activity the very same happens when the soil drys but the microbes always recover fast.

 

[Psychonaut47]

I'm not sure if a conclusion can ever be made on synthetics or organics but one think it seems both soil and hydro synthetic or organic people agree on is the biological aspects. few people grow hydro in a sterile reservoir that constantly has peroxide in it. I consider myself a biological grower and I don't do anything that I think will harm the biome. For some people that may settle things (thinking that synthetics kill microbes) but at least from my research synthetics can only harm the microbes through direct toxicity ( which could also harm your plants)or through osmosis( pulling water out of the cells of microbes and even disrupting the plants ability to draw water and nutrients) these things don't happen at 1000 ppm (ocean water has 10000 ppm of sodium alone).
Only when your medium drys up or you feed too much and dont allow enough run-off can the salts concentrate enough to cause harm so if I use any salt like potassium sulfate (omri) I
always feed straight water before I let things dry up.
when synthetics are used in an organic soil with a high humus content. The high ion exchange capacity of humus can actually pull ions out of the solution and if there is too much if a nutrient and will exchange for something that there is not much of, humus has both positive and negative exchange sites so it not just cations its anions too . this is what makes soil so forgiving you don't have to worry as much about dangerous build up. so I believe synthetics can be used as a supplement to an organic system without negatively effecting the soil and even if there is a slight suppression of microbrial activity the very same happens when the soil drys but the microbes always recover fast.

I would agree with an emphasis of synthetics being a catalystic tool which has its place...on my shelf that place collects dust where synthetic bottles used to be...comprimise is only necessary for me at the investors meeting and they don't need to know organics is just as fast and just as big as synths, with that being said I'm sure some Indian Geneticist will impose on my bias soon.

 

[NightsWatch]

Bottom line synthetics has its place in agriculture and like anything else it has its good points , bad points just like organic growing ..
I guess on the other hand they could ban it .
Then we could see people around us starving to death

 

[NightsWatch]

If we abruptly stopped using petro fertilizers and pesticides on a global scale there would probably be mass starvation and food shortage. Considering that most farming is done on dead soil and requires such chemicals, maintaining production at current levels (in the short term) not to mention increasing output to meet ever-increasing demand due to population growth would not be possible without said chemicals. The population growth over the last 100 years is directly linked to these "advancements" in agriculture that allow us to produce food in great abundance to keep bellies full. In short, the global population no longer survives on food. It survives on oil.

On a brighter note: If we stopped using chemical fertilizers and pesticides over a longer period of time and phased them out over a 20-30 year period we would likely see an unprecedented possible increase in health, and possible decrease in disease [especially ones that hardly existed 120 years ago
And cleaner water supplies. Yep, it sounds crazy, but all those things depend on the food we put into our bodies and whether that food is

We would also require more land in production instead of building suburbia on rich fertile farm lands.

But seriously all animals have predators except Humans were on the top

So how would we control population it would get out of hand like it is now were on the verge like it or not of being over populated
Cancers disease are forms of population conrol although bad we need it .
and Why the cure which they have will never be released to the public

Were not gaining lands but losing lands from the oceans to dry lands turning into deserts .
People claim were to blame when its Evolution working at its finest .

And with the population boom what happens more homes , and more De forestation being cut up to build homes and farm.

Hate to say it but were already living longer and its become a big burden to society in general

I know this sounds harsh but sometimes Truth hurts right

 

[Wisher619]

I am still trying to figure out what a Sythetic or Chemical fertilizer is!!
it is a Mineral based nutrient solution

you see when you all speak Synthetic or Chemical you are actually perpetuating to yourself a falsehood that mineral based ferts are some how Synthesized in a chemical lab somewhere

petro synthetics?

what is even better than this video

Nitrogen in most hydroponic ferts come from calcium nitrate so the process of nitrogen fixing is mute
so where does this petrol or chemical come from
so there is a chemical process involved in the end product
does not mean they are chem ferts or synthetic in some way
they are simply refined and chelated from earth natural sources

calcuim nitrate-
It is produced by treating limestone with nitric acid, followed by neutralization with ammonia

Magnesium sulfate-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsomite

potassium nitrate-
It occurs as a mineral niter and is a natural solid source of nitrogen. Potassium nitrate is one of several nitrogen-containing compounds collectively referred to as saltpeter

shall I go on

 

[NightsWatch]

give it a rest dude seriously can we not agree that synthetic is extreme processed minerals

 

[Wisher619]

give it a rest dude seriously can we not agree that synthetic is extreme processed minerals

actually no we cannot
they are not EXTREMELY processed minerals
I am an a avid organic gardener
and have been for many years
no till compost worm bins you name it

I also grow hydroponically

I researched reality based facts before making decisions

all this ignorant factless nonsense perpetuates a falsehood not based in reality

the more people know truth and not what they PERCEIVE to be the truth
the better for all

so no Dude

 

[mojavegreen]

I like hydro.

 

[Psychonaut47]

Hydro is aaaiiight, if it's organic hydro greenhouse medicine...

 

[Seamaiden]

I am still trying to figure out what a Sythetic or Chemical fertilizer is!!

The Haber Bosch method of making ammonia uses methane to derive hydrogen. When we're after large sources of methane, we go to natural gas. A fossil fuel. For me there are a few issues with this scenario, not the least of which is the reliance on a fossil fuel to get one of the components required to make (aka synthesize) this fertilizer. Another one is the harm the overuse of these fertilizers causes to soils and soil biology. Another one is the amount of energy required to form these compounds, last time I checked energy isn't free and tends to still be provided by non-renewable/non-sustainable sources.

I'm pretty sure those are fact-based statements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process

 

[mojavegreen]

I was raised on dairy and fur farms. Lotsa petrochemicals involved in producing animal shit!

 

[NightsWatch]

 

[Psychonaut47]

Confirmation Bias, no way around it...

 

[Seamaiden]

Many of us have moved away from the ideas and practices put forth via the Green Revolution, and for many of us, those reasons are indeed based on science, not just ideas or opinions, but also observations.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-fertilizers-harm-earth/

Dear EarthTalk: What effects do fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides used on residential lawns or on farms have on nearby water bodies like rivers, streams—or even the ocean for those of us who live near the shore?
-- Linda Reddington, Manahawkin, NJ

With the advent of the so-called Green Revolution in the second half of the 20th century—when farmers began to use technological advances to boost yields—synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides became commonplace around the world not only on farms, but in backyard gardens and on front lawns as well.

These chemicals, many of which were developed in the lab and are petroleum-based, have allowed farmers and gardeners of every stripe to exercise greater control over the plants they want to grow by enriching the immediate environment and warding off pests. But such benefits haven’t come without environmental costs—namely the wholesale pollution of most of our streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and even coastal areas, as these synthetic chemicals run-off into the nearby waterways.

When the excess nutrients from all the fertilizer we use runs off into our waterways, they cause algae blooms sometimes big enough to make waterways impassable. When the algae die, they sink to the bottom and decompose in a process that removes oxygen from the water. Fish and other aquatic species can’t survive in these so-called “dead zones” and so they die or move on to greener underwater pastures.

A related issue is the poisoning of aquatic life. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Americans alone churn through 75 million pounds of pesticides each year to keep the bugs off their peapods and petunias. When those chemicals get into waterways, fish ingest them and become diseased. Humans who eat diseased fish can themselves become ill, completing the circle wrought by pollution.

A 2007 study of pollution in rivers around Portland, Oregon found that wild salmon there are swimming around with dozens of synthetic chemicals in their systems. Another recent study from Indiana found that a variety of corn genetically engineered to produce the insecticide Bt is having toxic effects on non-target aquatic insects, including caddis flies, a major food source for fish and frogs.

The solution, of course, is to go organic, both at home and on the farm. According to the Organic Trade Association, organic farmers and gardeners use composted manure and other natural materials, as well as crop rotation, to help improve soil fertility, rather than synthetic fertilizers that can result in an overabundance of nutrients. As a result, these practices protect ground water supplies and avoid runoff of chemicals that can cause dead zones and poisoned aquatic life.

There is now a large variety of organic fertilizer available commercially, as well as many ways to keep pests at bay without resorting to harsh synthetic chemicals. A wealth of information on growing greener can be found online: Check out OrganicGardeningGuru.com and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Alternative Farming System Information Center, for starters. Those interested in face-to-face advice should consult with a master gardener at a local nursery that specializes in organic gardening.

CONTACTS: CDC, www.cdc.gov; Organic Gardening Guru, www.organicgardeningguru.com; USDA’s Alternative Farming System Information Center, www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/pubs/ofp/ofp.shtml.

EarthTalk is produced by E/The Environmental Magazine. SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; [email protected]. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php. EarthTalk is now a book! Details and order information at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalkbook.