Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Any questions or comments you have about Natural Sequence Farming processes. These could include general questions or ones about your personal problems.

PLEASE NOTE :
We do not endorse any answers from anyone in this forum except Peter Andrews himself.

Please remember, Natural Sequence Farming has to be tailored for your specific problem and to follow general advice may create more problems for you.

Moderator: webmaster

sceptic
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:17 pm

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by sceptic » Mon Sep 13, 2010 3:57 pm

Ian James wrote:Sceptic
n
1. (Philosophy) a person who habitually doubts the authenticity of accepted beliefs
2. a person who mistrusts people, ideas, etc., in general
3. (Philosophy) a person who doubts the truth of religion

I am happy to be engaged on any topic I join. I am especially happy to have a person who calls themselves by the moniker Sceptic join the fray.

I have been a sceptic of different ideas on many occasions. Sitting comfortably up among the branches eyeing jealously those below me feasting greadily on a juicy idea, watching carefully, should a luckless soul carelessly let a morsel slip, I'll quickly scamper down and snatch my treasure 'fore returning speedily to the safety of my lofty perch.

The amount of carbon emitted by my fertilizer factory is an interesting topic to discuss but for me it is not a matter of huge importance. Wether or not I am able to correctly calculate the carbon content of the gas is not particularly high on my list of things upon which I intend to hang my hat.

What really interests me is will this technology allow me to grow profitable crops without the need for fertilizer?

It is not in my nature to let distracting discussions about the finer details get between me and the truth.

The answer to that question will be in the pudding.
Scientific scepticism is about examining the hypothesis, looking at the evidence and making and testing predictions, it's not about just saying "I don't like it" it's about asking for proof behind claims and being willing to change your mind should better evidence become available. I am, by nature, sceptical, I like to see proof, to see well reasoned argument and to see facts, I refuse to believe something is true just because someone says it's true. I've been around long enough to know I don't know everything even if it is something I'm supposedly "expert" at.

Now, back to your exhaust, the concentration of CO2 going in to your engine is around 350ppm, the concentration of CO2 coming out is about 64 000ppm so atmospheric concentration of CO2 has very little to do with it which means that 99 point whatever percent of the CO2 coming out of the exhaust is from the burning of diesel, so figure out your rate of diesel use per hectare and work from there.

Moving on (or forward as some would put it), what effect would this CO2 have on the soil? I'm guessing probably very little and would most would escape before it could be fixed (I'm not too well up on soil biota but CO2 is generally fixed by photosynthesis which requires light, there would be some fixing by algae and small plants in the top cm or so where a little light can penetrate but generally the soil is where decomposition takes place where organic molecules {sugars, starches, lignins etc} are converted to CO2 rather than the other way around).

However, and here's the good news, the various nitrogen compounds, Ammonia and the various nitrogen oxides, are in a form available for uptake by plants and can be disolved into the moisture in the soil and this will give a boost to crops (and I must add my congrats to how your crops are looking, very nice), pumping nitrogen compounds into the soil is something fairly common, though the amounts pumped in on the big operations isn't good for the soil biota. I am interested in seeing how this goes over a couple of years and what effects it has on the soil biota, pH and organic content.

Sceptically yours
sceptic
The truth is out there.

Angela Helleren
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 6:45 am
Location: Victoria

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Angela Helleren » Tue Sep 14, 2010 6:09 am

As previously stated I'm no mathematician or scientist for that matter yet I have found this a very interesting topic.
I can turn a light switch on without needing to know why it works yet if it doesn't work someone had better have the answer!! :lol:
I hope Ian won't mind my throwing in this link on his thread but we have such a diverse community here it may be of interest someone.

http://www.waterontheweb.org/under/wate ... xygen.html

Cheers
Many hands make light work.
Unfortunately, too many hands stirring anti clockwise, has spoiled mother natures recipe.
Back to basics.

Ian James
Posts: 253
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Avon West Australia

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Ian James » Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:03 am

Angela, it's no one’s thread!

That was a great link, really interesting.

You know what, I should be gracious and say how valuable sceptics are to scientific debate and such and such and so forth.

But I can’t be bothered; I just don't have time for sceptics. Those days are long past.

I am interested in progressive thinking, discovery and innovation. Let the sceptics choke in the dust.

What great inventions have sceptics come up with and how many have they delayed and inhibited?

This site is a celebration of one of Australia's greatest ever innovators. Peter Andrews.

Knockers are a dime a dozen and no sceptic can come up with a thought that an inventor has not already dismissed as irrelevant.

Peter came to WA last week and we drove out to Mukinbudin to listen to him speak to a crowded hall full of farmers facing the toothy end of a horrendous drought not matched by anything in recorded history.

I recognised in him a man who has forged ahead in spite of the sceptics, to trial and test his theories, those both barren and those fruitful.

Those sceptics, who so value their doubts have left their mark on Peter and continue to muffle his great achievements.

That inspirational man, how far could he have gone had his knockers been gracious themselves and supported him.

Wake up Australia! Let’s get all get behind Peter and PUSH!

Shirley Henderson
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 4:03 pm
Location: Thirlmere

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Shirley Henderson » Wed Sep 15, 2010 8:32 am

It’s interesting about skeptics. It’s interesting that they are not skeptical about their own way of doing things. Scientists are trained and programmed to record and measure and explain everything in small sequences without gaining understanding of a whole thing and how it works. Nature, water, weather and biodiversity is not fully understood and no amount of measuring and recording will change the truth of what is happening. Science is supposed to gain an understanding, in this case, natural sequence farming. Last night I viewed one of the videos on you tube of an up and coming scientist who is looking at Natural Sequence farming at Spring creek. After going through the robotic measurements of transects he states that the rebuilding of the system will take 200-2000 years. I am truly wondering where he believes he has the knowledge to make that assumption when we have seen complete systems begin to develop in a matter of weeks due to NSF. Of course years are required to make assessments but since no-one has actually carried out a transect for 200 years as yet what is he measuring his assumption on. It is not comparable to any other. His scientific measurement is in fact an insight (unproven) based on what he believes to be true. Why is his assumption considered more likely to be the truth than Peters assumptions based on years of practice and dedicated, indepth thinking into NSF? I think it is great that we measure, examine and learn from everything we do but positively and not too skeptically we have to understand we have limited understanding when it comes to the environment. It is a fantastic ambition to be caring for our land and waterways. It has now become a real forefront issue to be dealt with but there are so many skeptics, destroyers, negative thinkers that delay and hold back those of us who are different. It is always the different thinkers that change old out dated modes of doing things and skeptics that are afraid to try new things themselves. If you don’t do, you don’t learn be it success or failure as the result. I struggle every day within my field with brainwashed racists of the plant world. They are dear people and well intentioned, as I was sometime ago in the same situation. They are unable however to engage in a conversation of any depth as to why they believe that only native plants should be used to repair the damage done to the Australian landscape. The only argument is that is how it should be, that is how it used to be, and we have wrecked the environment. YOU CAN’T PUT IT BACK! Its spilt milk. Sorry but wake up and get on with the job. Ever since I saw Peter Andrews on Australian Story I saw a man of understanding and commitment. No matter what the out come in Peters life he has started a new way of thinking that will baffle the scientists for years to come. If you practice NSF, no doubt time will tell. It the legalities where the real difficulties lie. The paper work, the laws, the legislation all formed by those unbending misunderstood minds. So we have to just get on with it and face those problems and people along the way. There is no escaping that but as you know sometime you move forward in baby steps and sometimes leaps.
Sceptic, why not bend your mind to areas where you never thought you could go and start looking at things from a different angle. It’s great that you are questioning all this but how about getting on side. I think you will be better off in the long run.
Ian, I am so happy to see your work coming along and wish you well. You have so many eyes watching you and wanting to you to win.
Shirley

Ian James
Posts: 253
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Avon West Australia

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Ian James » Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:23 am

What a great post Shirley! I just love your passion. Passion comes from belief and faith. Faith comes from trust and self confidence which is earnt and learnt.

Like me you have travelled a road, from sceptic to believer and you have made that journey using the stepping stones of discovery of factual evidence in combination with an open and enquiring mind. The desire to embark on an expedition of discovery triggered by an identified need for a solution to a problem.

Thank you Sceptic for being a wall against which we can bounce our ideas. I am irritated by your nickname but let’s discuss the questions you present.
Moving on (or forward as some would put it), what effect would this CO2 have on the soil? I'm guessing probably very little and would most would escape before it could be fixed (I'm not too well up on soil biota but CO2 is generally fixed by photosynthesis which requires light, there would be some fixing by algae and small plants in the top cm or so where a little light can penetrate but generally the soil is where decomposition takes place where organic molecules {sugars, starches, lignins etc} are converted to CO2 rather than the other way around).
There may not be much CO2 in the emissions and not all of this would fix in the soil but hey, how much do we need to stimulate biological activity. Answer that.
We know that in nature a small amount of a required element in the right form can unlock a whole raft of sequences.

How else does CO2 enter into the subsoils and what effect does it have? We all know that C is a vital element in a biosphere.
but generally the soil is where decomposition takes place where organic molecules {sugars, starches, lignins etc} are converted to CO2
Your comment here shows me you may need to do further research. The soil is where decomposition takes place.??

Come on! Go and read about soil bacteria and fungi. They grow! Sure they consume that is like us, they need fuel. They grow. The soil is not where decomposition takes place. It is the engine room of growth! The small fraction of biology that we see on the surface is miniscule to the biological growth that happens out of our view. Read up on the billions of bacti that inhabit 1 gram of earth. Read up on what they produce and emit and transport.
The soil is their medium; it is not just a place of decomposition. It is a place of life.
However, and here's the good news, the various nitrogen compounds, Ammonia and the various nitrogen oxides, are in a form available for uptake by plants and can be dissolved into the moisture in the soil and this will give a boost to crops (and I must add my congrats to how your crops are looking, very nice), pumping nitrogen compounds into the soil is something fairly common, though the amounts pumped in on the big operations isn't good for the soil biota. I am interested in seeing how this goes over a couple of years and what effects it has on the soil biota, pH and organic content.
Thank you for your grats on my crop, you are dead right about large amounts of N being not good for the soil biota. This is a big clue as to why the emissions can stimulate plant growth because the stimulating effect is not seen when fertiliser is added with the emissions.

sceptic
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 7:17 pm

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by sceptic » Mon Sep 20, 2010 8:09 am

Sorry about the delay in replying, now lets look at some of the points/questions you have raised.
Ian James wrote:
Moving on (or forward as some would put it), what effect would this CO2 have on the soil? I'm guessing probably very little and would most would escape before it could be fixed (I'm not too well up on soil biota but CO2 is generally fixed by photosynthesis which requires light, there would be some fixing by algae and small plants in the top cm or so where a little light can penetrate but generally the soil is where decomposition takes place where organic molecules {sugars, starches, lignins etc} are converted to CO2 rather than the other way around).
There may not be much CO2 in the emissions and not all of this would fix in the soil but hey, how much do we need to stimulate biological activity. Answer that.
We know that in nature a small amount of a required element in the right form can unlock a whole raft of sequences.

How else does CO2 enter into the subsoils and what effect does it have? We all know that C is a vital element in a biosphere.

The short answer is carbon enters the soil by the decomposition of plants,

Image

plants take up CO2 and through the process of photosynthesis convert it (with the addition of water) into sugars, these sugars are then converted to more complex molecules, organisms consume the plant (both live and dead) converting it to other carbon compounds and releasing CO2, this goes on above and below the soil surface. This is known as the Carbon Cycle.

but generally the soil is where decomposition takes place where organic molecules {sugars, starches, lignins etc} are converted to CO2
Your comment here shows me you may need to do further research. The soil is where decomposition takes place.??

Yes it is, it also takes place at the soil surface, just to quote Wikipedia
Decomposition of plant matter occurs in many stages. It begins with leaching by water; the most easily lost and soluble carbon compounds are liberated in this process. Another early process is physical breakup or fragmentation of the plant material into smaller bits which have greater surface area for microbial colonization and attack. In smaller dead plants, this process is largely carried out by the soil invertebrate fauna, whereas in the larger plants, primarily parasitic life-forms such as insects and fungi play a major breakdown role and are not assisted by numerous detritivore species. Following this, the plant detritus (consisting of cellulose, hemicellulose, microbial products, and lignin) undergoes chemical alteration by microbes. Different types of compounds decompose at different rates. This is dependent on their chemical structure. For instance, lignin is a component of wood, which is relatively resistant to decomposition and can in fact only be decomposed by certain fungi, such as the black-rot fungi. Said fungi are thought to be seeking the nitrogen content of lignin rather than its carbon content[citation needed]. Lignin is one such remaining product of decomposing plants with a very complex chemical structure causing the rate of microbial breakdown to slow. Warmth determines the speed of plant decay, with the rate of decay increasing as heat increases, e.g. a plant in a warm environment will decay over a shorter period of time.

In most grassland ecosystems, natural damage from fire, insects that feed on decaying matter, termites, grazing mammals, and the physical movement of animals through the grass are the primary agents of breakdown and nutrient cycling, while bacteria and fungi play the main roles in further decomposition.

The chemical aspects of plant decomposition always involve the release of carbon dioxide.



Come on! Go and read about soil bacteria and fungi. They grow! Sure they consume that is like us, they need fuel. They grow. The soil is not where decomposition takes place. It is the engine room of growth! The small fraction of biology that we see on the surface is miniscule to the biological growth that happens out of our view. Read up on the billions of bacti that inhabit 1 gram of earth. Read up on what they produce and emit and transport.
The soil is their medium; it is not just a place of decomposition. It is a place of life.

The soil is where decomposition takes place and decomposition is needed to recycle the nutrients taken up by plants, typing "decomposers" into Google will give a great deal of information, personally I think this one's pretty good and to quote:
Introduction:

Decomposers are vital components of the nutrient cycle. Without decomposers, nutrients would not cycle back into our environment and waste would accumulate at an alarming rate. If decomposers did not exist, within a month the earth would be covered in a layer of dead flies almost twenty feet deep! Thankfully, decomposers consume dead plant and animal matter, so the nutrients contained within them can be reused. Think of pop can recycling. When pop cans are recycled, they are melted down into aluminum and sent off to processing plants so the metal can be used again. If we did not recycle pop cans, we would run out of aluminum in the future. Likewise, if nutrients were not recycled in our environment they would not be available to other organisms.





Yes I do know about soil bacteria and fungi, yes they do grow but they do grow because they are decomposing other organisms and as they decompose other organisms they release CO2, this is why soil CO2 concentrations are generally higher than atmospheric levels, if soil microbes and fungi were storing CO2 then the concentration would be lower than atmospheric levels. In fact increasing soil CO2 levels can have an adverse impact on soil biota.

In order to assess the validity of conventional methods for measuring CO2 flux from soil, the relationship between soil microbial respiration and ambient CO2 concentration was studied using an open-flow infra-red gas analyser (IRGA) method. Andosol from an upland field in central Japan was used as a soil sample. Soil microbial respiration activity was depressed with the increase of CO2 concentration in ventilated air from 0 to 1000 ppmv. At 1000 ppmv, the respiration rate was less than half of that at 0 ppmv. Thus, it is likely that soil respiration rate is overestimated by the alkali absorption method, because CO2 concentration in the absorption chamber is much lower than the normal level. Metabolic responses to CO2 concentration were different among groups of soil microorganisms. The bacteria actinomycetes group cultivated on agar medium showed a more sensitive response to the CO2 concentration than the filamentous fungi group.


However, and here's the good news, the various nitrogen compounds, Ammonia and the various nitrogen oxides, are in a form available for uptake by plants and can be dissolved into the moisture in the soil and this will give a boost to crops (and I must add my congrats to how your crops are looking, very nice), pumping nitrogen compounds into the soil is something fairly common, though the amounts pumped in on the big operations isn't good for the soil biota. I am interested in seeing how this goes over a couple of years and what effects it has on the soil biota, pH and organic content.
Thank you for your grats on my crop, you are dead right about large amounts of N being not good for the soil biota. This is a big clue as to why the emissions can stimulate plant growth because the stimulating effect is not seen when fertiliser is added with the emissions.
The truth is out there.

ColinJEly
Posts: 167
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:50 am
Location: melbourne

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by ColinJEly » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:38 am

Ian and Jodi
Bloody good show!
Has there been any studies done on what exactly you are pumping into the soil?
There would be CO/CO2 and various compounds of N? Anything not so good?

The most noble calling a man can have is to grow food for another.
The most noble calling a country can have is to grow food for another country's people!

Jodi James
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:36 pm
Location: Avon West Australia

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Jodi James » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:28 pm

Well Hi everyone! After the worst drought on record for WA I have something I would like to share.......you might all like to hear how our crop went, well take a look at this link and have a read.

http://fw.farmonline.com.au/news/state/ ... 19125.aspx

All I can say is...we will be here for another year to tell the next story so if you are interested, how about joining us on the journey of emission crops and put the money you save back in the pocket, as this is the next best thing in farming, and I am excited! :D
Open mindedness opens wisdom

Jodi James
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:36 pm
Location: Avon West Australia

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Jodi James » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:39 pm

By the way, Ian and I just finished a 4 day NTS Sustainable Farming Course and are very excited on our new programme that we are developing with Nutri Tech Solutions. So with that in mind, incorporated with emissions and NTS liquid products,and humates, next year should be a blast! If anyone is interested in what we are doing please don't be afraid to contact us and talk about the new age of farming with nature and biology! We are on a journey of growing better produce, reducing the nasties and lowering chemicals, eventually even considering organic! It's not about quantity, its about quality and being paid for it! We should be price makers not price takers.
Open mindedness opens wisdom

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by duane » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:52 pm

Jodi

Great news for you guys. Congratulations and well done.

I too was sceptical....you know that.

I now have to eat humble pie....you both had a leap of faith, mixed with a big dose of optimism, spurred on by adversity.

I hope you continue to show and lead by example- how broad acre farmers can be innovative, productive and sustainable.

Ian and you are an absolute inspiration.

Ian James
Posts: 253
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Avon West Australia

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Ian James » Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:19 am

Thanks Duane, it is nice to be able to say " I told you so" but that is not what we are wanting to say.

We are at the very beginning of a journey of discovery and realization. It is way to early to be back slapping and sitting back.

We must now formulate a plan to maintain momentum and build on the lessons of this season.

There are products and methods we have found and trailed which are compatible with our new system which we want to learn more about. The goal is to find alternatives that we can either make ourselves or source affordably to replace toxic or destructive, expensive inputs or methods and learn how to implement these new tools together in an evolving and complete system which builds sustainability.

Sustainability cannot be dismissed as just a sexy new buzz word, it must be a core objective in everything we attempt.

I am really enthusiastic about the coming planning period as we begin to bring together all the new knowledge we have absorbed and build an achievable and affordable strategy to get the most practical and rewarding results.

I think we have taken some large steps towards understanding WHAT we may be able to achieve and more importantly HOW we may be able to implement it.

That is something to feel good about.

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by duane » Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:30 am

Sustainability in terms of productivity from the landscape means only one thing.

"The ability to produce more from the farm ecosystem with each passing cycle, building enough matter from the energy provided by the sun via plants and water, to sustain ourselves and to aggrade our landscape".

We need to close the loop as Nature does to aggrade instead of the current system where we mine our systems instead of building them.

We are all on that journey.........Well done Ian.

Stringybark
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 10:24 am
Location: Wagga Wagga. NSW

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Stringybark » Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:50 am

Fantastic stuff Ian and Jodi!
I've been following this thread closely. I was beginning to worry at the lack of recent updates. The season has been pretty ordinary in WA, as you don't need reminding.
The more info I find on emissions fert, the more I'm convinced it's the way to go.
A farmer in the NSW Riverina got a write up in the Weekly Times this week about his setup.

http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/articl ... ticle.html

It's great to see people who are willing to think outside the square and conduct their own research, have a win.
I can almost feel your excitement here in NSW. It's a little contagious.

Shirley Henderson
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 4:03 pm
Location: Thirlmere

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Shirley Henderson » Sat Dec 11, 2010 6:01 pm

Congratualtions Jodi and Ian. What a great success! :D :D :D :D :D :D

Jodi James
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:36 pm
Location: Avon West Australia

Re: Exhaust emissions fertiliser

Post by Jodi James » Sun Dec 12, 2010 7:40 pm

Hi Duane,

Yes I do remember you saying last year it was snake oil, well we were all a bit worried, but we didn't have much of a choice. I only hope that people look at they way they are running their farming business and consider their budgets and look at the huge finical risk they are taking when the put that fertilizer in the ground. our aim is to promote healthy soils that breathe life, I have been amazed at how much root mass we have below the ground in just one year. I also am interested in bringing back our worms, they provide all the fertilizer you would ever need in any year. The trusty worm can provide any plant it's nutrient requirements for each season. Why would anyone want to put chinas toxic waste into your soil, you would have to be crazy. They are making chemical cocktails with our fertilizer to get rid of their waste products, and we are growing our food with it. That is scary. Ian and I have very high levels of heavy metals in our bodies, and are concerned, how that came to be. So we are making a stand, and are not considering at all of poisoning our dirt anymore. If all farmers considered the long term effects from fertilizer on our soils and really looked at the growth below instead of what's on top, maybe our precious soils would stop blowing away.

Well I must say Duane I wouldn't even be farming today if it wasn't for Peter, what a special man! He made us look beyond what we ever imagined. Lets hope that people will start to listen to him and keep our water here on our farms instead of letting it all run away when we have these flood events. You were right Peter about the Tanami winds, we are seeing the effects here in WA

By the way, Ian and I have been successful with a grant to put Peters theories to the test! , we also have funding to have Martin Stapper to deliver a holistic management course here in WA for sometime next year. Things are looking up!
Thankyou Peter!!!!!!!!
Open mindedness opens wisdom

Post Reply