Captain Hero
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2008
- Messages
- 659
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- N/A
What about really seedy homeless dudes, I'm sure we could mine phosphate from those guys if you know what I'm saying. It's not like society would miss them hey.
these countries should be destroyed. cant anybody see theyre ruining our world?Trefoil said:With a rising population and emerging India, China and Latin America, I really don't think that increasing food competition is a good idea.
now indias turnCaptain Hero said:China's population is declining rapidly, guy.
Nah because they don't have a One Child policy, and thus haven't both kneecapped any future growth, but also torn off the leg and thrown it into the sea.Pace_T said:now indias turn
That's fascinating, champ.staticsiscool said:You only need phosphate if you're a fuckwit broadacre spaz in which case you will already be owned by a multinational anyhows.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphoruswikipedia said:Phosphorus is a component of DNA and RNA, as well as ATP, and is an essential element for all living cells. The most important commercial use of phosphorus-based chemicals is the production of fertilizers.
Oh my.wikipedia said:An average adult human contains a little less than 1 kg of phosphorus, about 85% of which is present in bones and teeth in the form of apatite, and the remainder inside cells in soft tissues. A well-fed adult in the industrialized world consumes and excretes about 1-3 g of phosphorus per day in the form of phosphate.
DNA and photosynthesis are based on ATP (adenosine triphosphate). Without phosphate, plants can not grow, produce energy, or reproduce (i.e. produce seeds or fruit).you said:Phosphate is not needed for growing shit as it fucks the soil anyway, locking ups nutrients.
Haber process? You mean this?you said:Phosphate will not reach peak dickhead, ever heard of the haber process? 33% of the worlds fertilisers are made using the haber process and it uses 3% of the worlds natural gas supply to do this.
No they are not. The majority are not currently made out of waste, and the majority are not planned to be made out of waste in the future. People plan to grow fulltime biofuel crops. It's lunacy.you said:Also the majority of biofuels are proposed to be made out of waste products anyway.
Yeah, you clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, so I'll consult the Department of Primary Industries for you:staticsiscool said:Added phosphorus you tool. Superphosphates. Not needed. Come back when you have some experience in growing crops without organophosphate fertilisers. I realise phosphorus is needed but not added. It locks up nutrients in the soil. Nitrogen for example.
Once again: the Haber process doesn't produce phosphorus. But you need phosphorus in your fertilisers or your crop yield will be horrible (if they even grow to begin with). It doesn't matter how much nitrogen you produce, your crops are still doomed without phosphorus.Yes i didn't put that very well. I meant that in not needing phosphate it wont reach peak because of the nitrogen (ammonia) produced in the haber process will supply the fertilisers in the form nitrates.
/Thread.Trefoil said:I certainly don't mind biofuel research. Especially not waste conversion or algae fuel. But biofuel is not the longterm answer. Heck it's not even the short- or medium-term answer. That's my point.
its not all about the depletion of oil for use as a fuel, what about the use of ethylene as a foodstock for all other products made from crude oil... What are they gonna be made out of after oil is gone? oh yeh, u can get ethylene by dehydrating ethanol which will work, but wait, are we just going in circles.. point is, we NEED to start using alternative fuels because we dont have the choicekatie tully said:lol did YOU watch it last night?
It was completely bias towards ethanol usage and didn't touch on any of the ramifications at all.
Did you see the bit about Brazil wiping out 7 football fields worth of Amazon a minute?
Have you done some independent research?
And if you read the rest of the thread, you would have seen it discussed that everybody agrees with the use of alternative fuels, but ethanol as a substitute for the oil crisis is not a viable venture for many reasons.colmadawg said:its not all about the depletion of oil for use as a fuel, what about the use of ethylene as a foodstock for all other products made from crude oil... What are they gonna be made out of after oil is gone? oh yeh, u can get ethylene by dehydrating ethanol which will work, but wait, are we just going in circles.. point is, we NEED to start using alternative fuels because we dont have the choice
I don't need to do research because i have experience in growing the cropzors. The dpi are retards who are still going off the century old idea of adding superphosphate fertilisers to everything to increase yield.Trefoil said:Yeah, you clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, so I'll consult the Department of Primary Industries for you:
"Like most Australian soils, North Coast soils are naturally low in phosphorus due to extensive weathering. While native plants are adapted to these low levels, introduced crops and pasture grasses are not, which means you need to apply phosphorus fertilisers to soil to achieve productive yields. Australian farmers use much more phosphorus than nitrogen and potassium compared with farmers in Europe and USA.
Phosphorus fertilisers are available in several forms, all based on rock phosphate."
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/resources/soils/improvement/phosphorous
Once again: the Haber process doesn't produce phosphorus. But you need phosphorus in your fertilisers or your crop yield will be horrible (if they even grow to begin with). It doesn't matter how much nitrogen you produce, your crops are still doomed without phosphorus.
Now, I'm going to ask you to do some fucking research before your next reply, OK? Start here:
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/33164
http://phosphorusfutures.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=29
http://www1.fipr.state.fl.us/PhosphatePrimer
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/283/5410/2015
Just because you have grown crops without phosphate based fertiliser, doesn't mean everyone has soils as nutrient rich as yourself.staticsiscool said:Liek i said dude, come back when you have experience in the field of growing crops. Cos like its funny how you say that crops wont crow without copious amounts of superphosphates spread over them but like we have never done that and like the crops grow?
Is to meet current demand for world food supply.staticsiscool said:Edit: but that was because i dont believe adding phosphate fertilisers is essential.
WHAT??? That's some mighty fine enviro-raping. When will this heinous, unchecked destruction of our world stop?Did you see the bit about Brazil wiping out 7 football fields worth of Amazon a minute?