It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

World changing Technology Enables Crops to Take Nitrogen from the Air

page: 3
49
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by greavsie1971
 


Originally posted by greavsie1971
What is wrong with natural fertilizers. We have used them for millenia without problems, totally natural. Why do scientists always try to create some stupid chemical or genetic solution when we have a simple way already which does not entail changing the way the plants work by nature.

Of course, if we never started putting chemicals on our crops in the first place we would not have this problem....so we create a solution that isn't much different to the 'solutions' that created the problems in the first place.


In principle, you are right.

It is true that there is no need for synthetic chemical fertilisers at all, when we resort to natural farming techniques.
You are also right that the problems in monocultural massproduction are created by the method itself. (In the way we maltreat the soil).
So if we use this technology to just keep on substituting an in itself unsustainable method, then this is not really a solution but simply more of the same.

I'm not sure what to think of this new technology yet, but there might be fields (*wink*) where it could be of good use (e.g. integrated in natural farming methods?).

Depends on the long-term side effects and the costs of the bacteria-treatment.
Time will tell, I guess.
edit on 29-7-2013 by ColCurious because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 06:08 AM
link   
I would love to give that fellow a hardy high five, this
man has changed the world, truly amazing, i see a Nobel
prize in his future.

The implications of this are so vast, i would imagine that
the ability to grow crops in places where they would not
have flourished before might well be possible with this?

I am so glad to read some good news today, thank you OP.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Makes Monsanto look like a bunch of creepy pest-ic(spiders)-cedes.

WTG Farmer guy - KUDOS - hope you are covering your backside from the gmo crowd.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne
 


Part of me thinks this is absolutely fantastic, a proper scientific breakthrough and innovation (which, frankly, are words that are over used these days).

I have to say though, i do have a slight reservation in that what will be the effects on the atmosphere if farms the world over are taking Nitrogen direct from the air? It is probably negligible and not worth worrying about but at the end of the day, we (and every other living thing) are only alive because of the make up of our atmosphere. If farms are stripping away an element of this atmosphere (even if it is by far the most abundant) will it change things for us?

My science isn't anywhere good enough to comprehend this!



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by starwarsisreal
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne
 


My biggest concern is Monsanto is gonna steal this tech and convert them into something harmful


With any luck and a healthy dose of justice, it might put the evil swines out of business...or at the very least repeal the MPA laughing stock of 'law'.

Thanks for posting OP...this sounds fantastic.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Magister
When an organism is infected with bacteria it is called a disease. It makes me wonder why nature has not done this naturally. Why does this bacteria not occur in other plants? Would it turn our fields and gardens into jungles? This should be studied and tested carefully for a long time before being introduced into the unsuspecting plant world. It would be great if there are no ill effects!
Remember the GMO debacle.

Maybe they could find a bacteria to increase CO2 absorption. But with the same cautions.

Because nature uses plants to remove excess nitrogen from the ground. If there is no nitrogen in a soil then the plants are not supposed to grow until there is. Our problem is that there are to many people eating. Nature corrects this by supplying less food and people die. I think we just over eat. We could survive on half of what is grown.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 07:49 AM
link   
I see the mention of cleaning up pollution, but I am not seeing where the bacteria use the oxides of nitrogen.
I thought that the nitrogen-fixing bacteria used free nitrogen (N2) from the atmosphere, not the oxides. The NOx that causes pollution tends to combine with atmospheric water vapor and form nitric acid, causing acid rain.
Wikipedia: The Nitrogen Cycle

Nitrogen oxide pollution hampers the growth of plants. I don't believe that this new process of adding the bacteria to all plants will curb NO2 pollution, but it will cut the need for adding nitrogen (as fertilizer) to the soil.

ETA: I also fail to see how adding nitrogen to the soil in increasing amounts will decrease the pollution of water by ammonia and nitrates. Adding nitrogen to the soil by bacteria will increase the ammonia and nitrates in the soil.

Now I am wondering. If we have all crop plants fixing nitrogen in the soil, what if we increase the amount of nitrates in the watersheds and our bays? Will we get increased algae blooms and fish kills?
Just thinking out loud.
edit on 29-7-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Hello.

How is ammonia (NH3) and nitrogen (N2) that bad for our environment? They're naturally occurring substances.

Yes, when manipulated by humans they become alarmingly concentrated and more abundant than usual in a certain place, let's say, like the ammonia fertilizer plant that blew up in Waco. But should we put so much stress on our naturally occurring unnaturally (sort of) produced substances? We actually harvest this from our excesses in the oil refining processes we use today. So if we do not gather these excesses, would they in turn become emissions as we release the "waste" gasses into the atmosphere?

Don't get me wrong, hurray for this green technology, but should we exercise caution in the transition? Sigh. But it's probably just going to end up like all the other breakthroughs, under the rug.

Uhm, for example, I for one still believe that although ammonia is pungent and potentially dangerous to humans in high amounts, it still IS a naturally occurring substance. And comparing that to CFCs, they make a GREENER choice for refrigerants. HHHMMmmmmmm!!! Remember chloroflourocarbons and your ozone layer? Not a good thought.
edit on 29-7-2013 by headb because: edit to add: If we increase Nitrogen in the atmosphere, would this make us laugh more? Then is happiness just a Nitrous OD away? Imagine: global cheer.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   
From reading the article and a few other things after searching is this even really a new technology? Isn't it a bacteria that's probably been around forever
Some of the studies I saw looked like they were from the 70's and 80s

www.nrcresearchpress.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
edit on 29-7-2013 by warpboost because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by warpboost
From reading the article and a few other things after searching is this even really a new technology? Isn't it a bacteria that's probably been around forever
Some of the studies I saw looked like they were from the 70's and 80s

www.nrcresearchpress.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
edit on 29-7-2013 by warpboost because: (no reason given)


The breakthrough on which bacteria out of the millions that exist, and the method of artificially introduction to the seed is what is breaking, and I copied the title of the article like ATS requires so don't shoot the messenger. From what I can tell, the studies began long ago, but harnessing it into a usable and safe technology for ALL crops was not possible until Professor Cocking was able to demonstrate it in a repeatable fashion.

~Namaste



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Here is the company which is commercializing the technology.

While the current rhizobia bacteria market is limited to a few legume crops, the accessible market for Azotic Technologies is on all of the world’s crop species.

Azotic has achieved a world first in grass growing in total absence of soil

www.azotictechnologies.com...


Soil N, not soil. Hydroponics have done that a lot time ago.

Still don't get it from what I've read. They spray nitrogen fixing bacteria on the seed, and then it becomes intracellular in every cell? Hmm, anyone have more info?



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by NthOther
We've depleted the soil, so what do we do? Start depleting the air too, consuming one vital resource after another. Another step towards the complete cannibalization of the planet. Yay science.


Nitrogen is hardly a vital resource, and considering it makes up the majority of the atmosphere, pretty tough for us to put a dent in it.


Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne
 


Part of me thinks this is absolutely fantastic, a proper scientific breakthrough and innovation (which, frankly, are words that are over used these days).

I have to say though, i do have a slight reservation in that what will be the effects on the atmosphere if farms the world over are taking Nitrogen direct from the air? It is probably negligible and not worth worrying about but at the end of the day, we (and every other living thing) are only alive because of the make up of our atmosphere. If farms are stripping away an element of this atmosphere (even if it is by far the most abundant) will it change things for us?

My science isn't anywhere good enough to comprehend this!


Fair to say I think that the CO2 production from human activities would be far less than the nitrogen consumption from this technology, and the total atmospheric CO2 has hardly increased even with human activities, and with nitrogen at some 70% it shouldn't be a big deal. Nitrogen is pretty inert as far as I know, wouldn't have an effect on global warming or anything one way or the other.
edit on 7/29/2013 by Turq1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by greavsie1971
 


This is how beans get nitrogen. Its safe.
Organic old school.farming is not Sustainable, and we havused chemical salt fertilikzers to grow food cropsfor over a century.
The bacteria forms a symbiotic relationship with. The plant at the cellular level.
Transfering this ability to..other crops saves the land and makes for safer, cleaner food.
People should read and understand this before bashing it.
This is a good.thing.
If you have eaten beans, you have consumed this bacteria.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by BadNinja68
 


Because my opinion differs from yours you assume I havent read and understood it? I am a small holding farmer, I understand it perfectly. I value your opinion, and am pleased this seems important to you...we have that in common.......Please try not to assume people who have a different opinion than yourself must have difficulty understanding....do you not see how insulting that can be? Looking at your profile I see we have a hell of a lot in common and share many interests. Peace eh?

It isnt the bacteria itself that concerns me. I am aware some crops do this naturally as I read the article.

My issue is we are changing the 'natural state of things'. What happens to the nitrogen in the soil that is no longer being taken out by the plants?

We eat SOME foods that do this naturally, but what effect will it have on us in the long term when MOST of our foods have this bacteria?

Most farming is subsidised, therefore we create much more than we eat. This is a reason why natural farming is unsustainable (there are other reasons, I know) which is why I said we should all have an option to grow our own foods naturally (I know this will not happen).

Anyway, they said GM would increase yields and enable crops to grow in harsher conditions.....look how wrong they were. I find it worrying (especially after the GM debacle) that most of you are excited about this after just reading a little about it. I honestly think we need to start being very careful when they propose changing our foods at a cellular level. I agree it could be a great thing but will they do any long term testing?,,,,,,not if there is a profit to be made...we all know that.

Anyone agree?

Great thread by the way. Im enjoying the input.

Maybe I am being too critical but after years of growing produce I know the best and easiest way to get quialty food is the natural way. I have tried hybrids, gm, chemical pesticides, fungicides and fertilizer (usually takes 2 years for soil to recover after adding just 1 dose of any chemical...crazy). The hybrids are bad tasting, GM creates genetically mutated seeds if any at all and bad tasting food, also 'infects all heirloom plants...totally destroying them. I had pumpkins over a mile apart and they still got infected by the GM.

People keep calling this a natural method.....It isn't. For a few plants it is but to change plants at a cellular level just because it works with others is a bad idea without proper testing. It is not natural at all.
edit on 30-7-2013 by greavsie1971 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by greavsie1971
reply to post by BadNinja68
 


Because my opinion differs from yours you assume I havent read and understood it? I am a small holding farmer, I understand it perfectly. I value your opinion, and am pleased this seems important to you...we have that in common.......Please try not to assume people who have a different opinion than yourself must have difficulty understanding....do you not see how insulting that can be? Looking at your profile I see we have a hell of a lot in common and share many interests. Peace eh?

It isnt the bacteria itself that concerns me. I am aware some crops do this naturally as I read the article.

My issue is we are changing the 'natural state of things'. What happens to the nitrogen in the soil that is no longer being taken out by the plants?

We eat SOME foods that do this naturally, but what effect will it have on us in the long term when MOST of our foods have this bacteria?

Most farming is subsidised, therefore we create much more than we eat. This is a reason why natural farming is unsustainable (there are other reasons, I know) which is why I said we should all have an option to grow our own foods naturally (I know this will not happen).

Anyway, they said GM would increase yields and enable crops to grow in harsher conditions.....look how wrong they were. I find it worrying (especially after the GM debacle) that most of you are excited about this after just reading a little about it. I honestly think we need to start being very careful when they propose changing our foods at a cellular level. I agree it could be a great thing but will they do any long term testing?,,,,,,not if there is a profit to be made...we all know that.

Anyone agree?

Great thread by the way. Im enjoying the input.
edit on 30-7-2013 by greavsie1971 because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-7-2013 by greavsie1971 because: (no reason given)


Yes. It stands to reason that if plants are extracting nitrogen straight from the air, then the ground over time will eventually become toxic as too much nitrogen and phosphorous is obviously bad for a plant. It also becomes a concern that world over, the ground begins to store too much nitrogen and it actually has an atmospheric effect.

The only way around this I can see is that you won't need to do crop rotation, so maybe you only use these new bacteria/seed hybrids on a field every fourth year, so essentially you only take it out of the air when the grounds nitrogen is used up.

Its still risky though in my opinion. There is too many environmental issues already, we don't need more.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Wyrdnews
 


Excellent point. In fact crop rotation would be a bad idea. You would need to ensure no nitrogen producers were in the soil as it would become toxic...only way that is possible is using chemical weed killers....which brings us back to the initial problem...only this time we have also altered our food at a cellular level.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wyrdnews

Originally posted by greavsie1971


Yes. It stands to reason that if plants are extracting nitrogen straight from the air, then the ground over time will eventually become toxic as too much nitrogen and phosphorous is obviously bad for a plant. It also becomes a concern that world over, the ground begins to store too much nitrogen and it actually has an atmospheric effect.

The only way around this I can see is that you won't need to do crop rotation, so maybe you only use these new bacteria/seed hybrids on a field every fourth year, so essentially you only take it out of the air when the grounds nitrogen is used up.

Its still risky though in my opinion. There is too many environmental issues already, we don't need more.



The nitrogen requirement are 60% met with this new tech, so soil nitrogen is still being taken. This development does interest me, though my organically certified orchard is already fully planted. Perhaps if I applied the bacteria to my folia spray the trees might take it up?

Currently I truck up fish fert from a 1000 miles away, fire up my tractor and spray this over my whole property, environmentally I can see some real benefits for this tech.
Previously I have used naturally occurring bacteria to breakdown food for an invasive plant, which tied the mineral's up in the water and made my folia spray more valuable.

This is a game changer with conventional farmers not trucking in nitrogen (which is Hugh) and frequently overdone - the land can only hold so much - the excess running into out waterways causing a great deal of harm.

Big ups and hope for full testing.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:53 AM
link   
Surprised this didn't get more time on ATS. It's a revolutionary idea, thanks to our British brothers in agricultural science. This is an amazing discovery, and certainly will be World-changing forever. I hope it does not upset the balance of the atmosphere as all plants begin to take in maximum amounts of nitrogen. Then the atmosphere will begin to be excessive oxygen. Oxygenation could lead to faster fires through the forests. With this discovery, plants will grow faster and larger, but will burn faster, too.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join