[DocTim420]

Originally Posted by MrBungle

I can see it possibly bumping K too high (one of the more forgiving elements in excess) when added to a complete formula... but what about when KSil is part of the complete formula?

Hmmm, "KSil", I bet "K" stands for the element Potassium and "Sil" stands for Silica. Besides, using Potassium Silica as a plant nutrient is not allowed for "organic fanatics"--but OK for disease protection.

[MrBungle]

KSil yup... a pretty commonly used abbreviation for Potassium Silicate at least in the forums I've been part of...

I use KSil from veg til I just use plain water the last 7-10 days of flower

I hope you didnt think i was being sarcastic, I was honestly curious...

I can't see a reason to stop using silica in flower... There are so many benefits, but if there is a real reason other than its not "organic" to stop in early flower I'd like to learn about it

I honestly think the way people use it is not proper and that's why people are so apprehensive when using

[DocTim420]

No problem, just that there are other sources of Si that do not contain potassium that can wisely be used during the flowering cycle. So many people mistakenly think they can obtain Potassium Silicate in dry form (Ag Sil), mix it and then use it for plant nutrition and still be "organic"; Potassium Silicate is on the forbidden list when used for plant nutrition (period).

[Avenger]

Originally Posted by DocTim420

Hmmm, "KSil", I bet "K" stands for the element Potassium and "Sil" stands for Silica. Besides, using Potassium Silica as a plant nutrient is not allowed for "organic fanatics"--but OK for disease protection.

Potassium Silicate is on the forbidden list when used for plant nutrition (period).

the disease/pest protective benefit comes from the nutritional benefit potassium silicate gives the plant. Your interpretation of the NOP rules is flawed.

[DocTim420]

Originally Posted by Avenger

the disease/pest protective benefit comes from the nutritional benefit potassium silicate gives the plant. Your interpretation of the NOP rules is flawed.

Oh Avenger, why do you make this so easy?

Do we not agree that NOP guidance is provided at CFR §205.601, Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production?

In accordance with restrictions specified in this section, the following synthetic substances may be used in organic crop production: Provided, That, use of such substances do not contribute to contamination of crops, soil, or water. Substances allowed by this section, except disinfectants and sanitizers in paragraph (a) and those substances in paragraphs (c), (j), (k), and (l) of this section, may only be used when the provisions set forth in §205.206(a) through (d) prove insufficient to prevent or control the target pest.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...1.9.32.7.354.2

Then, if we agree on that, then a review of those regulations will reveal that "potassium silicate" (search that term Ctrl F makes it real easy) is permitted under two conditions:

Insecticide §205.601(e).
(2) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1) - the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand.


Plant Disease control §205.601(i).
(1) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1) - the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand.


Synthetic substances approved for plant and soil amendments are identified at §205.601(j) which I cut and pasted below. Do you see "Potassium Silicate"?

(j) As plant or soil amendments.

(1) Aquatic plant extracts (other than hydrolyzed) - Extraction process is limited to the use of potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide; solvent amount used is limited to that amount necessary for extraction.

(2) Elemental sulfur.

(3) Humic acids - naturally occurring deposits, water and alkali extracts only.

(4) Lignin sulfonate - chelating agent, dust suppressant.

(5) Magnesium sulfate - allowed with a documented soil deficiency.

(6) Micronutrients - not to be used as a defoliant, herbicide, or desiccant. Those made from nitrates or chlorides are not allowed. Soil deficiency must be documented by testing.

(i) Soluble boron products.

(ii) Sulfates, carbonates, oxides, or silicates of zinc, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum, selenium, and cobalt.

(7) Liquid fish products - can be pH adjusted with sulfuric, citric or phosphoric acid. The amount of acid used shall not exceed the minimum needed to lower the pH to 3.5.

(8) Vitamins, B1, C, and E.

(9) Sulfurous acid (CAS # 7782-99-2) for on-farm generation of substance utilizing 99% purity elemental sulfur per paragraph (j)(2) of this section.


And we have the actual NOP Board decision.https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/defau...ort%202003.pdf

The juice of the document is cut and pasted below:

Concluding remarks
Clearly, potassium silicate is a synthetic because, although the potassium carbonate and sand are mined, they require very high temperature treatment to form potassium silicate, and therefore a significant contribution of fossil fuel or fossil fuel replacement energy.

As a fertilizer, potassium silicate is highly soluble (generally a trait that puts a material in the prohibited grouping) and ‘jolts’ the soil with a rapid release of nutrients, even though the effects of a rapid availability of potassium and silica is not believed to have nearly as profound an impact as other materials such as sodium nitrate (an allowed non-synthetic material, with restrictions).

As a source of potassium or silicate for soil fertility, there are several effective non-synthetic, low soluble alternatives (lack of alternatives can mitigate other prohibited traits). Although synthetic silicates of metallic micronutrients have been allowed, they are not allowed as a source of silica, and probably should remain so: the reason for allowing these synthetic metallic silicates is the lack of acceptable materials, not that they are compatible with organic philosophy. The weight of the above evidence puts potassium silicate as a fertilizer in the prohibited column.

As a fungicide, the same concerns about synthetics are present. However the amounts used are much smaller, there is no ‘jolt’ to the soil and, most importantly, effective alternatives are not available. Unfortunately, there is not convincing evidence that potassium silicate will be even as effective as the alternatives, and its mode of action is not understood. These are important considerations. Sulfur and copper are allowed synthetics because, although they have some non-target toxicity and environmental troubles, they have a well-understood mode of action and breakdown products, have been used by organic farmers for a long time, and are proven effective. Potassium silicate does not have significant non-target toxicities, environmental risks or breakdown products, but does have a poorly understood mode of action, a short history of use, and has not been proven widely effective.

Recommendations to the NOSB:
The substance should be listed as a prohibited synthetic on the National List.


Now, where is the flaw in my interpretation of NOP rules? Or is it.....you?

[Elmer Bud]

Originally Posted by Douglas.Curtis

If you're unable to gently crush a flower with your fingers and have it break into small fragments, I'd start with the silica in flower. Yep.

G `day DC

I like a good generalisation too . lol .

Got any proof other than anecdotes above ?

Thanks for sharin

EB .

[Avenger]

Originally Posted by DocTim420

Oh Avenger, why do you make this so easy?

Do we not agree that NOP guidance is provided at CFR §205.601, Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production?

In accordance with restrictions specified in this section, the following synthetic substances may be used in organic crop production: Provided, That, use of such substances do not contribute to contamination of crops, soil, or water. Substances allowed by this section, except disinfectants and sanitizers in paragraph (a) and those substances in paragraphs (c), (j), (k), and (l) of this section, may only be used when the provisions set forth in §205.206(a) through (d) prove insufficient to prevent or control the target pest.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...1.9.32.7.354.2

Then, if we agree on that, then a review of those regulations will reveal that "potassium silicate" (search that term Ctrl F makes it real easy) is permitted under two conditions:

Insecticide §205.601(e).
(2) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1) - the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand.


Plant Disease control §205.601(i).
(1) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1) - the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand.


Synthetic substances approved for plant and soil amendments are identified at §205.601(j) which I cut and pasted below. Do you see "Potassium Silicate"?

(j) As plant or soil amendments.

(1) Aquatic plant extracts (other than hydrolyzed) - Extraction process is limited to the use of potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide; solvent amount used is limited to that amount necessary for extraction.

(2) Elemental sulfur.

(3) Humic acids - naturally occurring deposits, water and alkali extracts only.

(4) Lignin sulfonate - chelating agent, dust suppressant.

(5) Magnesium sulfate - allowed with a documented soil deficiency.

(6) Micronutrients - not to be used as a defoliant, herbicide, or desiccant. Those made from nitrates or chlorides are not allowed. Soil deficiency must be documented by testing.

(i) Soluble boron products.

(ii) Sulfates, carbonates, oxides, or silicates of zinc, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum, selenium, and cobalt.

(7) Liquid fish products - can be pH adjusted with sulfuric, citric or phosphoric acid. The amount of acid used shall not exceed the minimum needed to lower the pH to 3.5.

(8) Vitamins, B1, C, and E.

(9) Sulfurous acid (CAS # 7782-99-2) for on-farm generation of substance utilizing 99% purity elemental sulfur per paragraph (j)(2) of this section.


And we have the actual NOP Board decision.https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/defau...ort%202003.pdf

The juice of the document is cut and pasted below:

Concluding remarks
Clearly, potassium silicate is a synthetic because, although the potassium carbonate and sand are mined, they require very high temperature treatment to form potassium silicate, and therefore a significant contribution of fossil fuel or fossil fuel replacement energy.

As a fertilizer, potassium silicate is highly soluble (generally a trait that puts a material in the prohibited grouping) and ‘jolts’ the soil with a rapid release of nutrients, even though the effects of a rapid availability of potassium and silica is not believed to have nearly as profound an impact as other materials such as sodium nitrate (an allowed non-synthetic material, with restrictions).

As a source of potassium or silicate for soil fertility, there are several effective non-synthetic, low soluble alternatives (lack of alternatives can mitigate other prohibited traits). Although synthetic silicates of metallic micronutrients have been allowed, they are not allowed as a source of silica, and probably should remain so: the reason for allowing these synthetic metallic silicates is the lack of acceptable materials, not that they are compatible with organic philosophy. The weight of the above evidence puts potassium silicate as a fertilizer in the prohibited column.

As a fungicide, the same concerns about synthetics are present. However the amounts used are much smaller, there is no ‘jolt’ to the soil and, most importantly, effective alternatives are not available. Unfortunately, there is not convincing evidence that potassium silicate will be even as effective as the alternatives, and its mode of action is not understood. These are important considerations. Sulfur and copper are allowed synthetics because, although they have some non-target toxicity and environmental troubles, they have a well-understood mode of action and breakdown products, have been used by organic farmers for a long time, and are proven effective. Potassium silicate does not have significant non-target toxicities, environmental risks or breakdown products, but does have a poorly understood mode of action, a short history of use, and has not been proven widely effective.

Recommendations to the NOSB:
The substance should be listed as a prohibited synthetic on the National List.


Now, where is the flaw in my interpretation of NOP rules? Or is it.....you?

your loss not mine buddy(eclipse420?).

I'm sorry you never learned to comprehend what you read.

[Douglas.Curtis]

Originally Posted by Elmer Bud

G `day DC

I like a good generalisation too . lol .

Got any proof other than anecdotes above ?

Thanks for sharin

EB .

Grew without it for over a decade, flowers were always highly frangible. Easily break into tiny, frosty bits of yummy goodness.

Silica scene came around and a couple years ago I played with it. Different times, concentrations, couple of different runs. Use beyond first filling flower res is low-grade to me, hotter/harsher end smoke with tougher flowers. I now use it, where appropriate, and mid-end flower is not it.

Flowers are back to easily broken yumminess.

[DocTim420]

Originally Posted by Avenger

your loss not mine buddy(eclipse420?).

I'm sorry you never learned to comprehend what you read.

Why not articulate your position? IMO, honesty and integrity are two things that we can either embrace or....ignore. I am in the "embrace" camp.

[Douglas.Curtis]

I'm embracing the fact the both of you are about to go on ignore...