The Organic Think Tank

[treewizard]

"After all, do plants with 1000PPM of atmospheric CO2 not grow faster than those with 300PPM? Mother nature cannot do that, but I sure can."

Actually the reason that plants can use that much is because it was the CO2 content of our atmosphere a long time ago.

Humanity's arrogance will be its downfall.

 

[mg75]

isn't this an "organic hydro" thread? all this talk about compost... manure... EWC... try those methods in drip irrigation systems... ebb & flow... might get some clogs... also, some organic stuff is not supposed to be aerated and some must be for 24 hours before application. organic hydro might have limitations when it comes to the delivery system. not all hydro systems (aeroponic) can handle teas.

in my own experience non-OMRI certified nutes do better in hydro. they are more predictable. you might have a secret organic formula... i usually follow what the bottles say and adjust from there (usually subtract).

 

[xmobotx]

actually its prob the thing to take the chem vs organic to feed the world discussion elsewhere

seeing as this is "organic hydro" and there's so many diverse points

* many chem perspectives are based on the idea that "organic' is just a different bottle at the store/organic is growing food for the food and collecting naturally occurring feedstocks

[of course, organic methods are as diverse as organic gardeners -but, the "sustainability" element is key here]

* chem depletes the soil/organic develops it and it gets better over time (seeing as that's how nature intended)

* runoff/pollution from chem based operations actually causes far reaching problems affecting neighboring areas/organic done wrong could have similar issues but done right it actually improves the surrounding area

* usable arable land? that's a discussion in and of itself -since organic methods can be used to convert much of the "unsuitable" land to highly arable

*NTM does this context of "arable land" rely on the model of commercial farming? Since more logical approaches should depend on multiple individuals providing for themselves/their family/local on a small hand-farmed scale (maybe even give back some of the jobs the machines do in these modern sophisticated times)

 

[montanaorganics]

Ok I have a few points here.
#1 Hydro and aero DO yield more per foot. BUT stating chemical salts are sustainable is both myopic and moronic. Some of us may choose the path of least resistance but I prefer not to choose that for our children.
Now organic hydro provides the potential for truly sustainable higher food yields.

 

[montanaorganics]

And if you dont believe that then check out countries like Russia that supply the whole country with organic hydro produced veggies. Their produce is better fresher and cheaper than we could ever hope to attain with our countries attitude towards mass cereal production and crop subsidies.

 

[montanaorganics]

Next on my list of issues; if you use a bottle and take your opinion of organics from that, then you are poorly educating yourself. The same companies that were putting insanae markups on their cheap salt based ferts have simply moved on to a new profitable market. For the most part organics can be easily and cheaply reproduced or cheaply sourced from other less competitive industries.

 

[Hovz]

I strongly believe that the future of the world lies in biotechnology. If genetic engineers can isolate the gene that allows some grass to grow 1ft+ in one day, they can in theory create crops that finish much faster. Also cloning animals for their meat is becoming a reality.

 

[montanaorganics]

And my final rant for the moment is....
All of you hydro heads knocking organics should go get usb microscopes. Have a look at your water under high magnification and I bet you find all sorts of shit... Microbes, bacteria, fungi, protazoa etc etc.
Now that sounds pretty organic to me... So unless you use hydrogen peroxide or some other sterilizer every 2 days I venture you grow more organic than you believe.
A test comparison would be quite easy. Two seperate reservoirs. To one add micro starter every 2 days. To the other add H2O2 every 2 days. Lets see which wins.

One last point, and that is that in a sterilized system pathogens are the first organism to show.

 

[xmobotx]

I strongly believe that the future of the world lies in biotechnology. If genetic engineers can isolate the gene that allows some grass to grow 1ft+ in one day, they can in theory create crops that finish much faster. Also cloning animals for their meat is becoming a reality.

it's kind of like taking steroids;
* doesn't seem like a little extra testosterone should hurt anything. and, at 1st when the muscles bulk up and the endurance is at teenage levels it feels pretty good
* but in the long term, miscellaneous issues arise (or sometimes don't)
* and, there's frequently short term issues as well

exploration and science are good (great even) but when you get to this level you must tread carefully and test thoroughly

time and time again the corp regime has failed society in this respect. look at medicine and the lawsuits following products because they do more harm than good.

i would say, "look at chem gardening" but for some reason there's a huge portion of the populace who haven't figured it out yet.

oh wait, it's that corp regime thing again - profit precedes caution

 

[montanaorganics]

The problem with this argument is that chemical salts obviously grow marijuana well. I wouldnt know but I have seen too many fine grows to believe otherwise. However I cant really say they do anything else. Except maybe create a gigantic market for the mark up of inexpensive toxins and waste byproducts.
Not to get smug but the organic approach incorporates more than the input and results. Like anything else organic can be taken at any level. From a simple more symbiotic way to grow plants all the way to fanatical organic lifestyles of balance with nature. Take it at whatever level you want to. Either way you will learn far more about microbiology and how your plants actually grow if you spend a little time educating yourself about the soil web and micro/macrobiology.
It is truly omnipresent and easier to manipulate than fight.

 

[montanaorganics]

And thats about as hippie as I can stand to be so I`m gonna duck out for awhile. See Yall later

 

[Lazyman]

Indoors the soil web and the nutrients used are self-contained. I have no runoff, no chemicals going into the water table, and no direct impact on the soil ecology outside the grow.

When I do dispose of used soil, it gets composted or used to feed outdoor plants in my veggie garden, which thrive on it. I believ it's more from the aeration of the mix in my clay-heavy soil that the plants enjoy, as the nutrients are mostly flushed out of it before it's disposed of.

So, how am I causing any grave harm to the environment using chem nutes indoors?

 

[xmobotx]

The problem with this argument is that chemical salts obviously grow marijuana well.

this argument?

it's kind of like taking steroids;
* doesn't seem like a little extra testosterone should hurt anything. and, at 1st when the muscles bulk up and the endurance is at teenage levels it feels pretty good
* but in the long term, miscellaneous issues arise (or sometimes don't)
* and, there's frequently short term issues as well

cause steroids grow some fairly remarkable muscles

it's really the "down the road" that represents the probz

*but you may not be referring to my argument?

 

[xmobotx]

Indoors the soil web and the nutrients used are self-contained. I have no runoff, no chemicals going into the water table, and no direct impact on the soil ecology outside the grow.

When I do dispose of used soil, it gets composted or used to feed outdoor plants in my veggie garden, which thrive on it. I believ it's more from the aeration of the mix in my clay-heavy soil that the plants enjoy, as the nutrients are mostly flushed out of it before it's disposed of.

So, how am I causing any grave harm to the environment using chem nutes indoors?

you individually may have little impact worldwide - part of the efficacy of your "feed the planet" argument is the staggering #s

you as an individual aren't so staggering

however, your previous argument claims a basis on quantifiable figures. Have all the relevant figures actually been quantified?

and in this argument:

you're NOT self contained - you had to get to the store somehow, buy the nutes somehow (is your work eco-friendly?,) get them home somehow

what did you do w/ the packaging? who are you supporting w/ your purchase? what are they doing w/ the money? i.e. what might be the agenda of the co?

when you say "most of the nutes are flushed out," where are they flushed to? how accurate of a quantification is "most?"

and how can you truly quantify what the effects of 'disposing" your soil into your outside garden are to the planet? today? in 5 years? after a lifetime? (remember this is just the not very staggering you)

even assuming your "product" is safe (do you share it w/ others BTW?) what about the collateral?

keep in mind, i disagree that your "product" is safe anyway. (*edit, to be fair this is kind of a dig - maybe i should say "safe to eat")

do you use pesticide?

oh, and what is your discussion about chem soil doing in organic hydro?

 

[supermanlives]

i actually find organics easier. and i recycle all my soil. i had all kinds of problems recycling chem soil.chems do tend to yield a little more in my opinion and properly used will provide buds as good as organic.

 

[Lazyman]

you individually may have little impact worldwide - part of the efficacy of your "feed the planet" argument is the staggering #s

you as an individual aren't so staggering

however, your previous argument claims a basis on quantifiable figures. Have all the relevant figures actually been quantified?

and in this argument:

you're NOT self contained - you had to get to the store somehow, buy the nutes somehow (is your work eco-friendly?,) get them home somehow

Oh c'mon, matter is never created or destroyed, it just changes forms. The soil Im using has just been moved from one place to another.

what did you do w/ the packaging? who are you supporting w/ your purchase? what are they doing w/ the money? i.e. what might be the agenda of the co?

You're really reaching here...does bat guano get harvested from your own backyard too?

when you say "most of the nutes are flushed out," where are they flushed to? how accurate of a quantification is "most?"

Ok, H&G Drip Clean converts excess salts into a soild that they claim cannot be uptaken by plants. Most as in the plants are no longer getting enough food to survive, runoff is usually around 300PPM, which is lower than the well water I pump from the ground.

and how can you truly quantify what the effects of 'disposing" your soil into your outside garden are to the planet? today? in 5 years? after a lifetime? (remember this is just the not very staggering you)

You think a bit of peat and perlite, along with some small amounts of fertilizer are going to cause grievous harm? Worms will eat it all and it will be GONE in a year. Next?

even assuming your "product" is safe (do you share it w/ others BTW?) what about the collateral?

Yes I provide medicine for ten patients, and smoke it myself, as does my wife. I suppose they should all just start shooting up mercury as its safer? And again, my collateral causes no more harm to the environment than you do driving to the store, or powering the computer you're typing on.

keep in mind, i disagree that your "product" is safe anyway. (*edit, to be fair this is kind of a dig - maybe i should say "safe to eat")

I take it you never buy food from the grocery store then? Good for you! I don't have the time to grow all my own food, but I don't knock those that do.

do you use pesticide?

Yes, I consider it to be more harmful to the environment to burn 8KW of electricity on a product I'd have to throw away due to mite infestations than to prevent them in the first place. If you are lucky enough to have one of those extremely rare pest-free indoor gardens congratulations!

oh, and what is your discussion about chem soil doing in organic hydro?[/

I consider it to be chem hydro, as I drip feed hydro nutes into a largely inert medium, at least after a few weeks it is.

I also have experience in organic hydro and have done side-by-side testing (all laid out in my 8KW grow in my sig) which most people have not done. My first-hand experience in the matter is more practical and useful to the layman than your "what-if" scenarios of potential environmental harm that cannot easily be measured or quantified.

 

[xmobotx]

you're running w/ blinders

yes, i am a hypocrite in this argument as i drive a car, buy packaged goods, eat food from the store, and probably support all manner of evil co w/ my purchases/lifestyle

which actually isn't the issue so much

grapeman already told me i m an idealist and 2 billion people have to die for the world to go organic

but reasonably speaking, the world would go organic only after we (the species) are gone (well i could get into my belief structure but that's yet another matter)

AT WHATEVER RATE

i m cognizant that not all my decisions are perfect and i have waste i would just as soon not be wasting - and i strive to do something about it

i don't stick my head in the sand and say "my methods aren't hurting anything" when it is OBVIOUS that they are very bad and damaging not only to myself but also to society

###

the simple fact is that you as an individual only contribute your portion to the downfall (as do I) and only a worldwide societal reform would change this drastically

but it continues and disposal of a little peat/coco/whatever has it's drawbacks

BUT, not nearly the drawbacks of using the same nutrients on entire fields/mechanized farms

which are significant and undeniable

this grow style depletes the soil at a level we are still only beginning to realize - in terms of sustainability, organic may not be the wave of the future but it would be the only thing insuring that we might be able to provide for as many of us as possible - because the chem depleted soils are headed for a major nosedive that only organics would fix (as you yourself are relying on to make up for your disposal of your container mixes)

 

[toohighmf]

YAAAAAAAWWWWWWWN. this becoming a "my dad can beat your dad up argument". There is no correct answer. There is only a choice. Defend either op, and still no one wins.

 

[baet]

do what your comfortable with, and what works for you, or in some cases what your budget can afford.


the argument that conventional farming produces more yield...find some unbiased research. over a few years organic yield can match conventional/salt yield.

organic farming:
-less energy
-less water
-reduced soil and groundwater pollution
-increased biodiversity
-soil conservation
-sustainable

"A twenty two year study done by Cornell University revealed that organic farming produced the same yields of corn and soybeans as conventional farming, but used thirty percent less energy, less water and no pesticides; as well as using, on average, thirty percent less fossil fuel (Cornell University News Service). Under drought conditions organic farms also produced higher yields."

conventional farming is nearsighted.


edit: ^^^ all applies to large scale farming. i have no problem lazy man or any salt based hydro farmers doing ganja grows indoors for patients. respect.

 

[Lazyman]

I did, I posted it higher up on this very page:

Ever heard of Norman Borlaug?
From his 1970 Nobel Lecture
"I now say that the world has the technology – either available or well advanced in the research pipeline – to feed on a sustainable basis a population of 10 billion people. The more pertinent question today is whether farmers and ranchers will be permitted to use this new technology? While the affluent nations can certainly afford to adopt ultra low-risk positions, and pay more for food produced by the so-called “organic” methods, the one billion chronically undernourished people of the low income, food-deficit nations cannot."
30th Anniversary Lecture, The Norwegian Nobel Institute, Oslo, September 8, 2000
"Producing food for 6.2 billion people, adding a population of 80 million more a year, is not simple. We better develop an ever improved science and technology, including the new biotechnology, to produce the food that's needed for the world today." In response to the fraction of the world population that could be fed if current farmland was convered to organic-only crops: "We are 6.6 billion people now. We can only feed 4 billion. I don't see 2 billion volunteers to disappear." In response to extreme critics: "These are utopian people that live on Cloud 9 and come into the third world and cause all kinds of confusion and negative impacts on the developing countries."

If Norman Borlaug isn't a good enough reference I can't imagine what is.

Here's more info on his credentials if you're unfamiliar with his work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug