Are Organics people more snobby than other Potheads ?

[PazVerdeRadical]

...That the hydrogen used to make amonia may be hydrogen that is a byproduct of the pertoleum industry is irrelevant, that hydrogen is already going to end up in the environment somewhere... Calling it a petrochemical derived nutrient is just a propaganda word, since a large portion of the water molecules in the world came from burning hydrogen which has been released from natural gas or other carbon compounds which could also be called petrochemical...

I wonder if water bottles need to be labeled as potentially containing petrochemical derived water....

Oh hell... isn't water also an inorganic comound?

Grat,
the extractions of elements derived from petroleum are done by man, obviously. so for nitrogen molecules derived from petro-chemicals
to reach the plant needs to first go through what is termed an artificial and unnatural process, that is, the potential elements that can be obtained from petro-chemicals are only obtained through man´s intervention. in contrast, the nitrogen molecules that a plant needs and are derived from a natural and spontaneous process of organic decomposition will always be in effect without the intervention of man, plants have always fed themselves through this process. so that nitrogen molecule derived from petroleum won´t end up in the environment somewhere without man´s intervention, if you leave it to nature, it will keep that nitrogen molecule doing its thing in the petroleum below ground :wink:
this are things to be considered when thinking of what is known as organic/sustainable gardening/agriculture, as other posters have pointed out before, it is not really a question of who uses what nutes or growing method, but rather, how each gardener relates to the environment in which he/she works; in these things are subtle differences, which for some people, myself included, are important to work with and give them their proper relevance.

whether we like it or not, the term petro-chemical relates to all chemicals (this word has no negative connotations btw) obtained and derived from petroleum/gas. there is no conspiracy going on to make people using synthetics feel guilty or anything like that.

peace!

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

The nitrogen molecules are not derived from petrochemicals.
None of the plant food elements in any nutrient come from petroleum.
The hydrogen molecule which is bonded to the nitrogen to make it stay put until the plant can use it, then it is either released into the atmosphere or used by the root in the cation exchange process.
Nothing petrochemical ever becomes part of my plant.
Using petrochemical derived to describe a hydrogen atom is just a propaganda word.

A huge amount of the hydrogen in our atmosphere and water was once part of some petrochemical.

No Nitrogen, Potassium, Phosphorous, Magnesium, Sulfur, cobalt, manganese nor any other element which plants absorb through their roots and metabolize is derived in any petroleum products.

The term petrochemical derived nutrient is a misleading term at best.

 

[Sammet]

The cation exchange process happens in the soil, and occurs with or without plants. It happens all the time.

If you really want to talk about plant biochemistry then I'm game, it's one of my prefered subjects.

This is a basic Amino Acid:

As you can see it is made of 3 parts, a Carboxylic acid, a side chain (to do with protein-protein interactions and is not relevant to the discussion), and an Amino group.

We all know we feed plants nitrogen, but what do they do with it. Well the nitrogen bound in Ammonia/Ammonium NH3/NH4 is used to create Amino Acids. Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins and proteins are responsible for new growth in the plant and a vast number of cellular processes.



Plants do not just use the Nitrogen atom, it's impossible. The Hydrogen bound to the Nitrogen will stay with it all the way through the plant. Hydrogen does not get given off by plants. There is less that 1ppm of Hydrogen gas because it is so light that it escapes the earths atmosphere and vents into space.

 

[PazVerdeRadical]

Grat, you are simply mistaken. the elements that are by-products of petroleum extraction are called petro-chemicals all over the oil-world, and all fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides that contain elements derived from such a process contain petro-chemicals, whether you admit it or not. it is just a term, not a word created to conspire against you.

and again, as explained, there is a process behind the manufacturing of synthetic nutes, a process which in and of itself causes negative repercusions to our environment. whether your plants will or won´t absorb ¨anything from petro-chemicals¨ the process for these nutes to reach you is truly inefficient in terms of energy conservation when compared to proper organic gardening.
and the synthetic nutes do leave residues in soil and water. and the elements found in petroleum today will not become part of our atmosphere at the accelerated rate that they are becoming part of the atmosphere through man´s exploitation of that resource.


Peace

 

[LiveGiveTryDie]

Nothing petrochemical ever becomes part of my plant.

Dude, the point is being missed.

Your synthetic nutes are synthesized by a petrochemical process that in itself is bad for the environment, uses oil, and is not a sustainable method of feeding plants. Period. Simply - the way they make your nutes is damaging the environment.

The point of organic growing is to not use nutes that were derived from a petrochemical process. It is to use nutrients that would have otherwise been thrown in a landfill. It is to work with nature when growing your plant, not just give it a salt in a medium.

People need to be careful with organics, as well. I personally do not like the idea of getting coco husk that is shipped across the world, or bat guano that is shipped from far away.

A big chunk of working organically is to utilize as much as you can from your local settings.

Does this make sense, grateful? I'm hopin so.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Plants feed by...
Removing hydrogen from compounds it has taken in, moving them to the root zone, and swapping them for cations in the soil.

I know that cation excahnge also occurs as a soil process, but that is irrelevant to what I was talking about.

Paz... Ignorance... Please show me how carbon hydrogen and oxygen can be turned into Nitrogen...

No points missed... No oil drilled specifically for nute making... It uses hydrogen from by products of the petroleum industry... better than dumping the by product, imho...

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

The very fact that the discussion has gone from discussing the uppity attitude of organic growers, to organic growers touting the evils of inorganic nutes and the superiority of their methods fairly demonstrates their perception that they are "better"....

 

[Guest]

Whomever said this thread needs a better title was right ... Being a Pothead has nothing to do with being a Potsnob ... and neither term is being directly applied properly IMHO. Potheads smoke weed and rarely know what method was used to grow it ... Potsnobs smoke weed, rarely know the method used to grow it but think they do and speak Frequently about what they prefer even though they might not actually know what they prefer but merely know what someone else (that seems to be holding more knowledge than they) has said they prefer. Potheads and Potsnobs aren't growers you fucking retreads ... If this thread is anything more than the 1000th version of Organics vs Chems I'll eat that old box of Miracle Grow ... All you kids need to spend more time in your gardens than you do here trying to start something ...

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

And you know what... I don't care... you can claim the higher moral ground, I'll grow the better smoke.

 

[LiveGiveTryDie]

Grateful, why would you ever support this process:
http://www.madehow.com/Volume-3/Fertilizer.html

When you could support that of the organic process, which is clearly better for the environment, and your plants (if not, just as good for them)? I just do not get it..These processes that form your synthetic nutes have a net effect on the environment that is bad. It is not a good net effect. It isn't a sustainable net effect.

This whole petrochem process is about wasting energy to make your ferts, when you could just as easily, and in a more sustainable way, get your ferts just as well as you do now.

No offense, but to me, it is a selfish and unsustainable act to grow without considering the impacts it has on the environment. I'm not saying you don't consider em... Every grower has that responsibility; unfortunately many growers ignore it. But maybe you should look into what these synthetic processes do that is negative to the environment. It's all out there, and it is settled that petrochems are not a sustainable way of living. Why do you want to support it, over organics - just out of curiosity?

I'd like to emphasize, before you answer, that you can achieve the same quality plant, if not better, through organics...synthetic nutes aren't some super concoction that make better plants or somethin =)

 

[Stoned Cold]

Obviously nobody is interested in pollution.

So f'ing what if I'm more interested in plant health, than PLANET health. That's why I'm on ICmag as opposed to treehuggers.net!

LGTD: Did you REALLY just say that the 'organic process' is clearly BETTER for your PLANTS?....LMAO......It never ends!

 

[Saelin]

I've known organic gardeners my whole life and they have never had concern with potency or otherwise. You can find all the amendments to grow badass nugs nearly anywhere if you know what you're looking for. Some nutes may have questionable processes during the manufacturing process, but does anyone have solid evidence that your plants pick up some of the impurities which may exist in "petro-derived" chemicals? Wouldn't that be the real question we should be trying to answer? (please post if you've got it, i'd love to read it) I've used chem and organic ferts indoor and out, and prefer the simplicity of chem ferts, however I've been able to get better expressions of smell and taste from organics.... neither one is the end all answer I think.


to address the thread, anyone who actively makes a discriminating choice, I guess you could call them snobby.. depends on how offended you choose to get about their choices. IMHO

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

because I don't see anything wrong with the process.
The only harmful effect mentioned it the excess nitrate added to the environment by improper use of nutrients. I'm not adding any nitrate to the environment.

 

[LiveGiveTryDie]

Obviously nobody is interested in pollution.

So f'ing what if I'm more interested in plant health, than PLANET health. That's why I'm on ICmag as opposed to treehuggers.net!

LGTD: Did you REALLY just say that the 'organic process' is clearly BETTER for your PLANTS?....LMAO......It never ends!

Yes my friend. Organic gardening is indeed better for your plants. Growing with synthetics, solely, limits the biological activity and mutual symbioses within your soil. Plants evolved to work with this biological activity in soil. When you ignore that, you ignore the needs of your plants, period.

And obviously, people are interested in pollution, and working sustainable. Otherwise, we wouldn't have an entire industry for it literally booming and growing exponentially every day.

I do not take kindly to the pot grower that grows his or her pot at the expense of the environment. That is selfish, to me, and irresponsible. The saddest part, is that things like this get tied into it (the organic snob stereotype) and we tell you known fact, and you dismiss it as snobbery. I don't like to tell people "what is right" and I don't like to boss people around, at all. I try to avoid that. The thing that really gets me, though, is arrogant disrespect for the environment. Ignorance is one thing, but outright knowingly disrespecting the environment is a high offense in my book.

 

[LiveGiveTryDie]

because I don't see anything wrong with the process.
The only harmful effect mentioned it the excess nitrate added to the environment by improper use of nutrients. I'm not adding any nitrate to the environment.

Well, the process has been pointed out by many as 'wrong'
It is not a sustainable process

Do you care about the environment? Or am I talking to someone that just doesn't care? I ask that in a polite tone, because I'm just curious to see where you are coming from. Thanks.

 

[tenfeetofganja]

whether we like it or not, the term petro-chemical relates to all chemicals (this word has no negative connotations btw) obtained and derived from petroleum/gas.
peace!

So can i go dump my GH nutes into my car...its low on gas and I dont think ill make it to the gas station

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Some people believing something is wrong with it, and there actually being something wrong with it are two completely different things. When the petroleum industry goes away and there is no hydrocarbon byproduct which can be used to convert nitrogen from the air into ammonia... when the materials being used are actually depleting something that would have been used better otherwise... I'll begin to consider it to be wrong... As it is, as long as we all keep driving cars and using electric and buy plastics and nylons and all the other things which ACTUALLY keep the petrochemical industry running and supplied with byproduct, My nutrient choice is a very insignificant source of problem...

Do you voluntarily engage in any fossil fuel burning activities?
Am I dealing with someone here who only cares about the environment when it's convenient for them to?

 

[Crazy Composer]

Any nutrient bought at a store, or online, is contributing to carbon emissions. Packaging, trucking, you driving to the store, etc...

The ONLY people not guitly of having a carbon footprint in the grow scene are the ones who have animlas on their land that provide manure to use as fertilizer. And even then, they'll probably use plastic containers to grow in, so they are guilty too, if you want to split hairs.

But I don't worry about these emissions, I believe global warming is a farce... The globe is warming, sure, but so are all the other planets in the solar system... and we didn't do that. The sun has gotten warmer recently, naturally, but governments (and central bankers) want to scare us into a new carbon tax, so they fail to mention that.

Besides, compared to most carbon emitting activities, even pure hydro growers using nothing but chemical ferts are not causing any substantial harm anywhere in the world.

 

[LiveGiveTryDie]

Any nutrient bought at a store, or online, is contributing to carbon emissions. Packaging, trucking, you driving to the store, etc...

The ONLY people not guitly of having a carbon footprint in the grow scene are the ones who have animlas on their land that provide manure to use as fertilizer. And even then, they'll probably use plastic containers to grow in, so they are guilty too, if you want to split hairs.

But I don't worry about these emissions, I believe global warming is a farce... The globe is warming, sure, but so are all the other planets in the solar system... and we didn't do that. The sun has gotten warmer recently, naturally, but governments (and central bankers) want to scare us into a new carbon tax, so they fail to mention that.

Besides, compared to most carbon emitting activities, even pure hydro growers using nothing but chemical ferts are not causing any substantial harm anywhere in the world.

O my....o my...

These notions of GW being a farce will soon be put to rest...It hurts my eyes to see this stuff when we know very well that man is changing climate. It has been shown time and time again, and the evidence has only gotten stronger, while the naysayers have become weaker and irrelevant. I seriously hope you are shown the light, CC..

 

[Crazy Composer]

Hahaha! I used to think the same way, and then evolved from where you are. I have seen the light, and no longer believe what you still believe. We change the environment, of course, but the sun is heating up, as it does. I hope you can look into it and get back to us.