Is hydroponics better for the environment? I think it is.

Dr. Who

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
Sativied said:
‘Natural’ illusions: Biologist’s failed attempt to defend organic food
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/05/22/natural-illusions-biologists-failed-attempt-to-defend-organic-food/

"science simply cannot find any evidence that organic foods are in any way healthier than non-organic ones – and scientists have been comparing the two for over 50 years."

"Further, there was a study that said organic farming actually contributed more to pollution of groundwater, and then a meta-analysis of more than a hundred studies saying organic had more ammonia and nitrogen run-off per product unit, leading to more eutrophication as well as acidification potential."

Also click and read the links...

So, organics is bullshit from every angle, just the old appeal to nature fallacy, as many of us knew already, which indirectly makes soil just a poor choice. Hydro culture and (efficient) hydroponics / mediumless is the obvious option in terms of quality, quantity and the environment. Especially for something as easy to grow as cannabis.
Click to expand...
Now wait a minute Sativied.....I have always had great respect for you,,,,,,but this statement is just plain wrong as anyone saying it about Hydro would be....In all my posting on this subject.....I have never made any claims like those addressed above....I think pesticide use is what should be getting most of blame on health problems accused to nutrient use.....

The only problem I have with synthetic nutrition is future sustainability and the overall cost to me......I prefer organic growing for the water and walk away ease, along with the requirements of my state that will be forthcoming on how it's grown and what will be allowed to be used in growing down the road....(Talk from legislators on a personal level with me)........I also like how it tastes.....please note the "I"...

Doc
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
The word sustainability is so overly used. There's nothing sustainable about an exponentially increasing requirement for farm crops. Crop rotation and soil recycling doesn't make what we're doing sustainable the same way renewable energy is not sustainable. (unless we can grow our renewable energy production at a faster rate than population growth for the rest of time, which is impossible. Look up dyson sphere) Our consumption footprint will not change just because we use animal poops instead of nitrate salts or synthetic urea. As long as the population keeps rising, nothing we do is sustainable.

Sustainability is just a comfort word used to make people feel better about themselves... If you have more than 3 children, you're practices are not sustainable. That's really the only thing there is too sustainability.
 
Last edited:
testiclees

testiclees

Well-Known Member
hyroot said:
potassium converts to sugars when broken down. I also said it works ro a point. Natural sugars provide better / higher brix levels. As well.
Click to expand...
brother do a little research on the soil science related to high brix its not about alchemy it is about high Ca, very low K. Advancing Eco Agriculture a well respected high brix enterprise has a few talks online about the high brix methodology.

Pure salts are called pure because they have no,none contaminants. You will not cough up a lung unless youve been manipulated to do so.

Chemistry is Science, its stands on rigorous defense and challenges to its claims.
 
Dr. Who

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
The word sustainability is so overly used. There's nothing sustainable about an exponentially increasing requirement for farm crops. Crop rotation and soil recycling doesn't make what we're doing sustainable the same way renewable energy is not sustainable. (unless we can grow our renewable energy production at a faster rate than population growth for the rest of time, which is impossible. Look up dyson sphere) Our consumption footprint will not change just because we use animal poops instead of nitrate salts or synthetic urea. As long as the population keeps rising, nothing we do is sustainable.

Sustainability is just a comfort word used to make people feel better about themselves... If you have more than 3 children, you're practices are not sustainable. That's really the only thing there is too sustainability.
Click to expand...
Quite true Church, quite true!!! Population bomb is ticking, tic toc, tic toc....
 
hyroot

hyroot

Well-Known Member
sustainability is real.read up in the dust bowl. All the land was destroyed by improper plowing and chemical fertz. No till / recycling soil is what revitalized the land and made it growing on same land possible again. Of not for no till practices there wouldn't be any farms. No till practices began in the late 30's / early 40's.
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
Why don't we have a dust bowl now then?

The reason there was a dust bowl is because people didn't realize clearing out forests would cause erosion. Speaking of which, with crop rotation, you have to clear out 3 times as much forest for farmland to get the same amount of crops.
 
hyroot

hyroot

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
So far you've said we create poison stalks, that everyone agrees "chem grown" plants are inferior, when clearly we're all having a debate on it and don't agree on that at all. The discussion turned into ratio of K:Ca, and how a high K reduces brix levels. Well i can lower K with hydroponics. Most soil is already very low in K compared with hydroponic mixes, which tend to be very high in cations in general.

Frankly, I'm sick and tired of you calling everyone's products poison. I don't feel threatened at all because I know what you're saying a complete lie and I don't have any customers to lose to you anyway. Otherwise, yeah. I would feel threatened by my competition using lies to win over my customers. It's unethical to make the claims you do about heavy metal, just to provide them with a product even higher in heavy metals than the hydroponics counter part. It's unethical to speak about chemicals with authority and conviction, especially when the only people who believe you are not chemically minded themselves. It means you will likely make a lot of ignorant mistakes, and your customers will have to suffer the consequences.
Click to expand...

so all those university studies the health risks consuming chemically grown crops which have been found and proven ro cause disease are all bullshit.credible scientists with phd's that have published all these studies. You can find them from various and prestigous universities
 
hyroot

hyroot

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
Why don't we have a dust bowl now then?

The reason there was a dust bowl is because people didn't realize clearing out forests would cause erosion. Speaking of which, with crop rotation, you have to clear out 3 times as much forest for farmland to get the same amount of crops.
Click to expand...

we dont use the vertical plows anymore. Farmers learned from mistakes.

I highly suggest reading this book. You might learn something

6tag-210047452-940584441185982036_210047452.jpg

also read teaming with nutrients
 
AlphaPhase

AlphaPhase

Well-Known Member
This thread is starting to move fast!

If chemicals were 'poison' wouldn't it kill the plant? Anything in excess is poison. Too much organic amendments will kill a plant. Too much refined salts will kill a plant. Water will kill you if you drink too much. Any element in excess will kill someone.

Ever eat a pound of chicken poop? Probably would kill you. Ever hear of diseases spread from synthetic nutes? Mad cow isn't spread by my maxigrow nutes.

What I'm getting at is you may like a pizza, but I like lasagna. Doesn't mean I think your pizza is going to kill you when made properly.
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
hyroot said:
so all those university studies the health risks consuming chemically grown crops which have been found and proven ro cause disease are all bullshit.credible scientists with phd's that have published all these studies. You can find them from various and prestigous universities
Click to expand...
 
Alexander Supertramp

Alexander Supertramp

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
Why don't we have a dust bowl now then?

The reason there was a dust bowl is because people didn't realize clearing out forests would cause erosion. Speaking of which, with crop rotation, you have to clear out 3 times as much forest for farmland to get the same amount of crops.
Click to expand...
Wrong. The dust bowl was caused by the initial farming of prairie land, tilling and turning the soil.They thought they could replace the prairie grass and native fauna with cash crops. Took a few years and irrigation to complete the dream, Blind ambition and a near decade of drought events were the root cause...
 
Alexander Supertramp

Alexander Supertramp

Well-Known Member
hyroot said:
sustainability is real.read up in the dust bowl. All the land was destroyed by improper plowing and chemical fertz. No till / recycling soil is what revitalized the land and made it growing on same land possible again. Of not for no till practices there wouldn't be any farms. No till practices began in the late 30's / early 40's.
Click to expand...
Nope. Tillage a contributing factor, probably. Chemical nutes, really? lol
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
How do you even provide citation for an unframable experiment such as "the effects of growing with chemicals?" I wonder how a scientific study about "The effects of chemicals" would even work.
Click to expand...
Indeed. And imagine the body of data needed to determine that crops grown with chemicals do not merely correlate with "disease", but actually cause it. Makes you wonder just what diseases are being caused, how we know chemicals are causing them, and how would we grow anything without chemicals. That's why citations would be helpful.
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
From all this discussion, I'm very curious about reducing K to improve flavor now. I had actually read some studies showing similar with some berry (i think blueberry). The study showed that blueberries grown with high K had a more bland flavor with less acidity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top