Fwd from Steve Gilman at SANET - see: http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/ci_6606378 Nitrogen Overdose - Element quietly rivaling CO2 as a global climate threat Inside Bay Area, 8/12/2007
http://www.whrc.org/policy/Reactive_nitrogen.htm UNEP Report: Reactive Nitrogen in the Environment - Too Much or Too Little of a Good Thing pdf: http://www.whrc.org/policy/PDF/Reactive_Nitrogen_sml.pdf Also recent discussion here re "peak phosphorus". ------- >Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:44:15 -0400 >From: STEVE GILMAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: N overdose >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Hi Joel, > > Thanks for the article and report on the long list of serious >environmental impacts brought about by manmade reactive N, including >nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 300 times more virulent per pound >than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. > > It's interesting that the chemical N fertilizer business got >it's start via an industrial bomb-making process, developed by >Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch during WWI to meet Germany's nitrate >needs for armaments, after the allies blockaded the transport of >guano and Chilean nitrate sources. Here in the US, wartime >taxpayer dollars built the industry -- initially dominated by >DuPont -- that morphed into fertilizer production during peacetime >and then hugely expanded during WWII. After that war, the nitrate >companies went into agricultural production big time, along with >their nerve gas manufacturing brethren who went into the chemical >pesticides business. Based on the availability of cheap >petrochemicals and N, the chemical ag industry soon dominated >production.Their hegemony has long become completely intrenched in >policy, with corn ethanol as their latest manifestation. > > As the article from last week's farmgate blog explains, >however, because of the high production costs dependent on natural >gas, the US is now an N IMPORTER. ><www.farmgate.uiuc.edu/archive/2007/08/as_you_book_you.html> >Curiously, now that the US finds itself competing in an >international N market we may find ourselves involved in a modern >variant of the guano wars. > > Combined with the shortages of phosphorus already elaborated >upon on this list, that bag of NPK is not so cheap or sustainable >anymore, >and its prognosis is steadily worse. As scientific and public >tolerance for the polluting "by products" (including the new bottom >line-paradigm of energy use and climate change) of chemical ag >production fall under greater scrutiny and disrepute, Organic shines >all the brighter as the Way to Go. While agribusiness as usual has >certainly dominated the Farm Bill deliberations (so far) this time, >their adherents will have much less space to stand when the Farm >Bill comes around again five years hence. > > Meanwhile, the writing is on the wall, all their last-gasp >political machinations notwithstanding -- the sustainable/fertile >soil/solar energy/ biological control basis of organic production >is actually more competitive than petro-ag for generating our food >supply, in addition to its well-documented beneficent environmental >and health effects. > >Steve >Ruckytucks Farm > > > >farmgate: As You Book Your 2008 Nitrogen, Here Are The Reasons The >Cost Is Higher. > >In agriculture you have to think ahead. Risk has to be managed so a >crisis does not develop. Crops have to be marketed before prices >plummet. Inputs have to be booked before costs increase. And it is >that nitrogen input that impacts fertilizer and chemical costs that >requires immediate attention. > >Any farmer offered a higher price for a crop will produce more of >that commodity. But a USDA economist says it is just the opposite >for ammonia production that results in the reduced availability of >nitrogen fertilizer. The Impact of Rising Natural Gas Prices on U.S. >Ammonia Supply is a recent analysis by USDAís Economics Research >Service which warns of reduced availability for ammonia due to >higher natural gas prices. > >Any producer knows the importance of nitrogen, and USDA says, ìTotal >nitrogen costs for U.S. production of corn in 2005 and wheat in 2004 >were $3.66 billion and $1.02 billion, respectively. Nitrogen costs >contributed to the largest operating expense for both corn and wheat >producers. Nitrogen application accounted for 22 percent of the >operating costs for corn producers and about 33 percent of the costs >for wheat producers.î With 90 million acres of $4 corn this year, >nitrogen use increased rapidly in all likelihood. If you remember >your soil chemistry less from school, ìWhen combined with phosphoric >acid and potassium chloride, ammonia and its derivatives are the >basic material used in the formulation of various mixed fertilizers >containing nitrogen, phosphate and potash, which are used >extensively by farmers. Thus, a change in the price of ammonia >often leads to changes in the prices of all nitrogen fertilizers.î > >The basis for ammonia production is natural gas, which accounts for >72%-85% of the cost of ammonia, subsequently; there is an 80% price >correlation between natural gas and ammonia. The high cost of >natural gas and low margins earned by ammonia producers since 2000 >means low profitability and USDA says, ìBecause of low >profitability in recent years, a significant number of ammonia >producers ceased production or merged with other producers.î >Production capacity dropped 35% from 2000 to 2006 and actual >production declined 44%. With less US production, imports of >ammonia have increased, with a 115% jump from 2000 to 2006, with >shipments from Trinidad and Tobago, Canada, Russia, and Ukraine. >Even with increased imports, the overall supply has declined. > >Higher prices of natural gas means farmers will pay more for >ammonia, and prices went up 130% from 2000 to 2005. Those higher >fertility costs dropped profitability by 22% in corn and 32% in >wheat. USDA says those costs can be controlled by adopting >production practices that conserve nitrogen, ìFor example, a corn >producer might reduce the nitrogen application rate by applying the >amount as determined by equating the marginal return of nitrogen >fertilizer to the high nitrogen price, by delaying the nitrogen >application from spring before planting to summer after planting, >by increasing use of alternative sources of nitrogen (such as >manure), or by switching from corn to soybeans, as soybeans can >obtain enough nitrogen from the atmosphere.î > >When ordering ammonia for your 2008 corn and wheat crops, prices >will be a function of overseas production costs and transportation >costs. >1) Canadian natural gas prices are parallel with those in the US, so >Canada will not have a significant advantage, and production >capacities have recently declined as well. >2) Imports from Russia and Ukraine have high transportation costs, >negating the lower costs of natural gas and lower costs of ammonia >production. >3) The Mideast and North Africa have only limited production >capacity for ammonia, losing their advantage for low costs of >natural gas. >4) Any increase of imported ammonia will likely come from the >Caribbean Republics of Trinidad and Tobago. Their natural gas price >is low, and production capacity is expected to increase, and there >is more incentive to ship ammonia than natural gas. > >USDA believes that further increases in natural gas prices in the US >will result in further decreases in domestic ammonia production, and >more imports, most likely from the Caribbean. Because of the >increased demand on imported ammonia, US farmers may be susceptible >to global competition for nitrogen fertilizer. The US does have some >unused production capacity, which could supply enough ammonia to >provide nitrogen to an additional 10 million acres, should ethanol >continue to push up corn acreage. But that will result in higher >prices for ammonia and the cost of nitrogen fertilizer. > >Summary: >High prices of natural gas have curtailed ammonia production, >reducing the supply and increasing the cost of nitrogen fertilizer. >The Caribbean is a potential source for increased imports, but with >increasing dependency on imported nitrogen comes a chance for a >volatile supply and a volatile price. > > >On Aug 17, 2007, at 12:00 AM, SANET-MG automatic digest system wrote: > >> >>Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:37:44 -0400 >>From: Joel Gruver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Subject: Nitrogen Overdose >> >>Hello folks, >> >>The following article about the ecological impact of anthropogenic N may be >>of interest... >> >>Joel >> >>BTW here is a link to (what I think is) the UN report referenced in the >>article. >> >>http://www.whrc.org/policy/Reactive_nitrogen.htm >> >>******************************************** >>Nitrogen Overdose >>- Element quietly rivaling CO2 as a global climate threat >> >>By Suzanne Bohan, Staff writer >>Inside Bay Area, 8/12/2007 > >******************************************************** >To unsubscribe from SANET-MG: >1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to unsubscribe or; >2- Send a message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> from the address subscribed >to the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the message. > >Visit the SANET-MG archives at: http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html. >Questions? Visit http://www.sare.org/about/sanetFAQ.htm. >For more information on grants and other resources available through >the SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org. _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
