The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
It's the same with the industrial-agriculture-is-doomed meme. Pesticides are a tiny volume of petrochemistry. They could be made with other inputs of CHON. Diesel for industrial machinery is again a tiny amount of total consumption. could already be replaced by diester without going mad about biofuel acreage (waste products are enough). The only true problem is natural gas used to make fertilizers (and not petroleum). It's several percent of all NatGas use, and if Peak Gas is a total cliff as expected, then it could bite into those few percents. But since what is needed is actually hydrogen, not natgas, we could still find substitutes, we have decades (like electrolysis from renewables of pyrocracking using solar heat).
Granted, phosphorus is a harder problem, but it is a bit less urgent than peak oil and gas. And I expect when peak oil hits the mainstream (that is, 20 years after it has happened and there is no concealing it anymore), it will change a lot in the way governments are held accountable to the management of these resources. So we are not entirely doomed as a specie. The biggest impacts will be socio-economic, and dense fuel-efficient cities are actually a way to mitigate this. Pierre
Of course, for drying after the harvest its more likely to be natural gas.
About the only time our current agricultural system doesn't use oil is when the farmer is in the house in the evening, consuming coal or natural gas fired electricity.
Indeed, for all of the hoo hah about ethanol driving up corn prices, I saw a claim floating around cyberspace that the major factor driving up corn prices were oil price spikes. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
1. A method for producing a combined phosphate fertilizer and soil conditioner without employing a mineral acid, which consists essentially of the steps of: (a) grinding a moist, acidic, organic waste material having a pH less than 5, a water content of at least 40% and lower calcium and phosphorous contents than the calcium and phosphorous contents of phosphate rock; (b) heating the acidic, organic waste material ground during step (a) to a temperature of 40° to 120° C. and at a pressure of 16 to 22 bar; (c) grinding phosphate rock to a particle size of 0.02 to 1 mm; (d) heating the phosphate rock ground during step (c) to a temperature of 50 to 800° C.; (e) combining the ground, acidic, organic waste material obtained during step (b) as the sole acidic reactant with the ground phosphate rock obtained during step (d) at a pressure of 20 to 55 bar to permit the ground, acidic, organic waste material and the ground phosphate rock to collide, to cause disintegration of the phosphate rock; and (f) cooling the mixture obtained during step (e) to 20° to 40° C. to obtain the desired product which contains almost all nutrient elements of phosphate rock. A method for producing combined phophorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the organic reactant is bark waste. A method for producing combined phophorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the organic reactant is peat or peat mud. A method for producing combined phosphorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the organic reactant is waste fibre from a cellulose production plant. A method for producing combined phosohorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the organic reactant is sawdust. A method for producing combined phosphorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the organic reactant is the solid component of communal sewage. A method for producing combined phosphorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the amount of water-soluble phosphorus in the fertilizer is regulated by the pH of the reagent mass. A method for producing combined phosphorous fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the amount of water-soluble phosphorus in the fertilizer is regulated by calcium and phosphorus content of the reagent mass. A method for producing combined phosphorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1 which the amount of water-soluble phosphorus in the fertilizer is regulated by the reaction temperature. A method for producing combined phosphorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the amount of water-soluble phosphorus in the fertilizer is regulated by the duration of the reaction. A method for producing combined phosphorus fertilizer and soil conditioner according to claim 1, in which the amount of water-soluble phosphorus in the fertilizer is regulated by the weight ratio of the fresh organic mass and the dry phosphate rock.
(a) grinding a moist, acidic, organic waste material having a pH less than 5, a water content of at least 40% and lower calcium and phosphorous contents than the calcium and phosphorous contents of phosphate rock;
(b) heating the acidic, organic waste material ground during step (a) to a temperature of 40° to 120° C. and at a pressure of 16 to 22 bar;
(c) grinding phosphate rock to a particle size of 0.02 to 1 mm;
(d) heating the phosphate rock ground during step (c) to a temperature of 50 to 800° C.;
(e) combining the ground, acidic, organic waste material obtained during step (b) as the sole acidic reactant with the ground phosphate rock obtained during step (d) at a pressure of 20 to 55 bar to permit the ground, acidic, organic waste material and the ground phosphate rock to collide, to cause disintegration of the phosphate rock; and
(f) cooling the mixture obtained during step (e) to 20° to 40° C. to obtain the desired product which contains almost all nutrient elements of phosphate rock.
I didn't specify a timeline, so I don't understand why both you and Colman thought of "quickly". I am thinking of decades for the whole process.
only a tiny fraction of all transport is foodstuff. And this would get priority
Why do you think so? I am not at all certain. It could get priority after government gets priority, which only means that pressures will be stronger elsewhere. (A hefty recession after the creduction of production capacity in major industries, but this time permanent unlike in the thirties, wouldn't be pretty.)
Pesticides are a tiny volume of petrochemistry... Diesel for industrial machinery is again a tiny amount of total consumption.
It's not the amount that matters most. You forget about costs rising strongly for farmers. Couple that with the lending market one could expect. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by Frank Schnittger - May 31
by Oui - May 30 41 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 27 3 comments
by Oui - May 13 66 comments
by Oui - Jun 55 comments
by Oui - Jun 253 comments
by Oui - Jun 112 comments
by Oui - May 3169 comments
by Oui - May 3041 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 273 comments
by Oui - May 2738 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 233 comments
by Oui - May 1366 comments
by Oui - May 928 comments
by Oui - May 450 comments
by Oui - May 312 comments
by Oui - Apr 30273 comments
by Oui - Apr 2662 comments
by Oui - Apr 8107 comments
by Oui - Mar 19145 comments