[Terrapreta] Fossil fueled based fertilizers

[Nikolaus Foidl]

Dear Sean¨

Urease is the correct spelling. My approach is more plant adequate that
means simulating a slowly enhancing degradation which is normal in a soil
where plants start to grow having sufficient water and nutrients. The
exudates of the root system is rising with size and age of the plant so
microbial life in the roots or rhizosphere is as well improving. That means
the release of nitrogen has to improve as well ( more bacteria or bacterial
expression means more urease production and as a result more nitrogen
liberated from the polymer. At the same time you get more CO2 liberated as
well out of this polymer. Culmination normally is reached when you are half
the way to seed filling where most times only the accumulated photo syntates
are used to finish the job. ( exception would be water logging in soy or
resource deviation into enhanced disease fighting). The overall concept is
to get as much photo syntates as possible in the pre flowering stage
accumulated which means some tweaking of the chlorophyll efficiency ( DCPTA
or  MPTA applications) and an early salicylic acid induced disease
resistance( viral, bacterial and fungal) so-called SAR or self acquired
resistance which will drain a little on the photo syntates but at the end
rises overall productivity.
If it is more plant adequate then I think its not un common, its logic.The
costs are relative,in general it will cost twice as much then with Urea only
but as you can save more then 50% of Urea ist cheaper in the end and the
synergistic effects are much higher then without polymer. Try it is working
very well and its easy to do.

Best regards Nikolaus

On 9/15/07 11:16 PM, "Sean K. Barry" <sean.barry at juno.com> wrote:

> Hi Nikolaus!
>  
> You are absolutely correct about the misspelling.  Please excuse my
> misspelling.  What is "unease"?  You sound like you have a very advanced
> approach to fertilizer application and crop plant nutrition.  Do you think
> your approach is very common?  Do you think it is the most common?  Is your
> approach less expensive (polymer carriers for high nitrogen fertilizer)?
>  
> Regards,
>  
> SKB
>>  
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>  
>> From: Nikolaus Foidl <mailto:nfoidl at desa.com.bo>
>>  
>> To: terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>>  
>> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:43  AM
>>  
>> Subject: [Terrapreta] Fossil fueled based  fertilizers
>>  
>> 
>> Dear Sean!
>> 
>> Its Haber-Bosch not Haber Bauch. To avoid  toxicity of Ammonia and Urea you
>> can Polymerize the stuff using 1 :1  Formalin. You get water insoluble
>> crystals which are then broken up by  bacteria which use unease as a enzyme.
>> Like this you have a retarded  nitrogen fertilizer with very high efficiency
>> and the plants get the  nitrogen in little doses time after time. As you will
>> apply the polymer  below the seeds the rhizobia are not affected because they
>> react only to  direct water soluble nitrogen next to the seeds.The efficiency
>> is so high  that you can lower total nitrogen by more then 50% without
>> affecting  effective uptake quantity. Add a little Molasse and the bacteria
>> will love  to brake up the polymer. As an additional source of carbon you
>> might as  well add some methanol to your mixture.DCPTA enhanced plant growth
>> loves  additional CO2.
>> Thanks  Nikolaus
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Terrapreta  mailing list
>> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
>> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
>> http://info.bioenergylists.org
>> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/terrapreta_bioenergylists.org/attachments/20070916/23664769/attachment.html