6 ms·

Most people don't understand that fertilizer is made from petrochemicals. It's not old-fashioned manure.

cheeseomlit 5y ago
And some of the toxic by-products of that production are then put into our drinking water instead of being properly disposed of https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/engineering/engineering-shortages.htm https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/engineering/engineering-sho... >The three fluoride additives used for water fluoridation are derived principally from phosphate fertilizer production.
- lovich 5y ago
  Is fluoride in our drinking water a problem? I happen to like my teeth
  - OJFord 5y ago
    Some locales (all of the USA, I believe) add it for the benefit of teeth. (Like anything there's presumably a poisonous dosage! But) no, not a problem.
  - machinerychorus 5y ago
    While it is typically railed against by crackpots, it also shouldn't be assumed to be safe/correct. We've been adding flouride to water for a long time, without much understanding of the risks, benefits, or proper dosage. Here's an article from the atlantic (not a crackpot news source) which goes into detail: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/04/why-fluoride-water/606784/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/04/why-flu...
    - worik 5y ago
      https://www.cochrane.org/CD010856/ORAL_water-fluoridation-prevent-tooth-decay https://www.cochrane.org/CD010856/ORAL_water-fluoridation-pr... Key results Our review found that water fluoridation is effective at reducing levels of tooth decay among children. The introduction of water fluoridation resulted in children having 35% fewer decayed, missing and filled baby teeth and 26% fewer decayed, missing and filled permanent teeth. We also found that fluoridation led to a 15% increase in children with no decay in their baby teeth and a 14% increase in children with no decay in their permanent teeth. These results are based predominantly on old studies and may not be applicable today.
      - xboxnolifes 5y ago
        There is basically consensus that fluoride in the drinking water is good for teeth. The worry is that consuming it may have other negative effects unrelated to teeth. We know that fluoride in higher dosage isn't good to be consumed, but what about long term, small dosage exposure?
        worik 5y ago
        Yes. Pity the nut jobs use up all the oxygen saying it is method of disposing of toxic waste and a social control measure....
      - User23 5y ago
        But it may come at the price of childhood brain development[1]. I haven't evaluated the merits of that study, but that's showing a significant effect in a peer-reviewed journal. In any event I'd say it warrants further study. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5285601/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5285601/
  - CoastalCoder 5y ago
    If you'll forgive my use of an anecdote... I stopped getting cavities when I started using a good electric toothbrush, not when I started drinking fluoridated water. So no idea if the statistics bear this out, but personally I don't care much about the fluoride.
    - AlexandrB 5y ago
      I stopped getting tons of cavities when I started drinking fluoridated water as a kid. I didn't have an electric toothbrush until well into my 20s. So I guess that's 2 data points? What now?
      - CoastalCoder 5y ago
        I wasn't trying to demonstrate that brushing trumps fluoride. I shared my experience in the hope it would spark interesting discussion.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        I know a dentist in a suburb of a city that does not fluoridate. They said they can guess whether or not the patient grew up in the city or outside the city simply based on their dental history.
      - tharkun__ 5y ago
        Why we need a third data point of course! :) My childhood drinking water was not fluoridated and I've never to this date owned an electric toothbrush. I didn't have any cavities until my 20s. What do we make of this?
  - photochemsyn 5y ago
    Fluoride in water doesn't do anything for teeth. The fluoridation treatments dentists use are effective but that's a concentrated paste applied for some minutes to the teeth in a dentist's chair. Diluted fluoride in the water supply has zero benefit for teeth.
    - AlexandrB 5y ago
      Research seems to disagree with you[1]. Do you have a citation for your assertion? [1] https://cumming.ucalgary.ca/news/calgary-childrens-dental-health-getting-worse-without-community-water-fluoridation https://cumming.ucalgary.ca/news/calgary-childrens-dental-he...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - aunty_helen 5y ago
    Would you take a couple point IQ hit in exchange? I got in a heated debate with a fluoride crackpot and they annoyed me enough that I went to "do my own research." This ultimately led me to some weird places of the internet but also to places like the CDC... who really didn't have strong language for its safety around developing brains. It was very "its safe, but we should look into why kids in adjacent neighbourhoods with flouride are slightly dumber than those without." I won't post a link to this, do your own research. Having read a bit about it, I came away with a slightly changed view on fluoride.
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  The source of something doesn't tell you much about its health effects. A lot of life saving drugs are created using industrial processes involving many nasty chemicals. This is not too far from the logic of signing a petition against dihydrogen monoxide because it sounds like a scary chemical.
throwaway5752 5y ago
NPK is the acronym for basic plant nutrients. Others might know better than me, but you have those three (nitrogen, phosphate, and potassium) for primary fertilizer nutrients. Of those P is mined (apatite) from rock ore and K is mined from rock ore or brine. Mining and ore process has energy inputs couple to oil price, granted. Nitrogen is ammonia via HB, predominately with nat gas feedstock. Sometimes we get down these tangents and it derails from the core topic. This is terrible and unwelcome news.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
reaperducer 5y ago
Most people don't understand that fertilizer is made from petrochemicals. It's not old-fashioned manure. Not all fertilizer. But I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of it is made from chemicals. Chicago's poop gets processed and spread on farms downstate, for example. Just an hour ago I got a food delivery from a farmer who uses only her own livestock to fertilize her fields. (As a side note, it's wonderful to see — since the pandemic — how many farmers where I live have set up web sites so they can deliver their goods from their farms straight to the doorsteps of people living the city, in addition to farmers' markets. So far, I get my beef, pork, eggs, some cheeses, and honey delivered right to my doorman. Still looking for a milk option that isn't raw, or $11.99/gallon.)
photochemsyn 5y ago
Phosphate fertilizer is mostly mined. Ammonia-based (NH3) fertilizers are made from atmospheric N2 via hydrogenation, and the source of the hydrogen can be water. The whole process (Haber-Bosch) can be renewably powered with no fossil fuels in other words.
- nostrademons 5y ago
  "Can be" is pretty critical. Most hydrogen is currently produced from methane (natural gas) via steam reforming. The barriers toward renewable production are economic, not technological, but at current prices natural gas is a lot cheaper than electrolysis. On the plus side, it's good to know that fertilizer isn't a blocker from going fossil-fuel free.
  - londons_explore 5y ago
    Fertilizer can be carbon free (ammonia from hydrogen from water + sun), but about 0% of the world's supply is that. All the hydrogen comes from natural gas. Steel can be made carbon free, but so far it's all made in a blast furnace with a lot of coal. Aluminium can be carbon free (electricity), but so far we reduce carbon electrodes and release a lot of CO2 because carbon is cheaper than using extra electricity. All it would take is the right global tax or incentive structure and all these industries would quickly move over, saving us 20+% of CO2 emissions!
    - sophacles 5y ago
      Sorry for being pedantic, but isn't carbon-free steel just iron?
      - betterunix2 5y ago
        Pretty sure he meant carbon emissions, but technically you are correct, "steel" is a mixture of iron and a relatively small amount of carbon. As far as I know (but I am not an expert) there are not many applications for elemental (pure) iron.
DoreenMichele 5y ago
This was one of the things I was taught as an environmental studies major: That Peak Oil does not just mean we need to develop alternative energy and alternative transportation. It means we need to also develop alternative means to keep producing enough food to feed our current population.

And some of the toxic by-products of that production are then put into our drinking water instead of being properly disposed of https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/engineering/engineering-shortages.htm https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/engineering/engineering-sho... >The three fluoride additives used for water fluoridation are derived principally from phosphate fertilizer production.

lovich 5y ago
Is fluoride in our drinking water a problem? I happen to like my teeth
- OJFord 5y ago
  Some locales (all of the USA, I believe) add it for the benefit of teeth. (Like anything there's presumably a poisonous dosage! But) no, not a problem.
- machinerychorus 5y ago
  While it is typically railed against by crackpots, it also shouldn't be assumed to be safe/correct. We've been adding flouride to water for a long time, without much understanding of the risks, benefits, or proper dosage. Here's an article from the atlantic (not a crackpot news source) which goes into detail: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/04/why-fluoride-water/606784/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/04/why-flu...
  - worik 5y ago
    https://www.cochrane.org/CD010856/ORAL_water-fluoridation-prevent-tooth-decay https://www.cochrane.org/CD010856/ORAL_water-fluoridation-pr... Key results Our review found that water fluoridation is effective at reducing levels of tooth decay among children. The introduction of water fluoridation resulted in children having 35% fewer decayed, missing and filled baby teeth and 26% fewer decayed, missing and filled permanent teeth. We also found that fluoridation led to a 15% increase in children with no decay in their baby teeth and a 14% increase in children with no decay in their permanent teeth. These results are based predominantly on old studies and may not be applicable today.
    - xboxnolifes 5y ago
      There is basically consensus that fluoride in the drinking water is good for teeth. The worry is that consuming it may have other negative effects unrelated to teeth. We know that fluoride in higher dosage isn't good to be consumed, but what about long term, small dosage exposure?
      - worik 5y ago
        Yes. Pity the nut jobs use up all the oxygen saying it is method of disposing of toxic waste and a social control measure....
    - User23 5y ago
      But it may come at the price of childhood brain development[1]. I haven't evaluated the merits of that study, but that's showing a significant effect in a peer-reviewed journal. In any event I'd say it warrants further study. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5285601/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5285601/
- CoastalCoder 5y ago
  If you'll forgive my use of an anecdote... I stopped getting cavities when I started using a good electric toothbrush, not when I started drinking fluoridated water. So no idea if the statistics bear this out, but personally I don't care much about the fluoride.
  - AlexandrB 5y ago
    I stopped getting tons of cavities when I started drinking fluoridated water as a kid. I didn't have an electric toothbrush until well into my 20s. So I guess that's 2 data points? What now?
    - CoastalCoder 5y ago
      I wasn't trying to demonstrate that brushing trumps fluoride. I shared my experience in the hope it would spark interesting discussion.
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        I know a dentist in a suburb of a city that does not fluoridate. They said they can guess whether or not the patient grew up in the city or outside the city simply based on their dental history.
    - tharkun__ 5y ago
      Why we need a third data point of course! :) My childhood drinking water was not fluoridated and I've never to this date owned an electric toothbrush. I didn't have any cavities until my 20s. What do we make of this?
- photochemsyn 5y ago
  Fluoride in water doesn't do anything for teeth. The fluoridation treatments dentists use are effective but that's a concentrated paste applied for some minutes to the teeth in a dentist's chair. Diluted fluoride in the water supply has zero benefit for teeth.
  - AlexandrB 5y ago
    Research seems to disagree with you[1]. Do you have a citation for your assertion? [1] https://cumming.ucalgary.ca/news/calgary-childrens-dental-health-getting-worse-without-community-water-fluoridation https://cumming.ucalgary.ca/news/calgary-childrens-dental-he...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- aunty_helen 5y ago
  Would you take a couple point IQ hit in exchange? I got in a heated debate with a fluoride crackpot and they annoyed me enough that I went to "do my own research." This ultimately led me to some weird places of the internet but also to places like the CDC... who really didn't have strong language for its safety around developing brains. It was very "its safe, but we should look into why kids in adjacent neighbourhoods with flouride are slightly dumber than those without." I won't post a link to this, do your own research. Having read a bit about it, I came away with a slightly changed view on fluoride.
AlexandrB 5y ago
The source of something doesn't tell you much about its health effects. A lot of life saving drugs are created using industrial processes involving many nasty chemicals. This is not too far from the logic of signing a petition against dihydrogen monoxide because it sounds like a scary chemical.

throwaway5752 5y ago

NPK is the acronym for basic plant nutrients. Others might know better than me, but you have those three (nitrogen, phosphate, and potassium) for primary fertilizer nutrients. Of those P is mined (apatite) from rock ore and K is mined from rock ore or brine. Mining and ore process has energy inputs couple to oil price, granted. Nitrogen is ammonia via HB, predominately with nat gas feedstock. Sometimes we get down these tangents and it derails from the core topic. This is terrible and unwelcome news.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

reaperducer 5y ago

Most people don't understand that fertilizer is made from petrochemicals. It's not old-fashioned manure. Not all fertilizer. But I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of it is made from chemicals. Chicago's poop gets processed and spread on farms downstate, for example. Just an hour ago I got a food delivery from a farmer who uses only her own livestock to fertilize her fields. (As a side note, it's wonderful to see — since the pandemic — how many farmers where I live have set up web sites so they can deliver their goods from their farms straight to the doorsteps of people living the city, in addition to farmers' markets. So far, I get my beef, pork, eggs, some cheeses, and honey delivered right to my doorman. Still looking for a milk option that isn't raw, or $11.99/gallon.)

photochemsyn 5y ago

Phosphate fertilizer is mostly mined. Ammonia-based (NH3) fertilizers are made from atmospheric N2 via hydrogenation, and the source of the hydrogen can be water. The whole process (Haber-Bosch) can be renewably powered with no fossil fuels in other words.

nostrademons 5y ago
"Can be" is pretty critical. Most hydrogen is currently produced from methane (natural gas) via steam reforming. The barriers toward renewable production are economic, not technological, but at current prices natural gas is a lot cheaper than electrolysis. On the plus side, it's good to know that fertilizer isn't a blocker from going fossil-fuel free.
- londons_explore 5y ago
  Fertilizer can be carbon free (ammonia from hydrogen from water + sun), but about 0% of the world's supply is that. All the hydrogen comes from natural gas. Steel can be made carbon free, but so far it's all made in a blast furnace with a lot of coal. Aluminium can be carbon free (electricity), but so far we reduce carbon electrodes and release a lot of CO2 because carbon is cheaper than using extra electricity. All it would take is the right global tax or incentive structure and all these industries would quickly move over, saving us 20+% of CO2 emissions!
  - sophacles 5y ago
    Sorry for being pedantic, but isn't carbon-free steel just iron?
    - betterunix2 5y ago
      Pretty sure he meant carbon emissions, but technically you are correct, "steel" is a mixture of iron and a relatively small amount of carbon. As far as I know (but I am not an expert) there are not many applications for elemental (pure) iron.

DoreenMichele 5y ago

This was one of the things I was taught as an environmental studies major: That Peak Oil does not just mean we need to develop alternative energy and alternative transportation. It means we need to also develop alternative means to keep producing enough food to feed our current population.