Des Moines Water...
- Thread starter ISUonthemove
- Start date
I live in Des Moines and I can even taste it in the fountain drinks at the foot court now. Probably the past week or so smells like a swimming pool when I take a shower. The Rag had some article about it not long ago, apparently the chlorine levels are fine, just more of it cuz of all the melt off we had last weekend.
It probably has far more to do with the fact that farmers are actually putting raw Ammonia onto their fields in the fall, and when it runs off in the spring, it ends up in our rivers. Just another unseen form of pollution.
Strange how all the dead bodies show up after all the ice breaks up in the river.
east-siders know how to get rid of there loved ones.
:dull:
You do realize that it is knifed into the ground and not just sprayed on top of the soil right? Highly doubt this is a big cause of it. It's usually done in the fall or in the spring after its thawed and dried out so right now this is irrellevant too.
Yes, but water doesn't just drain off the surface of the fields, either. Nitrogen runoff in general is a fairly big problem, IMO.You do realize that it is knifed into the ground and not just sprayed on top of the soil right? Highly doubt this is a big cause of it. It's usually done in the fall or in the spring after its thawed and dried out so right now this is irrellevant too.
I think you need to do some research before making bold claims like this because right now its just your opinion. I'm not saying it's not a problem at all but anything that grows in the soil needs nitrates so your going to get some in the water regardless. I would think that the granular application of nitrogen versus knifing it into the soil in liquid form of anhydrous amonia is a better practice since the granular form is more susceptible to water runoff.
Sorry, I grew up in rural Iowa so I get a little defensive when people start blaming farmers for things like this. Most farmers are careful with their chemicals and manure. In fact some of these large hog confinement operations have much better waste management practices than the typical small traditional farmer.
Dude, you are on crack if you actually believe that. Number one, as previous poster says it is knifed in the ground in the Fall when it is cool. It breaks down in the soil and the Nitrogen actually attaches to old root structures and plant matter in the soil. Add in the fact that the soil is frozen right now so there is no "leaching" as no water is draining through the soil right now. It is snowmelt stirring up fish poop.
Raw ammonia??? You must be a city slicker who has read too many tree hugger books.........:wink: (joking by the way)
Last edited:
First off, it's the internet so I don't have to have any research behind my opinions. I can spread all the FUD I want and it doesn't make a lick of difference at the end of the day.
Secondly, while farmers individually may be, there is undeniable damage going on to our environment from industrial farming as a whole.
My family has been farming in Iowa since before it was a state. I have nothing against farmers. Farmers are some of the most hypocritic people I know, though.
Anhydrous ammonia is pretty much straight NH3 (80ish %). It's what I would call "raw". Sure it's "knifed" into the ground, but if the soil is too dry or too wet, you can lose up to 50% of the ammonia, and it has to go somewhere. You can't tell me that every guy farming 5000 acres is just waiting for the soil to get just right to go put ammonia down.
I'm not sure why you have such a grudge against farmers but it sure is obvious you have one. Just because there is individuals that are not respectfull doesn't mean you lump the whole bunch as such. There is a few decent Hawk fans but you don't label them all as good I hope.
Anhydrous Ammonia is 82% Nitrogen and it has an extreme urge to seek out water so you're right when you say too dry or too wet is not ideal. BUT, when you apply NH3 when it's too dry it doesn't seal and it hits the atmosphere and boils away(because it boils at 28 below zero) and is absorbed into the atmosphere. If it is applied in too wet of conditions it leaves air gaps where the knives went through the soil which again causes the ammonia to boil into the atmosphere other then that what can actually attach to water and be absorbed into the soil. It's not like it sits on top of the ground waiting around for some runoff water to come take it away on some magic boat ride to the river. The only way NH3 ends up in the river is if it is applied correctly(by corrupt farmers???) but when the ground warms up we recieve way, way more rainfall then normal and normal drainage into the tile, into the drainage ditches and to the rivers carries the stabilized N away. It isn't happening now on frozen ground, no matter how corrupt you think the farmer is.
Last edited:
I never said anything about "corrupt" farmers. I said things about lazy farmers, and hypocritical farmers, but not corrupt farmers. I think farmers are generally good people who often don't understand their collective impact on the world around them.
So you're telling me that out of the tons and tons and tons of NH3 that gets applied to farm fields every year, essentially none of it runs off into streams or rivers in the spring?
I have a grudge against farmers because they suck up a ton of tax dollars and in return constantly complain about it. We get things like corn-based ethanol shoved down our throats by lobbyists when it does nothing but harm the environment and economy in the long run.
Farmers live in every bit as much of an entitlement society as people living in government housing, and that's what irks me.
This arguement is without merit.
Putting extra N on a field would be like you taking money out of your billfold and burning it. And for the record, by the acre, more fertizilers and chemicals are put on in the city than on the farms. The city's have easier runoff into the streams. Do you treat your lawn?
I'm with ya there jumbopackage. I was raised on a farm too, and anybody that tells you that heavy use of anhydrous ammonia, fertilizers, and pesticides isn't harming Iowa's lakes, rivers and water supplies is only kidding themselves. And farmers are right up there when it comes to welfare. I don't mind my tax dollars helping out smaller farmers, but the welfare haul made by big corporate farms is a national scandal. Another scandal is ethanol, which does nothing to reduce our dependence on oil, drives up food prices for all of us, and sucks up more of our tax dollars.
I've seen farmers, especially ones with lots of land and compressed timelines, seed bean fields from the air, and get Cat tractors buried so deep you can walk out of the cab onto the ground. I'm sure chemicals get applied when it's not optimal.
Iowa has far FAR fewer acres of city than it does farms.
I am sorry if I took your comments the wrong way on farmers. I grew up on a farm and like to work out on the farm as often as I can and work with farmers on a daily basis and sometimes they get a lot of bad publicity they don't deserve. I apologize.
The only way the NH3 makes it to the streams is if there is spring moisture that is way above normal after NH3 is applied. If water is continually flowing through the soil to drainage tile or creeks you will lose some that way but I am 100% sure it can't be happening right now because the ground is frozen and water can't run through it it only flows over the ground heading down the the streams.
When NH3 is applied, it's extremely attracted to water and seeks it out very aggressively. When it gets in the moisture of soil it breaks down and stabilizes and attaches itself as a white little node of roots and on plant material to be used by the crop. Since you can't apply it when there is enough water that would be draining to a creek I say there is not much chance of it. Urea dry fertilizers and UAN solution 32% or 28% N can be picked up and taken to streams because it is much more stable when applied but typically those fertilizers are not applied until the ground conditions are ideal and are either worked into the soil or are absorbed very quickly where it attaches itself in the soil like NH3 does after it stabilizes.
If you produce 180 bu corn it will use approximately 1lb N for each bushel of corn produced. If you grew soybeans the previous year, whatever yield you got from that crop(say 50bu/acre) contributes 1lb N for the corn to use(50lbs in this case). So If you want 180 bu corn and you got 50lbs of N from your last years soybean crop you should aim for 130 actual N units in NH3, UAN or Urea. I am sure there are quite a few instances over overapplying N and that can make it to the rivers if it isn't used by the crop. But most of the farmers I work with are pretty on top of what they are applying, especially now with anhydrous being so expensive ($750-1,200/ton).
Hope I made sense and sorry for the book...
Ethanol harms the environment?????? And the economy????? Ya, I can see how lessening our dependency on foreign oil really hurts our economy and ethanol burns way cleaner then gasoline so that argument is whacko.
Comparing farmers to worthless citizens living in public housing is like comparing a moped to a ferrari. The world don't depend on unemployable slugs like they do farmers.
And if you're talking about the economy as a result of $5 corn. Ethanol has about 5-10% of that cause. It has a whole lot more to do with worldwide wheat supplies and Chinese demand for vegetable oils then ethanol does.
We're using corn ethanol, and no, that does not reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Why do you think the oil industry and their politicians aren't fighting the use of ethanol? They know that when you include the various energy costs to grow the corn, energy to produce the ethanol, and consumers having to buy more gas to make up for the reduced mileage from ethanol, there is no reduction in oil use and may be more. Throw in the fact that we taxpayers have to subsidize it to boot, and you can see why a lot of people think it's a fraud (at least corn ethanol). And farmers are growing more corn than ever, but the price has gone up anyway the last few years after sitting at low levels for decades. Is it just a conicidence that the big jump comes at a time when the government is pushing ethanol? And I believe I've read somewhere that ethanol actually creates more smog, so large cities discourage its use.
