imho hydro sucks

xtsho

xtsho

Well-Known Member
When I did flood and drain I would use the add back method but drain my reservoirs from time to time and start fresh. I always dumped the old solution in the garden. Which was a hassle because I was growing in a basement and had to lug buckets up the stairs and out to the garden. The only think I noticed was healthy vegetable plants. Now I use gravity fed blumats with no runoff so I don't deal with that anymore.
 
ounevinsmoke

ounevinsmoke

Well-Known Member
3rd Monkey said:
The only difference between a fertilizer "salt" and an organic "nutrient" is terminology. They are both simply ions, the same ions. An over abundance of either will cause contamination in runoff.

I see no reason why a "salt" fertilizer is detrimental when applied in the proportion necessary to supply plants with proper food levels, the same as "nutrients".

Fertilizer "salts" aren't really salts, rather crystallized ions that are formed from bonding.

An example:

Plants uptake nitrates, not nitrogen. Nitrates are broken down into nitrogen in the plant. Whether manure or nitrate "salt", it's the same to the plant.

To me, organic has little to do with which source of fertilizer is used, as opposed to the manner in which it is used.
Click to expand...
Incorrect, when using synthetic nutrients most are coupled with chelating agents. Usually an iron with DTPA and some of the other good shit has EDTA which is the main problem because when that delivers whatever nutrient it's coupled with its left alone, then it immediately will bond to something else in nature through run off. Plants uptake the nutes but leave the EDTA. EDTA in large amounts not good for anyone or anything (Large like commercial grows using hundreds of gallons). I do see your point saying when application is only used as necessary but lets be honest most people overfeed. The most environmentally safe "synthetic" would use little to no edta or other harmful chelating agents. Chelation with natural amino acids are better for the environment combined with your humic and fulvic acids as well, but most people are not researching ingredients on the bottle nor do they care of the long term accumulative effects.
 
3rd Monkey

3rd Monkey

Well-Known Member
ounevinsmoke said:
Incorrect, when using synthetic nutrients most are coupled with chelating agents. Usually an iron with DTPA and some of the other good shit has EDTA which is the main problem because when that delivers whatever nutrient it's coupled with its left alone, then it immediately will bond to something else in nature through run off. Plants uptake the nutes but leave the EDTA. EDTA in large amounts not good for anyone or anything (Large like commercial grows using hundreds of gallons). I do see your point saying when application is only used as necessary but lets be honest most people overfeed. The most environmentally safe "synthetic" would use little to no edta or other harmful chelating agents. Chelation with natural amino acids are better for the environment combined with your humic and fulvic acids as well, but most people are not researching ingredients on the bottle nor do they care of the long term accumulative effects.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that not all chelating agents are the best choice, however an ion is still an ion, no matter which way it is bonded.

Chelating agents such as edpa are not the best option, I agree. However, they are the most practical in the use of "salt" fertilizers, hence their use.

At the end of the day, ions are ions and while edta may contribute heavy metals in large scale applications, nitrate and phosphate buildup from overuse of organic fertilizer is equally as harmful and is more common in small scale gardens as well as large scale agriculture.
 
bdt1981

bdt1981

Well-Known Member
Oh shit. I did not mean to do this. Lol. I was just searching for pix of my very first gro and came across a thread i had posted yrs ago that i was totally wrong about. Tryin to right my wrongs. I forgot about all the youngsters in here that like to argue. Lol.
 
bdt1981

bdt1981

Well-Known Member
We could dump millions of nutes down the drains of the world and the actual impact that it will have on the enviroment is nil. It would take trillions upon trillions of gallons to hardly notice anything. Wouldnt make a pimple on the guys asses that pour their used engine oil out on the ground.
 
70's natureboy

70's natureboy

Well-Known Member
bdt1981 said:
We could dump millions of nutes down the drains of the world and the actual impact that it will have on the enviroment is nil. It would take trillions upon trillions of gallons to hardly notice anything. Wouldnt make a pimple on the dick head douchbags asses that pour their used engine oil out on the ground.
Click to expand...
Fixed your point. People that intentionally pollute our earth are dick head losers. Think of our grandkids.
 
hellmutt bones

hellmutt bones

Well-Known Member
bdt1981 said:
Oh shit. I did not mean to do this. Lol. I was just searching for pix of my very first gro and came across a thread i had posted yrs ago that i was totally wrong about. Tryin to right my wrongs. I forgot about all the youngsters in here that like to argue. Lol.
Click to expand...
Oh shit is right OP. Why did you rehash old ass threads Op! And now you caused a divide in our stoner community. Shame on you! What ever you do dont start a which is better organic or synthetic thread:shock:
 
ounevinsmoke

ounevinsmoke

Well-Known Member
bdt1981 said:
We could dump millions of nutes down the drains of the world and the actual impact that it will have on the enviroment is nil. It would take trillions upon trillions of gallons to hardly notice anything. Wouldnt make a pimple on the guys asses that pour their used engine oil out on the ground.
Click to expand...
Incorrect, The Ohio Cuyahoga river has literally been on fire (june 22, 1969). The great lakes have terrible algae blooms that kill aquatic life and release toxins that cause cancers in, humans (today). The water all over the planet has been contaminated with
Dupont's ​
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and its in damn near every human alive.

Trillions? It takes less to have impact.
 
A

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
I can agree to disagree.
Let me ask you this do you organic growers need to replace your soil after growing? Nope just keep adding more organic ferts to keep it rich can be used as long as you want.

Do you growers using salt based ferts replace your soil after a grow?
From my understanding almost always.

I don't grow in dirt but I do have an understanding of nutrients. Organic and salt based nutrients are not the same. Yes both can pollute the environment in excess.

They do not leave the same amounts of unusable waste. Almost all salt based ferts contain sodium. Sodium is only used in trace amounts and a buildup will hurt soils. This can take a long or short time to happen depending on the amount of sodium and the amount of dirt it's out into and also the drainage of that soil.
 
A

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
eyderbuddy said:
MOST hydroponic nutrients are safe when used as intended.

Excessive nutrient buildups will always be harmful, whether it comes from organic or synthetic sources.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But take a tbsp of salt mix it with water and spray it over a 20x20 ft lawn. You will see no real effects. Now do this once a week and eventually your grass will stop growing. It may take years but that salt will build up because it's not being used by the plants and the soil will be garbage until you either replace it or add top soil to essentially dilute it
 
bdt1981

bdt1981

Well-Known Member
Hydro still tops soil in production. More yield faster growth = more money made. Thats what should be the #1 thing to consider when comparing anything to see which is better. Once you got ur shit in order and the proper equipment hydro is very simple and very automated. The yield can be 10x with hydro. Hard to pull a half to a full lb in dirt with 3 week veg.
 
3rd Monkey

3rd Monkey

Well-Known Member
Aqua Man said:
I can agree to disagree.
Let me ask you this do you organic growers need to replace your soil after growing? Nope just keep adding more organic ferts to keep it rich can be used as long as you want.

Do you growers using salt based ferts replace your soil after a grow?
From my understanding almost always.

I don't grow in dirt but I do have an understanding of nutrients. Organic and salt based nutrients are not the same. Yes both can pollute the environment in excess.

They do not leave the same amounts of unusable waste. Almost all salt based ferts contain sodium. Sodium is only used in trace amounts and a buildup will hurt soils. This can take a long or short time to happen depending on the amount of sodium and the amount of dirt it's out into and also the drainage of that soil.
Click to expand...
They are exactly the same. I make components for black powder (potassium nitrate) in a nitre bed using organic material. I could take that same material and fertilize with it. An ion is an ion.

They aren't real salts, these "synthetic" fertilizers. The only thing "synthetic" about them are the chelating agents, as mentioned before. Otherwise, they are just bonded ions, same as organic.

Don't get me wrong, I see where you and others are coming from exactly. I use all raw organic materials, but not because of "salts".

Organic releases much slower as it has to be broken down. Less immediate nutrition, more over the long run. I'm learning this the hard way on the hydro bucket lol.

Organic amendments are really only meant for soil structure. "Synthetic" fertilizers are immediate nutrition that can be used in any medium via chelation, but they don't hold like organic. Beyond that, there is no difference between the ions.
 
A

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
3rd Monkey said:
They are exactly the same. I make components for black powder (potassium nitrate) in a nitre bed using organic material. I could take that same material and fertilize with it. An ion is an ion.

They aren't real salts, these "synthetic" fertilizers. The only thing "synthetic" about them are the chelating agents, as mentioned before. Otherwise, they are just bonded ions, same as organic.

Don't get me wrong, I see where you and others are coming from exactly. I use all raw organic materials, but not because of "salts".

Organic releases much slower as it has to be broken down. Less immediate nutrition, more over the long run. I'm learning this the hard way on the hydro bucket lol.

Organic amendments are really only meant for soil structure. "Synthetic" fertilizers are immediate nutrition that can be used in any medium via chelation, but they don't hold like organic. Beyond that, there is no difference between the ions.
Click to expand...
Much agreed on the break down of organics and that's a huge benefit. But where do organics produce sodium?
 
Dr. Who

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
JSB99 said:
No doubt! I thought soil would be easier as well, after only growing via DWC. I was wrong. Heavy bags of soil, watering every day, once they get big, etc...my system consists of a few totes and pipes. All the weight is in the water.

And I really like the instant feedback plants show, when growing in hydro.
Click to expand...
I used to do DWC.
I do have to agree that DWC and better yet, RDWC really works great.....RDWC, you use less nutrient to get great results....

Still, how often do you have to adjust your res pH?
Add backs
Res temp control
How much vacation time have you had last year?

It's an interesting view from either direction. We each have our druthers..... I guess for me. Playing in the dirt started young on the farm. I just have that basic love of all things in the ground.
Still, that increased terp profile and the nice tweeks that soil spin into the finished product.....

Just like @Aussieaceae says above....
 
Dr. Who

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
3rd Monkey said:
They are exactly the same. I make components for black powder (potassium nitrate) in a nitre bed using organic material. I could take that same material and fertilize with it. An ion is an ion.

They aren't real salts, these "synthetic" fertilizers. The only thing "synthetic" about them are the chelating agents, as mentioned before. Otherwise, they are just bonded ions, same as organic.

Don't get me wrong, I see where you and others are coming from exactly. I use all raw organic materials, but not because of "salts".

Organic releases much slower as it has to be broken down. Less immediate nutrition, more over the long run. I'm learning this the hard way on the hydro bucket lol.

Organic amendments are really only meant for soil structure. "Synthetic" fertilizers are immediate nutrition that can be used in any medium via chelation, but they don't hold like organic. Beyond that, there is no difference between the ions.
Click to expand...
And yet the difference in final results is organic does more for the plant as a whole..... Your product even stores longer then non-organically grown product....
 
eyderbuddy

eyderbuddy

Well-Known Member
Honestly though, if you're growing outside... Just having the spectrum from the sun, and the cheer photon count will likely compete with or surpass any indoor grow.

I use pretty powerful white LEDS, and been messing with UV lately, but i'm still far off from 100% sun grown.
 
3rd Monkey

3rd Monkey

Well-Known Member
Aqua Man said:
Much agreed on the break down of organics and that's a huge benefit. But where do organics produce sodium?
Click to expand...
Most store bought nutrients contain a very small amount of sodium. Coincidentally, some plants need to uptake sodium. Many fruits and vegetables contain sodium... it's required for them for sustainability. Where does that sodium come from?

Decaying organic matter contains sodium, plain and simple. The salt your referring to is NaCl, sodium chloride... table salt. Sodium itself is necessary for most living things to uptake.

Nutrients don't contain table salt... at least none I've encountered. Science refers to a salt as 2 ions that bond and form a crystalline structure... not always table salt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top