Nitrogen overload concerns ecologists

[onejayhawk]

Yeah, you can drown in pure water, or in a 100 % N2 atmosphere, but what they are claiming is that we are releasing too much nitrogen into the atmosphere, which is already 78 % N2. (and not taking into account that much of that nitrogen comes from a human driven cycle too, where atmospheric N2 is fixed to form fertilizers and such.

I find the use of the word nitrogen for everything even more confusing that a possible quick explanation of a technical term.

This reminds me of the DHMO people. http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

Technical terms are used to prevent confusion. Sometimes there is no way to simplify.

J

 

[Ecofarm]

For those of you who would like to understand how N2 is removed from the atmosphere (it does, in fact, interact - but does so through biology not merely chemistry), and how nitrites, nitrates, and ammonia and ammonium (products of atmospheric nitrogen) are returned to the atmosphere, perhaps a picture will help. Do you really expect people to say "nitrogen, nitrites, nitrates, ammonia, and ammonium" everyime they discuss nitrogen flow in the cycle?



Is it more clear now? The article is correct. It is accurate science. As an ecologist (MSc, PhD candidate), I agree with the reasoning and causation presented. Until we begin to treat our farms as ecologies, and not factories, we are screwed (note my name).

ps. Human fixation of nitrogen into ammonium and nitrates for fertilizer is usualy over-applied, resulting is most of it "running off" (because of rain) into local fresh water systems and "evaporating" (via bacteria) quickly back into the atmosphere. Carefuly applied fertilizer (timed to growth spurts in plants, avoiding rain, and application directly to plant base/roots) can be far less deliterious, but (as the article mentions) the use of fertilizer is not regulated like the release of nitrogen through combustion. Organic farming, of course, does not use synthetic fertilizers - so it avoids the problem alltogether. The negative results of hapless synthetic fertilizer use go far beyond a mere increase in atmospheric nitrogen, for instance: algal blooms (red tides), destruction of coral reefs (through cultural eutrophication [anthropogenic over nutrient-ation], and "dead zones" at river outlets (see: Mississippi, for example). There is some debate on the extent that phosphorous (from synthetic fertilizers) contributes to these processes. In some cases (the Florida Bay, for example), phosphorous is likely the primary culprit of algal blooms. Sweden has, though world-leading policy and implimentation of fertilizer regulations, largely eliminated excess nitrogen from many lakes, but phosphorous remains an almost impossible problem for them to correct because of its physical and chemical properties (too complex to explain in an already long post).

EDIT: Regarding scientists being "in it for the money", I can tell you firsthand: not ecologists (we don't get patents). Maybe those medicene or genetic engineering guys, but not us farmer/forest/marine (variations of ecology) guys.

 

[Urederra]

So, you think this is accurate?

nitrogen in vehicle exhaust from a nearby freeway has led to the local demise of a threatened butterfly population.

"The planet has never seen this much nitrogen at any time."

(BTW, they are quoting a 'scientist'

Not only is the glut of nitrogen disrupting ecosystems, polluting waters and harming human health, but it's also a silent partner with carbon dioxide in changing the Earth's climate, the report said.

Please note that here they talk about nitrogen and CO2, not carbon.

Despite the countless initiatives under way to reduce carbon-dioxide levels to slow global warming, some scientists warn that those efforts will prove moot unless nitrogen releases also are lowered.

ZOMG... Nitrogen causes global warming?

"We won't solve global warming without addressing nitrogen," said Elizabeth Holland,

oh... yes they are claiming that...

"The changes to the nitrogen cycle are larger in magnitude and more profound than the changes to the carbon cycle," Holland continued. "But the nitrogen cycle is being neglected."

And they are neglecting the benefits of fertilizing our fields, like having enough food for all without having to farm too much land... D'OH.

 

[Ecofarm]

"The planet has never seen this much nitrogen at any time."

I need some more evidence for this one. The planet has a LONG history. I agree with the rest of it.

And they are neglecting the benefits of fertilizing our fields, like having enough food for all without having to farm too much land... D'OH.

We could probably feed the world just on the excess food eaten by obese Americans, and do so with FAR less fertilizer application (by refining our techniques and policies).

Please note that here they talk about nitrogen and CO2, not carbon.

Umm, CO2 = carbon (1 atom) and oxygen (2 atoms) ?


And lastly, but certainly most grand! ....

ZOMG... Nitrogen causes global warming?

oh... yes they are claiming that...

Let's have a look at some work by people who might know a little more than you (apparently):

The reason not to concentrate only on reducing nitrogen oxide emissions, they say, is that there is a marked difference in the short- and long-term effects of doing so. Increased nitrogen oxide emissions do indeed lead, as is commonly expected, to short-term warming from increased short-lived ozone in the troposphere, the lower part of Earth's atmosphere.

Over the following decade, however, these nitrogen oxide emissions lead to reductions in methane and even ozone, and thus to a net cooling. Overall, the net impact is a slight cooling for a wide range of locations of nitrogen oxide emissions, and thus reductions in these emissions, such as from pollution control measures, will eventually add to global warming.

The scientists note, however, that when emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), which usually result from the same processes that produce nitrogen oxides, are added to the equation, the net result is back to global warming. Therefore, they say, efforts to address issues of urban air quality and global warming must involve combined emission controls and not just the "quick fix" of reducing local air pollution by controlling emissions of nitrogen oxides.

Joint American Geophysical Union/University of California, Irvine Release
http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/prrl/prrl0112.html

Although excess nitrogen contributes substantially to issues such as changes in the carbon cycle, global warming, water quality, acid rain, biodiversity loss, and air pollution, the issue has so far received little attention from the scientific community.

Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Natural Environment Research Council (UK)
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/press/releases/2006/challenge.asp

There are two main things that these nitrogen compounds affect: the environment and human health. When nitrous oxide (N2O) reaches the stratosphere it helps destroy the ozone layer, resulting in higher levels of UV radiation and increasing the risk of skin cancer and cataracts. Ironically, when N2O is nearer to the Earth’s surface it can actually make ozone, which can become smog on a still and sunny day.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/articles/article/nitrogenthebadguyofglobalwarming1160583306/


ZOMG! Consider yourself edumacated. Now simmer down before I learn you somethin good.

 

[Snowball]

There was a time. Many years ago, when Oxygen was a deadly, poisonous gas being produced by plants for the first time. And now life depends on it.

 

[Ecofarm]

Perhaps we should increase the lead and arsenic levels in our water to get ready for the time when life depends on it? We could also actively destroy the ozone layer (via nitrous oxide) to get ready for the time when life will depend on massive amounts of UV rays...

 

[Atlas14]

Do you really expect people to say "nitrogen, nitrites, nitrates, ammonia, and ammonium" everyime they discuss nitrogen flow in the cycle?

Yes. Chemically they are very different, and each affect the environment differently. I don't know of anyone that refers to N2, nitrites, nitrates, ammonia, and ammonium as just "Nitrogen", even in broad environmental science discussions.

Unless this was for a target audience composed of utter morons, which is possible, legit scientists/future scientists will distinguish between the different chemicals when referring to each of the related environmental processes.

 

[Shaihulud]

They are emphasising nitrates i think, that we use for fertilizers. Anyone who keeps an aquarium knows its not conducive to animals.

 

[Ecofarm]

Yes. Chemically they are very different, and each affect the environment differently. I don't know of anyone that refers to N2, nitrites, nitrates, ammonia, and ammonium as just "Nitrogen", even in broad environmental science discussions.

Unless this was for a target audience composed of utter morons, which is possible, legit scientists/future scientists will distinguish between the different chemicals when referring to each of the related environmental processes.

Any science you get from a newspaper will be at a moronic level.

In discussions with other scientists, we dont really need to specify if we know the other person is familiar with the cycle. You tell me what the concern is, where the nitrogen is, OR what the reaction is, and I'll tell you what form it is in. It's a simple cycle. In a paper, of course you must specify, even if it is obvious to a scientist. For instance: if you talk about nitrogen breaking down the ozone layer - there's only 1 form it takes at that time. I guess it depends on your target audience.

EDIT: I re-read the article. It is weird that they do not specify form even once, for the laymen.

 

[Urederra]

I need some more evidence for this one. The planet has a LONG history. I agree with the rest of it.

The planet's content of nitrogen (N2) hasn't increased vastly due to anthropogenic activity.

We could probably feed the world just on the excess food eaten by obese Americans, and do so with FAR less fertilizer application (by refining our techniques and policies).

No, you can't. And that is red herring, IIRC. The food eaten by obese Americans is also grown with fertilizes

Umm, CO2 = carbon (1 atom) and oxygen (2 atoms) ?

and nitrogen = N2. so they are talking about different things.

And lastly, but certainly most grand! ....

That quote of yours is not valid, you talk about nitric oxides, the part I quoted said "Despite the countless initiatives under way to reduce carbon-dioxide levels to slow global warming, some scientists warn that those efforts will prove moot unless nitrogen releases also are lowered." Nitrogen, not nitric oxides. You'll better check that if you want your thesis to be approved.

ZOMG! Consider yourself edumacated. Now simmer down before I learn you somethin good.

Flaming causes global warming.

BTW. english is not my mother tongue, what does edumacated mean?

Any science you get from a newspaper will be at a moronic level.

it is more than moronic level, it is plainly wrong.

In discussions with other scientists, we dont really need to specify if we know the other person is familiar with the cycle. You tell me what the concern is, where the nitrogen is, OR what the reaction is,

Yes you need, specially if you are talking about reactions. You can't go ahead and say... nitrogen decomposes to nitrogen and oxygen, that wouldn't make any sense.

EDIT: I re-read the article. It is weird that they do not specify form even once, for the laymen.

FINALLY you get it!!!!

 

[Ecofarm]

You need to study the nitrogen cycle. Sorry, I'm not here yo be your teacher. I tried, your beligerent. I already have my MSc in international environmental science. Good luck becomming educated yourself.

Moderator Action: Warned for flaming.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889