- #36
CaptainQuasar
- 372
- 0
chemisttree said:Nobody uses the term "petrochemical" to mean mined rock - anywhere.
Did I somehow give the impression I was talking about rocks? I didn't use that word. I'm talking about the chemicals. Is it really completely unintelligible to talk about "a petrochemical source of phosphorous"? Look, I know I'm not a chemist but the way I'm phrasing this isn't gibberish, at best it's imprecise.
[edit] I get it, I missed your dictionary quote before. I had never realized that the "petro" is actually "petroleum" contracted rather than the prefix "petro-". You wacky scientists, you, getting all crazy with your Latin and Greek prefixes and roots and then pulling this on me. So after all, what I was saying is gibberish. I apologize but a less brusque correction would have been helpful.
chemisttree said:But the reserve base is 47,000,000 thousand metric tons. And that is only what is reported as known at this time. Where does that put the end of phosphorous?
What is "reserve base" and why did you leave out the part of that report that tells what the difference between that and the "reserve" figure I quoted is?
That number is of course about four times what the "reserve" figure is. I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to more than quadruple the worldwide amount of arable land cultivated with phosphorous fertilizer in the next century, which would result in the depletion of the "reserve base" in about the same amount of time I mentioned before. Compared to the U.S. chemical fertilizers aren't extensively used in the Far East, Central Asia, Africa, South America, or Central America, are they?
chemisttree said:Weathering of igneous rock deposits it in marine sediments where it can be further concentrated by mechanisms that are not clear and concise. The source of phosphorous is igneous rock, weathered and carried into shallow seas where it combines with calcium and or fluoride and concentrates by mechanisms that are not fully understood. Both sedimentary and igneous rocks are mined as sources of phosphorous. My comment was actually focusing on the statement that phosphorous occurs as a result of organic processes such as in bat guano. Not so.
Bat guano and sea life is what I said. Of course, I realize that it must have ultimately originated in igneous rock, I'm not suggesting that it appeared from nowhere. By "comes from" I was referring to where we get the phosphate that's used in fertilizer, not where all phosphorous on Earth comes from.
I appreciate that you've clarified that the presence of phosphorous in sea sediments is due to non-organic processes - that means that older sedimentary rock than that containing sea life will contain it, right? And the USGS report you provide also sounds like it's saying there's believed to be some at the bottom of the Mariana Trench and other deep-ocean sources. So hopefully within the range of not-too-expensive future mining technology.
chemisttree said:I have on my bookshelf the book entitled "Industrial Minerals and Rocks", 6th ed. I have indeed read the chapter on "Phosphate Rock".
Look, all I said was that this was a more interesting potential problem than the original post about fluctuations in world food prices. I said any actual problem is decades and decades in the future, didn't I? Why the heck are you being so mean and hyperbolic about this? I can take it of course, but do you feel as though I've stepped on your turf or something?
Last edited: