Radioactive fertilizers?

Agriculture and soil. Pollution control, soil remediation, humus and new agricultural techniques.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Radioactive fertilizers?




by Christophe » 05/09/08, 11:48

A previous article informed us of the scandal of the presence of a radioactive element, 210Po, in tobacco.

This radioactive element actually comes, according to Le Figaro, from phosphate fertilizers extracted from apatite mines, a rock that contains radium and polonium.
These products are also the synthetic fertilizers commonly used in conventional agriculture.

This discovery made by tobacco manufacturers for several decades has however been hidden until then from the general public to protect the interests of their industry.
However, it also concerns all of agriculture and also our food!

The information is enormous and has only just come out.
If a dangerous radioactive element is present in tobacco crops at the rate of 0,01 becquerel per gram of tobacco, and what was known as early as 1960 by tobacco manufacturers like Philip Morris, other agricultural crops that also use fertilizers phosphates also contain this radioactive element.
It also appears that the tobacco industry lied in 1997 by declaring that it did not know that polonium was in the leaves of their tobacco, when the latter was probably aware for several decades!

Industrial phosphate fertilizers are synthetic fertilizers produced by the reaction of an acid with an ore.
They are commonly used in agriculture, but prohibited in organic farming.
The plant absorbs phosphate and other elements necessary for its growth by the roots.
The radioactive polonium deposited in the soil is thus absorbed by the plant and is then found in the plant tissue itself.

According to the Canadian Department of Agriculture, phosphate is used in agriculture because phosphorus is necessary for the proliferation of roots and the early ripening of fruits, especially cereals.
Also, seeds and fruits contain large amounts of phosphorus.
It is more than obvious that, if tobacco is contaminated with radioactive polonium due to the use of phosphate, the whole diet of conventional agriculture is also and significantly.

According to a document dating from 1970, Philip Morris indicated that the use of a solvent to clean the tobacco leaves would only reduce by 10 to 40% the amount of polonium in the tobacco leaves.

Suffice to say that, even when washing vegetables grown conventionally, they also contain a significant amount of this dangerous radioactive element.


Received by email.
0 x
User avatar
Gregconstruct
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1781
Registration: 07/11/07, 19:55
Location: Amay Belgium




by Gregconstruct » 05/09/08, 12:09

The more we search, the more we realize that we are in shit!
It is sometimes discouraging! : Cry:
0 x
Every action counts for our planet !!!
Bibiphoque
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 749
Registration: 31/03/04, 07:37
Location: Brussels




by Bibiphoque » 05/09/08, 12:13

Hello,
This is exactly what I pointed out on futura-sciences, again they downplay the possibility by only talking about "dust deposited on the foliage" not seeming to believe in the possibility that all plants grown in the using synthetic fertilizers can be contaminated with soluble salts of polonium.

Long live organic! : Mrgreen:

@+
0 x
This is not because we always said that it is impossible that we should not try :)
User avatar
Gregconstruct
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1781
Registration: 07/11/07, 19:55
Location: Amay Belgium




by Gregconstruct » 05/09/08, 12:16

Bibiphoque wrote:Hello,
This is exactly what I pointed out on futura-sciences, again they downplay the possibility by only talking about "dust deposited on the foliage" not seeming to believe in the possibility that all plants grown in the using synthetic fertilizers can be contaminated with soluble salts of polonium.

Long live organic! : Mrgreen:

@+


They take people for fools!
0 x
Every action counts for our planet !!!
Leo Maximus
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2183
Registration: 07/11/06, 13:18
x 124




by Leo Maximus » 05/09/08, 12:19

Christophe wrote:
...
If a dangerous radioactive element is present in tobacco crops due to 0,01 becquerel per gram of tobacco...
0,01 Bequerel per gram, this corresponds to the average radioactivity of seawater and approximately one tenth of the average radioactivity of the human body.

Something else should be found to encourage people to quit smoking!
0 x
User avatar
Gregconstruct
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1781
Registration: 07/11/07, 19:55
Location: Amay Belgium




by Gregconstruct » 05/09/08, 12:29

Leo Maximus wrote:0,01 Bequerel per gram, this corresponds to the average radioactivity of seawater and approximately one tenth of the average radioactivity of the human body.

Something else should be found to encourage people to quit smoking!


It is possible, but what about the concentration in fruits and vegetables which are fattened using the same products?

Tobacco undergoes many treatments before ending up in cigarettes. I assume that the concentrations that are communicated to us are those found in ready-to-drink tobacco. This means that it has undergone multiple washes and that it has been "dressed" with no less than 600 different additives.
This can therefore lead us to suppose that the concentrations were attenuated by the various treatments.

Fruits and vegetables are not treated as much as tobacco. One would therefore expect to observe much higher concentrations of radioactive elements than in tobacco.
0 x
Every action counts for our planet !!!
Leo Maximus
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2183
Registration: 07/11/06, 13:18
x 124




by Leo Maximus » 05/09/08, 12:33

An instructive link: http://lpsc.in2p3.fr/gpr/french/RadioOr ... ndeur.html

It is the use of phosphate fertilizers which is responsible for this radioactivity.

Long live organic!
0 x
Bibiphoque
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 749
Registration: 31/03/04, 07:37
Location: Brussels




by Bibiphoque » 05/09/08, 13:19

Hello,
The problem with polonium is that the type of radiation emitted is not detected by a "normal" geyger counter, you need one with a mica window.
So there is no point walking around your favorite store with your counter if it is not this precise model, you would see nothing but the frightened head of the personnel manager and customers : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen: (it's a blow to do, that !! imagine the joke !!)

http://forums.futura-sciences.com/post1866376.html

http://forums.futura-sciences.com/thread243561.html

@+
Last edited by Bibiphoque the 05 / 09 / 08, 13: 28, 1 edited once.
0 x
This is not because we always said that it is impossible that we should not try :)
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 05/09/08, 13:24

Thank you for the link

The radioactivity of a body (we also speak of radioactive activity) is measured in Becquerel (Bq); this unit is quite natural because 1 Bq corresponds to a disintegration per second, however 1 Bq is really very small. In the past, we used the Curie (Ci): 1 Ci corresponds to the radioactivity of a gram of radium or 37 billion disintegrations per second (the curie is a huge unit and we generally used the micro-curie (1 $ \ mu $ Ci = 3.7 x 104 Bq).


Now I read this:

If a dangerous radioactive element is present in tobacco cultures at the rate of 0,01 becquerel per gram of tobacco ... Blablabla and let me tell you bullshit!


Either 10 Bq per kg ... or less than the NATURAL radioactivity of a MAN !!

[quote] 1 man (70kg) 7000 Bq (of which ~ 4500 Bq due to bone potatium 40, the rest is due to carbon 14)
1 kg of coffee 1000 Bq / quote]

I suspected that it was a fake this mailing ... Sorry to have not checked the orders of magnitude ...

More ecologists who should go back to school ...

I propose to lock?
0 x
Bibiphoque
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 749
Registration: 31/03/04, 07:37
Location: Brussels




by Bibiphoque » 05/09/08, 13:30

Hello,
It depends on the type of radioactivity, not all are equal!
(I added the "futura" links in my previous post)
@+
0 x
This is not because we always said that it is impossible that we should not try :)

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Agriculture: problems and pollution, new techniques and solutions"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Majestic-12 [Bot] and 341 guests