Interview by Tristan Shaw and Everest Fernandez.

What does the future hold? Will oppression, war, poverty, hunger and greed ever be confined to history? Or are we stuck with them forever?

For many thousands of years we have been apt to regard ourselves as perennial surfers of the cutting-edge. After all, in our minds at least, “now” has always been after “then.” Throughout history we’ve believed that we know a whole lot … about a whole lot. But are we, as a species, a lot more primitive than we conceive ourselves to be? Maybe we are no more than evolutionary juveniles, just learning how to walk, and suffering from a particularly nasty bout of toddler tantrums? Are we ever going to learn to just play nicely with each other, share our toys, and get along?

Urban Garden Magazine meets Jacque Fresco, a 93 year old futurist, social engineer and brainchild of “The Venus Project.” Fresco says that the sustainability of life on this planet is beyond his opinion. It is axiomatic. And he’s developed a plan to achieve it. But can we get our heads around it in time?

Jacque Fresco

Born March 13, 1916.

• Invented systems for noiseless and pollution free aircraft
• Invented a new aircraft wing structural system, patented by the US Air Force
• Designed an electrostatic system for the elimination of sonic boom for Raymond De-Icer
• Created a boundary layer control and electrodynamic method for aircraft control that dispenses with ailerons, elevators, rudders, and flaps
• Created a three-wheel automobile consisting of only 32 parts
• Designed “The Aluminum Trend House,” a prefabricated house designed and developed for Mike Shore and Earl Muntz, 1945
• Designed and developed another prefabricated aluminum house for Major Realty Corporation in collaboration with Aluminum Company of America
• Developed numerous components and systems for architectural construction
• Developed equipment ranging from three-dimensional x-ray units to electronic surgical instruments for the medical field
• Developed a technique for viewing three-dimensional motion pictures without the use of glasses
• Designed and built a wide variety of reinforced concrete structures

The Venus Project: housing design

JF: Yes, I can do that. I feel that if you want a world of peace, a world without poverty, hunger, war, prisons and police, what you must do is declare all of the world’s resources as a common heritage of all the world’s people. Prior to the organization of the United States of America, the states were separate, and used to fight each other over territorial boundaries. Once the states merged together, the militia disappeared. This is the only way the Earth will avoid the same kind of problems we have today. You must declare the Earth as a common heritage of all the world’s people and all the resources of the Earth shared by all the world’s people; anything less than that will result in the same problems over and over again. We must remove all the artificial boundaries that separate people and maintain a population that’s in accordance with the carrying capacity of the Earth. If we fail to do that, and exceed the population the Earth can support, there is going to be poverty, riots, and territorial disputes. Do you understand that?

UGM: I understand what you are saying. But who is going to make this declaration – the President or the First Lady?

JF: No, the Venus Project is different than any political system. It has nothing in common with socialism, fascism, capitalism, or communism.

UGM: Sharing all the world’s resources equally among the people – sounds a lot like communism doesn’t it?

JF: Communism uses money. Communism has bankers. Communism has armies and navies, and a government with an elitist structure. The Venus Project doesn’t have any of that. So look into The Venus Project before you judge it or hand a name to it – it’s socialistic, it’s communistic. This is a device used to discourage you from thinking along new lines.

UGM: But isn’t it impossible, or very difficult, to free yourself from the known? For instance, it will be a tall order for most people to envision a world without money…

JF: I understand that. Only when it hits them, when they lose their houses, their jobs, then they will start looking for something else. Right now, they all don’t give a damn.

“What’s in it for me?” is the type of society you live in today – where everybody profits off each other. It’s a very crude and primitive system. We are not civilized yet. But you never become civilized, it’s a constant input in which people grow continuously. There are no final frontiers, no utopias, and no ideal city. If I designed a city that was the most efficient, it’s the most efficient for what I know up to now. But the city that I design will be a straitjacket to the children of the future. They will design their own cities. Rather than established, we need an emergent society that allows a constant state of growth and change. And the public has to embrace social change, intellectually and emotionally. If you fail to do that, you are making more problems for the future.

UGM: But how is the Venus Project going to emerge? What will it emerge from? The illustrations that will probably accompany this interview may look like a fantasy world to many people. The Venus Project feels like the letter ‘Z’, whereas we are at letter ‘A’ or ‘B’ or ‘C.’ This begs the question ‘How?’ How do we get from here to there? How do we change our monetary system, for example, or should we just wait for it to collapse?

The Venus Project: geothermal energy

JF: I think I can answer that. The monetary system is failing all over the world. But our government here in America has given the money to the banks and the people that have created the problem. They keep the money that is set aside for education, food, pensions and have given it to the “free-enterprise system” – the system that caused the problems in the first place. That tells you who runs the show. It is never the public. Here is how to get from here to there. The monetary system is going to collapse, people will lose confidence in their elected leaders, and then they will look for something else. Things were so bad in Russia, people were treated so poorly, that they threw out the existing government. And when the public gets angry, if enough people tend to fight for what they call the support of The Venus Project’s plans, I think we can pull out of the problem. I don’t know if they will do that or not. I’m not psychic; I have no power at all. It depends on what you do and what people do. If you don’t understand The Venus Project look us up on the website: www.thevenusproject.com. There are all kinds of questions and answers. But don’t project your own values into it. It’s not a scientific culture run by scientists, and there is no technical elitism or any other kind of elitism. That is a projection by people that know nothing about it.

UGM: So, let me get this straight: the world is currently run by bankers and corporations. Is the Venus Project putting the world in the control of computers or computer programmers?

JF: Not exactly that. See if you can consider what I say. In the early days a pilot would look down out of an airplane and he would say, “I’m about a mile high.” Today with Doppler radar you can get the exact amount of feet off the ground. No human can do that. But it’s not a machine takeover. We are assigning machines decision-making where humans cannot make decisions. For example, milk cartons are filled by machines automatically; no human can move that fast. No human can do the type of production that automation can. About nine months ago machines where able to handle 1,000 trillion bits of information a second. No group of humans can do that. So in order to set up a system that can work, it has to be connected to industry, transportation, agriculture, and integrated into a holistic system that works for the benefit of all people. The machines do not control people. They only maintain production and distribution of goods and services. People live whatever lifestyle they choose to live.

UGM: So you are proposing that we defer all decisions to machines? Isn’t that danger….

The Venus Project: automobiles

JF: You know there are some roboticists that are afraid that machines are going to “take over.” The machines have no feelings. If you work on a computer on Saturday and Sunday, it doesn’t ask for a day off. It doesn’t say, “You can’t work me all the time!” because they don’t have feelings. Machines don’t want to take over. They don’t want to run people. This is a human projection and a human attribute. It’s humans that make war and drop bombs on cities. It’s humans that hurt one another. The machines don’t hurt anybody. This is a bunch of stupidity that comes from Hollywood. They make movies about the future that show robots choking their designers. They show movies of the future in which machines explode, take over, kill people and use laser weapons to burn cities – this is all done by people, not machines.

UGM: Is the Venus Project a democratic system?

JF: Have you ever known a democracy? You ask the public whether they voted for the Vietnam War. Of course they didn’t. Did you vote for the space program? Of course not. Did you vote for the design of highways, or the capital city? No. People do not participate. That’s an illusion. In the future you will participate if you have the ability to do so.

UGM: In whose opinion?

JF: If I base all decisions on existing resources, if we live in accordance with the carrying capacity of the Earth, that is not Fresco’s opinion. Fresco makes no opinions. If you want a world without war, you cannot have separate nations controlling most of the Earth’s resources.

UGM: There seems to be widespread anxiety, or perhaps misunderstanding, concerning the emergence of a one-world government. Are you not proposing a “New World Order?”

JF: Yes. But the “New World Order” most people are afraid of is the one where business people are in control. The world I’m talking about is one which raises every human being to their highest potential. And to do away with the money system, which is the basis of all corruption. We just need to make things available to people. We have more than enough resources to do that. If you consider the cost of World War II: the money, the ships sunk, the lives lost, the cities bombed … we could have housed everyone on Earth, built hospitals all over the world, wiped out the slums and poverty all over the world. So how stupid can you be?

UGM: So globalization isn’t such a bad thing after all?

JF: Again, when you use that term in this society, it means that the business world is in charge: bankers in charge of all things on Earth. But when I talk of “globalization” I mean that all nations share all the Earth’s resources: a resource-based economy. There are more than enough resources to take care of all human needs. As long as we manage the population to be in accordance with the carrying capacity of the environment, we will have no problems. If your population exceeds what the land can support you are going to have territorial disputes, arguments, invasions, and a need for armies.

UGM: Let’s look at the root cause of the wars going on right now. Oil and energy. Lots of people are talking about the current energy crisis. How does the Venus Project address this? It seems that the Venus Project is in favor of a lot of industry, transportation, and agriculture. How is this feasible in a world depleted of most natural resources? In short, how will you satisfy the massive energy requirements of the Venus Project?

JF: Okay … the oceans of the world have tides traveling in and out. We can put turbines down under the water and get all the power we need. We can harness power from temperature differentials in the ocean. We can get power from the solar system and from wind. There is geothermal power: the natural heat under the earth. According to volcanologists, we have thousands of years of heat available under the Earth. Just that alone can take care of all the world’s needs. The real energy crisis is the shortage of brain power in government.

UGM: Can you describe how food will be produced in the Venus Project?

JF: Where we don’t have arable land we will need to use hydroponics. We need farms on land and in the sea to put back the necessary ingredients we use to fertilize plants. You cannot keep taking life out of the ocean without considering the entire marine cycle, and maintaining it. Once we learn to do that, we can overcome most shortages. You know the shortages have to do with ingenuity. When America formed the blockade in World War II and prevented Germany from getting rubber from Sumatra, they invented synthetic rubber. So our problems are technical, not political. 100 years ago politics was great, but today it’s obsolete. Politics is a system that does not work.

UGM: So you want to nourish plants with nutrients from the sea? Kind of like aquaponics?

The Venus Project: mariculture & sea farming design

JF: Mariculture, the planned cultivation of marine crops and fish farming communities, can be designed to support more than one type of marine life. A mutually supporting symbiotic relationship can be sustained while emulating natural conditions as closely as possible. A wide variety of aquatic plants may be cultivated in multiple layers and suspended by cables in underwater fields adjacent to the cities. In some instances, the tops of plants could be harvested automatically, leaving the roots and lower third of the plant to grow new crops without replanting. These floating ocean platforms would be equipped with solar-operated desalinization plants, which would extract fresh water for hydroponic farming and other uses. Upwelling can also be harnessed to extract deepsea nutrients to supply aquaculture farming. Of course, any attempt at aquaculture or mariculture would be subject to international monitoring of ocean farms. This provides fish farming complexes and introduces the most advanced principles of poly-culture, which maintains the reproduction and natural balance of species. Every precaution would be taken to avoid disrupting or spoiling the spawning grounds that have sustained the human race for centuries.

UGM: Isn’t it your vision to use technology to free man from servitude and repetitive tasks?

JF: Absolutely – we can automate all the boring and dangerous jobs! We want to free people so that they can go back to school and study whatever the hell they want to study! Art, music, playwriting, travel, whatever they want to do. They can study a profession they feel they want to do, whatever they want to realize. They are not put in pigeon holes where they’re carpenters, plasterers, construction workers: all that was good in the past but it’s irrelevant today.

UGM: And I guess the same goes for bankers. Can you explain the big problem with our current money system?

JF: First off, the Federal Reserve System is not federal. It’s a private institution. The word “federal” gives people the illusion that it’s an agency of the government. The Federal Reserve has nothing to do with money; it has to do with the exploitation of people. When nations seek the competitive edge, it means they don’t give a damn about people. The United States would not outsource if they liked their people. They would keep them employed. They would never send soldiers to war. They would try to bridge the difference between nations. War kills a lot of people, civilians and soldiers. Think of all the ruined cities and museums…

UGM: The question was our current money …

JF: Yes, and war has always been big business! War is the selling of warships, of selling destruction. If we had a real, healthy nation, assuming we did, there would be no war. Because we would conscript all the war industries so no one makes a buck out of war. When you conscript the lives of people and put up their lives to defend the country, you should have no profiteering during war.

UGM: So the money system seems to be the root of many of our problems.

JF: That is right.

UGM: And yet so many people are dependent on the money system. They don’t know how to produce their own food.

JF: You are right. I would say they depend on it. They are trapped.

UGM: So isn’t monetary reform, rather than abolition, a more realistic next step?

JF: None of those systems would work. You don’t need money, or coupons, or energy certificates. What you need is the production of abundance and making it available. Patchwork will not do. You know … guaranteed insurance, medical insurance, none of this solves the fundamental problem. You cannot patch up a society like ours. It has to be complete change. If you don’t want war and poverty, or any suffering, then you need to redesign the culture based upon scientific scales of performance.

UGM: Can you elaborate on your plans to build an experimental city?

The Venus Project: skyscraper design

JF: The first city will be a planning center – where we plan and test the validity of the Venus Project’s proposals. We’ll see how well it operates. And if the city begins to work well, we will invite people from all over the world as guests to stay in that city. And if they like it, after two or three weeks, they will build three in Russia, three in China, build them all over the world and then merge them together. You can’t do it at once. You have to have a transitional period where you gradually phase out the monetary system, meaning just a few years, it won’t take that long. So people have to like the Venus Project, understand what it’s about and not have fear that it’s a machine takeover, or a group of scientists running things.

UGM: Doesn’t somebody have to run things?

JF: Scientists are just as stupid as other people. The proof is that when war comes they align themselves with their governments. They don’t say “I would like to hear all sides of the story.” Scientists, too, are patriotic. They are victims of culture just like everybody else.

UGM: So you are saying that the Venus Project must be precipitated by a fundamental change in our cultural values. What role do you see the Internet playing in this change? Are you at all concerned by governmental attempts to control and regulate the Internet?

JF: They will always seek that power. If governments get control of the Internet, you can say goodbye to freedom. They would like to take over and privatize everything if they can. They are very stupid and ignorant people. They are not well read. Talk to politicians; ask them how to solve problems like bridge erosion. Ask them how to solve the problems of automobile accidents. There are more people killed in accidents than wars. They have no idea how to solve problems. We live in a very primitive system that was designed thousands of years ago, which will not work whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, it does not matter. They are all inefficient; they don’t know how to operate the Earth.

UGM: [sighs]

JF: Look, I don’t like what I’m saying. I’m sorry, I wish people were rational beings and could move in the appropriate direction. But they’re not brought up that way. When I talk of governments I’m saying that all the world’s governments are basically corrupt. The professions such as lawyers and judges will be considered criminal in the future. Even the Supreme Court judges will be considered criminals. We train people in business. We train them in parasitic professions that really don’t serve the well-being of people. Advertising, business, investment banking: all of those do nothing for people, so those professions will be outgrown – not eliminated, outgrown in the future. Once people admired King Solomon: he had a thousand wives, today he would be arrested as a bigamist. So all the things that you think are right and normal are only normal to your culture, which is very primitive.

UGM: So where do we go from here?

JF: You know very shortly we are going on a global tour. We have been invited to most countries to present the Venus Project. Magazines all over the world today are running the Venus Project without adding their two cents to the article. The United States is the only country that has not run magazine publications, radio television shows, on the Venus Project. Maybe they have a fear that the Venus Project might cause the population to turn around. According to Peter Joseph of the Zeitgeist Movement, which is the participatory directive of the Venus Project, 50 million people are now aware of the Venus Project.

The more people know about the Venus Project, the smoother the transition. I’m sorry to say that the transition will be painful. It will not be smooth. The more people that know about it, the more that sustainability will become normal to the future. If you don’t talk to your friends about it, if you don’t present the Venus Project, nothing will happen. It does not depend on Peter Joseph and I. We have no power at all. It depends on what you do about it. So try to find out more about the Venus Project before you judge it.

UGM: Thanks for giving us the opportunity to publish and distribute this interview throughout the U.S., Canada and the U.K. – and, of course, on the Internet.

JF: Thank you for the privilege.

What is The Venus Project?

• The end of monetary exchange.
• Creation of sustainable city systems.
• Replacement human labor with machines.
• Utilization of science as a methodology.
• Cessation of national boundaries.

“The Venus Project presents a vision not of what the future will be, but of what it can be if we apply what we already know in order to achieve a sustainable new world civilization. It calls for a straightforward redesign of our culture in which the age-old problems of war, poverty, hunger, debt, and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but as totally unacceptable. Anything less will result in a continuation of the same catalog of problems found in today’s world.”

Find out more at: www.thevenusproject.com

See also: www.thezeitgeistmovement.com

WTF?

Isn’t this communism?

Communism falls short of ending war, poverty, hunger, or crime. It also has no real relationship to the Earth and its resources. The Venus Project is a scientific approach to social concern.

What will people do?

People can work boring jobs if they like. Nobody is going to force you not to work boring jobs. But maybe, just maybe, people will want to finally enjoy life without being subservient to a job.

Isn’t this idealistic and contrary to human nature?

Isn’t human nature just human behavior? If human behavior can’t be altered … wouldn’t we still be living in caves? People’s behavior is not pre-determined.

Will machines rule the world?

We can graciously thank Hollywood for this intelligent idea. Machines don’t have desires or motives. It is humans that control the machine and determine its use.

“The day that hunger is eradicated from the earth, there will be the greatest spiritual explosion the world has ever known. Humanity cannot imagine the joy that will burst into the world on the day of that great revolution.” – poet Federico García Lorca

Is your back aching from lugging endless sacks of soil, coco or other growth media in and out of your indoor garden? Then check out our latest blueprint, aptly named “The Water Room.” The idea is to grow monster tomato plants directly in a nutrient solution using a cutting-edge, modular Deep Water Culture (DWC) system called The Under Current™. But the liquid theme doesn’t end there. Water is also used to cool the garden using an ingenious chiller-based system created by Hydro Innovations.

Everest catches up with Dan and Stephen, the co-designers of this blueprint, to find out what logic exists beyond all this liquid!

GROWING IN WATER

Everest: Hi Dan. Let’s start by looking at the systems themselves. Am I right in thinking each 16 pot system requires both an air pump and a water pump?

Dan: That’s right, Everest. The inline water pump powers the negative solution displacement, which drives the Sub Current Culture (SCC) method. The linear, high efficiency air pumps provide the active aeration which supercharges the nutrient uptake.

Everest: So it runs 24/7 – even during the night cycle?

Dan: In properly aerated and balanced nutrient solution, plant roots can stay submerged 24/7, even through the dark cycle. Plants continue to metabolize nutrients and exchange gases in the dark, so keeping the solution moving aids in these processes. And remember, no timers for pumps means no worries!

Everest: How much solution is in each module?

Dan: We recommend an operating volume of approximately six gallons per module. That makes 100 gallons +/- in a 16XL (6 x 17 modules). A very small volume of solution is held in each joint (conduit) between the modules as well.

Everest: Is it the same for the bloom cycle?

Dan: We advise growers to drop the operating level to about four gallons per module during the fruit and flowering cycle. This helps ensure ample atmospheric oxygen uptake by the non submerged roots within the module. This oxygen exposure aids in proper fruit set and essential oil production as the plants mature. This technique can also mimic “drought conditions,” which triggers the plant to produce more oils as a means of reducing transpiration rates.

Everest: What about nutrient top-up?

Dan: The return module (epicenter) comes equipped with a high quality float valve built in for easy auto top-off. Each system also includes a bulkhead adapter for plumbing straight to your reservoir.

Everest: What about developing this set-up further with an auto-dosing system?

Dan: This system would work perfectly with an auto-doser like the Intellidose from AM. In this case you would plumb the Under Current (UC) float valve directly to a pure water source and let the Intellidose do the rest. Of course, you’ll need to set the doser to your specs, but then it’s on like Donkey Kong. The likelihood of a zero dump out run increases exponentially when a doser is used.

Everest: What EC should the top off res be balanced to?

Dan: When operated properly, top off should be balanced the same as the solution in the system. Traditionally hydro growers have been instructed to top off with half strength or pure water to avoid nutrient toxicity, but because the UC runs best with half strength nutes there is less of a chance of salt build-up. Ideally the solution in the system should stay balanced even as the plants use the nutrient and water. As a rule of thumb, if the nutrient EC/TDS rises as the solution is depleted you are likely running your levels too high to begin with. Conversely, if your EC/TDS drops it indicates you’ve started too low. Ultimately, as solution levels drop in the system the EC/TDS should stay stable; this is a good indicator that you’re dialed in. This EC/TDS stability will translate into improved plant health and greater pH stability to boot.

Everest: What if I experience drift in my nutes?

Dan: Correct it with your top off solutions. For example: a system started at 500ppm but has crept to 625ppm as the solution level has decreased. That’s a 25% increase, which can be easily offset by a top off res balanced at 25% below the initial 500ppm. This results in a top off res balanced at 375ppm to compensate. Ideally solution strength should stay constant as the plants consume it. This is a good indicator that minerals and water are being used at equal proportions.

Everest: What solution temperatures are optimal?

Dan: The system operates well anywhere from 65-80°F. We recommend maintaining a temperature between 68-72°F. This is a happy medium between optimum dissolved oxygen capacity and not chilling the nutrient solution so much that it slows the plant’s metabolism. If necessary, the water chiller can be easily adapted to the return pump.

Everest: Besides high water temps, what else can reduce dissolved oxygen levels in the system?

Dan: Elevated levels of dissolved solids can displace dissolved oxygen as they compete for real estate in the nutrient solution. So cool, half strength nutes are a perfect environment for high dissolved oxygen levels.

Everest: What dissolved oxygen levels should growers aim for in the UC?

Dan: We’ve tested on average +/- 9ppm of D.O. in solution. Water temps and quality will influence levels. As a point of reference, Dr. Elaine Ingham recommends no less than 6ppm to brew actively aerated teas.

Everest: You claim nutrient solution can last several weeks in the UC, but what about nutrient schedules that change by week?

Dan: Given that we encourage zero nutrient change outs, this does complicate things a bit. Best technique is to dilute any primary supplement into the top off reservoir.

Everest: How do you veg for the system?

Dan: Quad Tops are now available for the UC which allow up to four juvenile plants to be grown in each bucket. You can transplant our 5.5” heavy duty net pots right into your blooming UC rig. Other systems that veg well for the system include the GH Aeroflo2, AmHydro’s N.F.T., or transplant straight out of any aero cloner. Veg times in the UC are notoriously quick so start your fruiting cycles early to avoid overgrown madness. WE MEAN IT!

Everest: What grow media works best in the net pots?

Dan: Any non-wicking inert grow media tends to work best. Expanded clay pellets, growstones, silica stones, lava rock, sure to grow … to name a few. When using a wicking media like rockwool be sure to adjust the solution level to a point where it is not in contact with the media.

Everest: How much longer will nutrient stay viable vs. traditional ebb ‘n’ flow set-ups?

Dan: Time frames vary but typical change outs in E/F are about 7-10 days. In the UC, change outs should be necessary no sooner then 21-28 days. Many variables influence this time frame, so adjust your time frame to best meet your needs. Change nutes once they destabilize or become murky.

Everest: Is it a pain to clean in between crops?

Dan: Disassembly is not necessary. A bottle brush, green pad, biogreen and some elbow grease is all you need.

COOLING WITH WATER

Everest: Right, let’s talk about cooling this room with water. Many of our readers will be unfamiliar with using water chillers. Stephen, can you explain the basics of what a water chiller actually is and how it works?

Stephen: Sure thing. Firstly, water absorbs heat. And a water chiller cools water. So the basic idea is to use water to absorb heat from your indoor garden, and then a water chiller to get rid of it – similar to a regular air conditioner but with greater efficiency. A pump drives cool water through a manifold pipe and into a heat-exchanging device called an Icebox. The Icebox can be located on the exit duct of an air-cooled hood and provides increased surface area for the cool water to absorb heat from the hot air that passes over the grow lamps. The warm water then returns to the reservoir where it is re-chilled.

Everest: Why is water chilling more efficient than air conditioning?

Stephen: It’s down to the heat exchange capacity of water compared with air. The thermal conductivity of water is 23 times greater than that of air! A chiller will exchange the heat in a given space much more quickly than an air conditioner, allowing it to run less to get the same results. This is where you save electricity. With an air conditioner, air is passed over the evaporator instead of water. Since the air is less conductive, the evaporator can’t draw out as much heat as it can with water. The chiller evaporator is significantly smaller than an air evaporator because of the increased thermal load of water. In nearly all cases, the evaporator in a chiller will be significantly more efficient than that of an air conditioner, again allowing it to run less to get the same amount of cooling.

Everest: What type of chillers should be used?

Stephen: You need an industrial chiller – not a nutrient or aquarium chiller. Nutrient chillers might be more affordable, but they were not designed for battling against a constant source of heat! Only an industrial chiller is able to cope with constant loads and most can be placed outside if desired. Generally speaking, the larger your chiller, the more efficient it is.

Everest: How do you calculate the correct size of chiller for your room?

Stephen: Good question! Obviously this is really important to get right! First you need to decide whether you are going to use the water chiller simply for offsetting the heat generated by your grow lamps (i.e. keep your room at the same as the ambient temperature) or if you want to actively lower temperatures in your indoor garden further. It’s important to note that both heating and cooling are measured in BTUs (British Thermal Units). The first thing to do is measure how many BTUs are being generated from your equipment. In general, 1000 watt bulbs produce 4000 BTUs and 1000 watt digital ballasts produce around 2500s BTU of heat. (Exact figures vary.) That’s why ballasts should always be housed OUTSIDE of the garden.

Everest: So what sized chiller would this room need?

Stephen: 8 x 1000W lamps generate 32,000 BTUs. Each horse power of the chiller gives us around 12,000 BTUs. This room would need a 3HP chiller to cool the room entirely without A/C. Otherwise, a 3 ton A/C could be used in combination with a smaller (e.g. 2HP) chiller.

Everest: How is the cooling regulated / controlled?

Stephen: Cold water circulates around the system constantly. Regulation of the cooling effect is achieved through the fans that blow over the heat exchanger coils inside the Iceboxes. The fans are plugged into a thermostat controller. As it gets warmer, the fans speed up. As it gets colder, they slow down. The thermostat has a night and day setting.

Everest: Okay, now it’s time for the nitty gritty. I want to ask you about humidity. Surely cooling hot air rapidly through an Icebox creates condensation?

Stephen: A room full of transpiring plants is going to create humidity. Every indoor gardener has to deal with this and it’s easy to overcome with a dehumidier. As for condensation, the dew point changes with room temp and humidity levels. If you cool things down, water drops out of the air. Check out dew point calculators online. Typically, if you keep your humidity at below 50% then you will have no condensation.

Everest: How does the grower know how much the water needs to be chilled? I guess what I’m asking is, does the number of lights correlate to the water temp?

Stephen: Water temp is irrelevant to number of lights. You need to compare your water temperature with your room temperature. Assuming you have the right sized chiller, if the water temp is 10°F less than the room temp then you will maintain the room at that temperature. If you chill your water more than that it will create an A/C effect. 20°F difference will create active cooling in the room. It’s all about heat exchange and surface area, Everest, not just about how cold your water is. If you have three lights daisy-chained to just one Icebox, you can get the same results from three Iceboxes but you have to get your water a whole lot cooler. When you take away heat exchangers, you take away efficiency. But also, you need to take into account the volume of the room.

Everest: So you’re saying that a good rule of thumb is: the more Iceboxes (or heat exchange surface area), the better.

Stephen: You got it. The best efficiency is achieved when your water temperature is above the dew point and as close to your room temperature as possible.

Everest: Ok guys – that’ll do I think. I like the look of this room. Thanks for sharing!

What do you think of The Water Room? Have you used a similar set-up? Did Everest miss any questions? Post a comment below!

If you haven’t heard of the movies

We tracked down Peter Joseph, writer and producer of Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist Addendum, and asked him what all the fuss wasn’t about…

Everest: Given the amount of views Zeitgeist has received on Google Video and YouTube, were you at all surprised by the lack of coverage in the mainstream media?

Peter: No. Although we did get a New York Times review for ZDAY 2009 in New York City. I really don’t care about the mainstream media. In fact, it’s good we are in the shadows still as it’s easier to function. However, the ‘movement’ that is happening is going to explode in the near future to an extent that will take a lot of people by surprise. This has little to do with our actions, but rather the degradation of the current system as a whole. As things get worse, more people will wake up and look not only for answers, but a new direction. Our direction is the next logical progression. I feel and I suspect millions of other humans are going to see this soon as well.

Everest: You mention the ‘movement’ but there’s still a huge amount of online debate with many different opinions over the central message of Zeitgeist. The first part of the film states that religion is nothing more than an astrological allegory used for controlling the masses. The second claims that 9/11 was an inside job: a fabricated event designed to manipulate the American public into supporting the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. The third part deals with money and how it is created and controlled by a private bank called the Federal Reserve. Can you explain why you chose to focus on these three areas and what, if any, the relationship is between them?

Peter: First of all, part one of Zeitgeist does not simply conclude that religion is nothing more than an astrological allegory. It’s more about what happens when a certain number of people engage in a certain value / belief system. My aim was to point out that the establishment power (governments) will always seek to hijack those issues in order to maintain control. In effect, you really can’t have a society without a general collective awareness. So, the establishment religions were always in transformation and always secretly guided to support the agenda for the elite classes who run the world. It is that simple. Religion is very relevant historically as to the nature of human thought and development, but 90% of religiously minded people today have been indoctrinated in a system of belief that is really there to preserve the status quo. For instance, in the old Capitalist newsreels they would say that the free market was a ‘Christian ideal’ while Communism was a cold ’spiritless atheistic’ ideal. They did this to convince the largely Christian population of the West to accept their system of social control vs. a new one that might alter the power balance.

As far as claiming that 9/11 was an inside job … yes, that is essentially correct.

Every major war for profit needs an excuse to get the public on board. 9/11 was just a CIA black op. It was also an infiltration to counter the growing anti-establishment sentiment growing around the world which threatens those in control. ‘Terrorism’ is a blanket term designed to subdue and intimidate those interested in social change. It is a preservation mechanism for the establishment, an attempt to contrive legal grounds to quash activism and rebellion.

I would summarize the three parts of Zeitgeist as all being related to social myth. Religion, of course, is naturally mythological, but other historical notions, such as money and catalytic events like 9/11, often do not get the attention they require on this level. 9/11, as per the government’s story, is essentially a myth and serves the same function – to influence people’s perspectives and worldviews. 9/11 was presented as a sacred event that “we will never forget” which essentially reinforces the idea of ‘good and evil’ and the notion of ‘freedom’ in ‘America’ and the like. This myth led to two wars for profit and caused more division for society. Division = control.

Part three dealt with the monetary system which is, perhaps, the most profound myth of them all! Money is a ‘nothing thing’ but people today are so conditioned that they can’t envision any other kind of life without it, mainly because they have never been shown any positive alternative. The only reason the monetary system works is because people continue to have faith in it.

Everest: Do you receive more ‘love-mail’ than ‘hate-mail’?

Peter: Yes: 98:2

Everest: I read a quote of yours on the Internet this morning: “It is my hope that people will not take what is said in the film as the truth.” Did you really say that?

Peter: Kind of … some time ago I made a poetic statement on my website referring to the nature of understanding. I stated something like what you’ve just said. This was, of course, taken out of context as though I was telling people not to believe the research in the film. The rest of the statement was something like “find out for yourselves for knowledge is not told, it is realized.” You can’t just tell people things, they have to figure it out for themselves. I hope that is clear. Debunkers of Zeitgeist have used that statement to berate the presentation as though it was a ‘disclaimer.’

Everest: What concerns, if any, do you have regarding the huge following Zeitgeist appears to have developed since its release?

Peter: I have no concerns about the supporters. The movement is not going to stop and the change we are advocating isn’t a matter of opinion. The evolution is going to happen one way or another … whether it takes a decade or a millennium. The only concern I have is the chaos that is likely to ensue in between, as we are on a path toward a kind of imbalance and disequilibrium that has never before been seen in history.

“We were saying how very important it is to bring about in the human mind the radical revolution. The crisis is a crisis in consciousness; a crisis that cannot anymore accept the old norms, the old patterns, the ancient traditions. And, considering what the world is now with all the misery, conflict, destructive brutality, aggression and so on, man is still as he was, is still brutal, violent, aggressive, acquisitive, competitive and he has built a society along these lines.”
– J. Krishnamurti

Everest: Will it be any different from the chaos that is our history? With all the violence and war and the rise and fall of one empire after another, are we not heading inexorably towards a one-world-government? Is it an avoidable step in our struggle to birth ourselves as an intelligent species?

Peter: A world organization, in and of itself, is actually a positive thing, as long as the corporate / financial elements are removed. The highest optimization of the planet’s resources is a system worldwide for mining / production / distribution. It is this eventuality that will lead to an abundance for all the world’s people. We need a ’systems’ approach to society as a whole using science, technology and intelligent resource management. That’s it. We don’t need ‘politics’ or ‘government’ or 99% of the legislation out there. Our system today is a failed one. It is like a house that was poorly built on the side of a cliff. Since it is weak, it needs stilts and supporting structures to put pressure on each side to keep the house standing. That house is the ‘monetary / corporate system’ and the supports are ‘laws.’ A true system needs no laws. Laws are patches to try and keep a failing system in place. That is why every year, across the world, thousands of new laws are introduced to control the behavior of the people. It doesn’t work and it won’t work. The daily destruction of the environment, the wars, the poverty, the labor exploitation and death every second from starvation is the result. It is time to change.

‘One World Government,’ when I use the term, is a system of centralized control based on money and what I would call ‘pocket capitalism.’ The free-market never existed as a larger system … it was actually a scam put upon the lower class, while the upper classes maintained control. This is why banks are being ‘bailed out.’ The system is a mathematical fraud so they have to bailout those that fall victim. Unfortunately, these never help the people … only the larger order corporate constituents. A corporate fascist one world state is avoidable if the public understands what the real direction is. Sadly, most people have no understanding of what is actually important or relevant to social functionality and peaceful coexistence. They don’t know the state of technology … they are constantly absorbing nonsensical biases from a culture which continues to reinforce aberrancies that do not help progress. We have a tremendous hurdle of ‘consciousness’ that we need to overcome. Patriotism, religion, capitalistic self-interest are just a few of the despotic world views that continue to paralyze human potential and keep the blinders on the public. Check out the website: www.thezeitgeistmovement.com.

Everest: Joining a website or an online forum to discuss a movie on YouTube is one thing. Holding or sharing an intellectual belief or a vague hope in change may be another. But, beyond the movie, what is the real nature of this transformation you anticipate in society?

Peter: We need psychological, sociological and environmental change. These have to occur more or less in tandem. The human value system needs to be rescued from the sea of the selfish, narrow sighted materialism which it is drowning in, and thus cultured to see the world as a singular entity. The basic realization is that we can accomplish a zillion times more productive things if we learn to ‘cooperate,’ rather than ‘compete.’ Likewise, the environment needs to support our flourishing, not our restriction. We live in an abundant world yet most of us have been conditioned by the system to think everything is scarce. Even our farce president Obama talks about cutting funding from government programs … this is just moronic … for there is no such thing as money! There are only resources and the fact that we live in a world governed by a game that artificially CREATES scarcity and deprivation is just pathetic and sad. It doesn’t have to be like this.

Everest: Do you suspect that the global recession or ‘credit crisis’ was deliberately engineered to pave the way for a single global currency?

Peter: No, but it is being used as such, among other things. The trick now is for the central banks to figure out how to avoid this issue from happening again, so they want to devise a new system that removes transparency. The more people understand the inherent fraud of the monetary system, the bigger the problem for the banks. If they can blanket the whole thing with a single currency and a worldwide organization, then the public will have no basis to compare and relate.

Everest: What about food and water? Surely these are two of the most fundamental resources for any society. How would resources like these be managed in a society without money? Or are you saying that the ’system’ would not require management? How will scarcity / hoarding be avoided in an ever-growing population?

Peter: Food and water are unbelievably easy to create and maintain. There is no sound reason for any human to have to pay for these things, for automation is already doing 90% of the labor. We simply need to finish the other 10%. There is no reason to hoard anything that is free to all. As far as scarcity, it can be overcome through environmental monitoring and autonomous cybernated systems. The management would be very simple. One person behind a computer could monitor the production for an entire city once the system is set up. For more on this, see the 83-page Orientation guide at www.thezeitgeistmovement.com. The sad thing is, 99% of the population has no idea as to the true state of technology, so they find it very hard to think that machines can replicate themselves. Machines can ‘heal,’ self-correct and maintain an ‘awareness’ of their environment. In time, the machines will be constructed through nanotechnology from the atom up. This also goes for most production items, including food. We face a new world of incredible abundance and we need to realize this and adapt a social system to fit the new level. For this to occur, our present monetary system must be overcome. The longer we have it, the more paralyzed we become.

Everest: Do you grow any of your own food?

Peter: No, I live in New York City.

Everest: Remember you’re talking to Urban Garden here. Living in NYC is all the more reason to grow your own food! Don’t you think that home and community-based food production has a role to play in any such transition, no matter where you happen to live?

Peter: In time, considering how bad things are getting with corporate greed and environmental destruction, it could have a huge role.

Everest: Finally, any plans for a third film?

Peter: Yes. But I would prefer not to give too many details at this time, as it is still in development, but it will likely focus on human behavior, technology and rationality, generally speaking.

Don’t know what we’re talking about?
Zeitgeist
Zeitgeist Addendum

Everest casts his critical eye over blueprints of real indoor gardens and examines pros and cons with their designers.  Under the spotlight this time is Claude. He’s built what he calls an “almost sealed” room to produce heirloom tomatoes all year round. Will his set-up produce juicy fruits of joy or paltry piles of passatta?

THE SPECS

Environment

Temperature:

Day:  During flowering (up to the last two weeks) 83-85 °F (28-29°C)
Controlled by A/C – this switches on at 85 and switches off at 83.

Night: 72-74 °F (22-23°C)
Controlled by heaters and thermostats.

In the last week Claude lowers daytime temperatures to 70°F (21°C)  nighttime temps to 65°F (18°C) to simulate the fall.  This encourages ripening and enhanced flavors and colors.

Relative humidity is maintained at between 40-50%.

Photoperiod:  12 hours

Water source: rain water  (0 – 10 ppm) starting pH 6.6

Room Specs and Equipment

Dimensions: 28’ x 11’ ceiling height:  8’

Hardware:

• 10 x 1000W lamps with parabolic reflectors – the lights are suspended from hooks on the ceiling on pullies.
• 10 x 1000W E-ballasts with dimmer facility (housed outside of the room – with female sockets in the room.)
• CO2 generator – 8 burner.
• CO2 controller (PPM monitor.)
• 65 Pint dehumidifier  (you always need a dehumidifier in a sealed room – especially at night!)
• 5 ton (3 part) AC unit (compressor and fan are separate.)
• 10” carbon scrubber  (just circulates and purifies the air.)
• 10” inline fan with ducting.
• “Dump” fan – only comes on at night – 8” inline fan with 10” filter (with reducer.)
• 2 x 1500 watt heaters to keep nighttime temps up in winter.
• 75 feet of 10” ducting that runs around the whole room, dispersing the cool A/C air.  The holes are smaller nearer the AC unit, and larger towards the end for more even flow.  The holes near are 1” x 3” gradually getting larger until they get to about 1.5” x 5.5” – the holes are spaced about 8” apart and the ducting is right at the top of the room.  The holes are in the upper hemisphere of the ducting.
• 11 x 16” Oscillating fans moving the air between the tops of the plants and the lights.  (Not directed at the plants!)
• 6 x beds ( 5’ x 8’) made from 2 x 10’s with 5 1/8 ply bottoms on heavy duty coasters for portability.
• Growth media – 50:50 Promix BX (soilless mix) to perlite.
• 4” passive intake with damper.

Nutrient Solution Storage Room (aka “Res Room”)

This is completely dark and cool.
2 x 55 gallon barrels
One 8 stone air pump (4 per barrel.)
2 x 300W aqua heater (one for each barrel)
One float valve.

Nutrients & Additives

Base Nutrients: GH 3-Part
Floralicious Bloom, Liquid Kool Bloom, Dry Kool Bloom, Diamond Nectar, Pro Silica, Grotek Cal Mag.
Cal / Mag

THE INTERVIEW

Everest:  Hi Claude.  So we’re going to focus on the room you use for flowering and fruiting your plants. I see you’re using A/C to control temperatures and supplementary CO2 … and most people would presume you were trying to create a sealed growing environment, and yet you call your room “almost sealed” – what do you mean by that?  Did you purposefully design your indoor garden with air leaks or something?

Claude:  No, I just dump all the air in the flowering chamber every night when the lights go out using an extractor with a spring-loaded damper (to keep the room sealed when it’s not in use.)   All the air gets extracted into an adjacent room which I use for plants in vegetative growth.

Everest:  So if you’re so keen to get this air out of your flowering chamber, why do you “dump” it into your veg room?

Claude:  Because for six hours of the flower room’s dark period, the veg room has its lights on and so the plants in there can utilize this excess CO2.

Everest:  Ok, I get you.  What lamps are you using in your flowering room?

Claude:  When I first introduce plants into my flowering room I continue to use metal halide lamps as I have found that during vegetative and transition stages the metal halide produces much healthier looking plants.  But, once the plants start to focus their energy on flowering and fruit production the metal halide definitely starts to fall behind and it’s time to switch to High Pressure Sodium.

Everest:  Interesting.  I see you have your lamps arrayed in two rows of five.  Could you talk us through how you approached this room’s lighting requirements?  You say it’s 28’ x 11’ and lit with 10 x 1000W HID lamps.  Now, I’m sure you know the rule of thumb for growing light-loving annuals indoors:  40 Watts per square foot. 10,000 watts divided by 308 square feet gives you only 32.46 Watts per square foot.

Claude:  Yeah but not all of those 308 square feet are taken up by plants.  Some floor space is dedicated to auxiliary equipment like the CO2 generator, heaters and dehumidifer etc.  So I reckon I’m hitting your benchmark there.  The lamps are hung vertically within parabolic reflectors.  I find these give a broad and even dispersal of the light with fewer hotspots, even though they are stationary.  I have increased my yields by lessening the intensity and spreading the light over a larger area – even though some inefficiencies are brought into the equation by the fact that the light really has to be reflected.

Everest: And what are you growing your tomatoes in, exactly?

Claude:  I grow my toms in six beds filled with a soilless mix.  Generally I plant 48 plants per bed.  I use stakes and netting to provide extra plant support and I’m fanatical about pinching out and pruning too.  There is a 6” gap between the wall and between the two beds in the middle. The beds are on coasters so I can move them, allowing me to create an 18” walkway anywhere I like.

Everest:  Beds on coasters!  What was the thinking behind that?

Claude:  Well, it gave me the best compromise between filling my room with plants while maintaining a sensible space in which to work with them.

Everest:  What about drainage?

Claude:  (Looks sheepish)  Errrrm ….. there is no drainage.

Everest:  Whaaaaat!!?  No holes at the bottom of those beds?

Claude:  No.

Everest:  Who thought that was a good idea?

Claude:  I know, I know.  It’s not ideal.  I just try to water the bed as a whole.  One 55 gallon barrel does three beds.  I always use the same amount of water to moisten the soil, what changes as the plants mature is the frequency with which I water.  Maybe this isn’t the textbook method but it works really well for me.  At the beginning it may be as little as one watering every five days, but that soon works up to once every three days after ten to fourteen days.   It tends to stay at that for the rest of the cycle.

Everest:  I have to say that sounds a bit rough and ready.  How do you know what’s enough?  It’s not like you can do a weight test like you can when you pick up an individual pot – and you can’t see any run off.  Aren’t you worried about the lowermost roots getting all wet and anaerobic (without oxygen.)

Claude:  Well, it hasn’t seemed to be a problem so far.

Everest:  Well, I think that’s a major flaw in your set-up, Claude.  You’ve gone to town with all this lighting, AC, dehumidification, CO2, and you forget some simple drainage holes?  You absolutely must drill some in!  You could catch the run-off using trays under the beds, couldn’t you?  I’d be very surprised if you didn’t suffer from salt build-up in your media in the mid to late fruiting stage.

Claude:  You have a point there, Everest.  Salt build-up has been a bit of a problem and I end up having to flush through with water every so often.

Everest:  But how can you flush through if you don’t have drainage holes?

Claude:  Ok, point taken … I’ll sort some out.

Everest:  Right, let’s move on to your environment.  You seem to have this pretty well dialed in.  Your A/C unit keep things nice and cool, dehumidifies the air (with help from a separate dehumidifier unit) and the water collected by the A/C and dehumidifier drains into a tank, with a sump pump returning it to the reservoir to be re-used.

Claude:  That’s right.  Some growers say that the copper pipes in the A/C unit can contaminate the water but I beg to differ.  The PPM pen doesn’t lie!

Everest:  So walk me through your CO2 enrichment.  Aren’t you worried that you’re killing the planet with extra CO2?

Claude:  Not if my plants take it up, no.  I run a CO2 Generator when the lights are on, bringing the CO2 levels up to 1500 PPM.

Everest: 1500 PPM is too high.  I wouldn’t go above 1200.  Some old-timers I know won’t go above 1000 PPM.  They claim anything above that has an adverse effect on taste.

Claude:  Yeah, I’ve heard that too.  For the last two weeks of flowering I drop it down to 700 – again, I’ve heard a lot of different opinions on this – too much CO2 can slow the ripening of the fruit and produce an excess of green matter, rather than juicy toms.  At night, I run a dump fan – basically a small extractor fan – it dumps the excess CO2 (which the plants don’t need at night) into the veg room for the vegetative plants to exploit.

Everest:  How much do you run your dehumifier?

Claude:  Oh, that baby runs 24/7!  But it’s most important at night because in the daytime the AC does a lot of the dehumidifying – when it cools it dehumidifies.  At night, the temperature in my indoor garden drops which results in a sharp rise in humidity (air cannot hold as much water when it is cooler.) – The last thing I want is all that moisture falling out of the air onto my plants when they are in the final weeks of flower – I might as well just sprinkle mold spores onto my plants!

Everest:  Ok, let’s move on to irrigation.  You’ve got a little under 300 plants in your flowering chamber.  When they’re full of ripening tomatoes they must drink a heck of a lot.  How do you feed them?

Claude: I hand water.

Everest:  (Flabbergasted)  You whaaaat!!!!?  You’re kiddin’ me.

Claude:  Yeah yeah! I know what you’re thinking – I’m crazy but hey, it’s my passion.  And there’s method in my madness.  I live in a place where there are lots of power outages so automated watering isn’t so reliable or feasible.  It’s not as bad as it sounds.  I have two 55 gallon rain water barrels – each barrel has a float valve to automatically fill them from my outdoor cistern.  Each barrel has a 300W aqua heater keeping the water at exactly 68°F (20°C).  I have four air-stones in each barrel to keep my nutrient solution really well oxygenated.  There’s a pump attached to a hose with a water-lance.  When the beds are initially filled with soilless mix I water them in well with a ¼ strength nutrient solution and then leave the beds for an hour for the water to equalize in the media.  Then I transplant the plants into the beds and given a final small watering to welcome them in. One barrel does three beds.  I always use the same amount of water to moisten the soil, what changes as the plants mature is the frequency with which I water.  Maybe this isn’t the textbook method but it works really well for me.

Everest: Aren’t vertically hung lamps in parabolic reflectors a somewhat inefficient way to deliver light to your plants seeing as it’s virtually all reflected light that’s hitting them?

Claude:  Yeah – this is definitely a possibility / topic of hot debate, but so far I’ve found that the overall results in this set-up using beds and a large light footprint seems to be a good way to dissipate the intensity of 1000W lamps.

Everest:  So why do you use a small extractor at night (the “dump” as you call it.)

Claude: The purpose of it is to vent the excess CO2 and humidity at night.  I’ve found that leaving 1500 parts per million of CO2 at night seems to choke my plants out and cause yellowing.  It’s a good time to freshen up the air – plus, it’s a good idea to bring in oxygen as the plants are using more than they can produce at night.

Everest:  What is the pH of your nutrient solution?

Claude:  I adjust the pH to 6.2 in veg and 6.0 in flowering.  I believe that this is the correct pH for soilless media but when using mineral-based fertilizers it’s a bit of a grey area.

Everest:  Why do you use a lower pH slightly in flowering.

Claude:  Because P (Phosphorus) and K (Potassium) are more available at a slightly lower pH.

Everest:  True, the availability of P and K when using artificial growth media is higher at around 5.8, I even know some growers who drop it as low as 5.5.  Different strains of different plants have different needs but the standard range for fruiting veg is 5.9 to 6.5.

My best advice is to allow your pH to float within a range, say 5.8 to 6.5, at all stages of growth and to check the pH of your run-off too – then you’ll get a more accurate idea of the pH in and around the root zone.

Get those holes drilled ASAP and aim for 10 – 20% run off – whether you are watering or feeding, you are always trying to flush the media through.  In your final flush, run some water through a plant in a raised bed or container. Put a PPM pen in the runoff. You are shooting for zero PPM.

Claude:  Thanks Everest.

So what’s the big deal about ‘organic’ and minerals for growing plants?

There is a conflict between definitions and scientific facts. The problem is that “organic” is not defined by ecologists or scientists – it is defined by bureaucrats, by government functionaries who often don’t have a clue what they are talking about from a purely scientific point of view and are often making decisions for special interest groups including organizations that put up a lot of money to twist the rules in their favor. ‘Organic’ has become big business.

The rules that define ‘organic’ vary from place to place. European rules that define ‘organic’ are significantly different from the rules in the United States. Canada has its own rules and many states in the US have different rules. Within the United States there is the NOP (National Organic Program) from the US department of Agriculture, there is OMRI (Organic Materials Review Institute), there is CCOF (California Certified Organic Farmers) to name a few… and there are many more regulatory groups. Their rules are not the same and their definitions are not scientific. They tend to be well meaning, non-scientific, closed minded groups that ‘know better’ and will apply their views to all who wish to use the term to make money.

On the other hand, when “organic” is looked at scientifically it’s really about protecting the environment and making more wholesome products – that’s what it should mean. But the bureaucrats and special interest groups have set different definitions. Fortunes are being made by companies selling weak and often ineffective products, and sometimes even harmful products, to a largely uneducated marketplace.

As a scientist I find value in both mineral and organic ingredients – and I am really looking at products from the point of view of what works better; what grows plants better, what gives customers higher quality and larger yields and what reduces the strain on the planet. That may or may not be ‘organic.’

Fundamental to the US ‘organic’ regulations is that purified ingredients cannot be used to make fertilizers; all ingredients need to be in their natural form … with some exceptions passed for special interests. This has led to some ‘organic’ ingredients having high levels of ‘heavy metals’ and sometimes pathogenic organisms such as E. coli and salmonella bacteria (this happens with mined ingredients and poorly composted materials that contain manures or other dead animal ingredients). If the poisons are removed, the product is no longer ‘organic.’ I consider this completely absurd.

One positive note is that fertilizer regulations in many places now require manufacturers to have their products tested for ‘heavy metals.’ This is a case where the rules provide the consumer some measure of protection from dangerous produce. I find that many state regulations for fertilizers are in fact very good rules offering the consumer assurance of product quality and consistency. Many of the state regulators I have worked with for years consider the ‘organic’ rules absurd. Nonetheless, rules are rules and regulators must apply the rules whether they like them or not, that’s their job. For more info see: www.aapfco.org.

I’m in my 32nd year in this business and I take the word “organic” very seriously. I’ve worked very hard in the field of modern plant growing technologies, always from a scientific point of view. If ‘organic’ was always based on good science and consistently resulted in better and healthier produce, faster growth rates and higher yields, as well as less impact on soil and water, I would be much happier about the definitions.

Can you describe enabling vs. triggering and the theory behind nutrient manipulation?

A good nutrient formula needs to stimulate all aspects of the plant’s growth and health – roots, stems, and leaves to start – the structural period of growth. And this means high nitrogen, appropriate phosphate, pretty high potassium, appropriate magnesium, calcium, and sulfate – and then of course the full spectrum of micronutrients. The plants go through their life cycle and they are triggered to change to the reproductive mode, typically by a change in day length – this is called ‘photoperiodism.’ An indoor gardener classically alters the light cycle from 18 to 12 hours of light per day. Within a week or so the plants start to express flowering. As we see the first evidence of flowering, we change the nutrient blend into something very different so the plants are better able to produce flowers. As the plants continue to grow we can further modify the nutrient blend, making it somewhat threatening to the plants. The plants respond by converting all their growing energy to produce flowers, to prepare for the next generation. Annual crops have a limited lifetime, of course – and they have the goal of growing up, becoming strong, and then generating seed for the next generation. It’s all about reproduction for the next generation. So you could say that plants are all about sex and they are all about their children. The essence of life is defined by a limited lifetime and preparation for the next generation.

When plants are growing in a perfect happy life, when they are young and in vegetative mode, they have no particular reason to reproduce. They’re secure and growing vigorously, becoming bigger and stronger. But when the trigger comes of day-length shortening, the plants are being told by nature that the winter is coming and the end of their life is at hand. And so, at this point the plants have to completely change priorities into reproductive growth. By switching the nutrients to something that enhances flower growth and reducing nitrogen significantly – the plants are now threatened by the nutrient regimen. They are not on a starvation diet, but a modified diet that stimulates and enables reproductive growth – kind of like a goose being fed for pate. There’s a different set of priorities going on from the grower’s point of view and the crop is responding. So now the job of the nutrient is to enable the plants to produce these wonderful flowers. So we’re really now about helping that crop to flower – tremendously, because flowers are the precursors to fruit and seed. We provide the elements needed for abundant flowering and we reduce the nitrogen that was needed for early structural growth while enhancing ingredients that enable flowering.

Remember, you cannot compel a plant to enter the reproductive phase with nutrients alone. Nutrients are enablers – not triggers. Day length change is a trigger. It’s telling the plant that winter is approaching, as the days get shorter. But when you apply a trigger you also need to apply an enabler so that the plant is able to make that transition. If we were growing in a deficient environment the plant would not be able to reproduce very well, so we provide what is needed for flower production and reduce the nitrogen that is fundamental to vegetative growth.

What is the difference between vitamins and nutrients?

Plant fertilizers are a very clearly defined group of minerals. The list is exact and they are all pure elements, or basic compounds made up of elements. Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium are the primary nutrients. Calcium, magnesium and sulfate are secondary nutrients. Iron, manganese, zinc, copper, boron and molybdenum are the micro nutrients. Silicon has been added to the list of beneficial elements, to improve plant structure. Recent studies indicate that a little nickel and a little cobalt are also helpful (primarily for beneficial organisms that live in the root environment). We know from hydroponic studies that we can grow a healthy plant from seed to harvest on only those elements if they are provided in appropriate ratios and concentrations.

Vitamins and nutrient supplements are generally composed of complex organic molecules that are usually derived from plant and animal by-products, or synthesized from various compounds. In the case of animal-based ingredients, organic growers use blood meal, bone meal, feather meal, fish meals, and manures, literally the by-products of animals. These ingredients provide fundamental NPK as well as complex organic molecules which are broken down in the soil by microorganisms. Or plant tissue and microbial derivatives, such as compost, that also contain some NPK plus myriad organic molecules. It’s an extremely complex field.

A plant’s need for a vitamin or its production of a vitamin or other complex organic molecule are often derivatives of environmental phenomena. If a plant is threatened it will convert its chemistries internally, making whatever that plant is inclined to make. Perhaps a pheromone to attract beneficial insects, or another to drive harmful insects away. Notice the difference between essential compounds, which are the elemental minerals in fertilizers, and beneficial compounds, which include many of the ‘organics’ that people are showing interest in today. You can use some of these organic products to improve a crop’s quality, growth rate, yield, vigor and health but the plant can grow without them as a general rule. Take away any one of the mineral compounds required for plant growth and that plant cannot live – it cannot fulfill its genetic destiny.

Can plants absorb vitamins through their root system?

We didn’t used to think so. And for many years I would speak the old party line of “big organic molecules can’t fit through plant roots – just the mineral elements.”  I believe I was mistaken about that and I think that we are now learning that larger and more complex molecules can travel in and out of the plant whether through root tissue or foliar – there are various modes, usually with symbiotic microorganisms acting as doorkeepers to help the molecules into or out of the plant tissue.

Microbes living in the root zone help the plant absorb many of these natural compounds. Plants have a synergistic relationship with many of the organisms living in and on the roots. Ecto (living on the surface of roots) and Endo (living within the roots) Mychorrizae are good examples of beneficial fungi that live symbiotically with plants. By populating the root zone with beneficials, the bad organisms become challenged by the beneficials. Without the beneficials the roots have no protection. We have found with studies at the University of California that in many cases the complex organic compounds become most effective when the crop is under extreme stress: for example, high temperatures, inadequate moisture, or a disease are generally high stress situations. I’ve seen treated plants recover from moisture stress (not watered for a long time) next to untreated plants that never come back; this is an osmotic pressure imbalance model where plant tissue becomes dehydrated. A lot of crops are lost due to inadequate irrigation.

Another group of compounds that help plants absorb nutrients include the Humic and Fulvic acids. These organic acids often come from Leonardite, sort of an ancient or fossil form of compost. Many regulations do not recognize ‘Fulvic acid’ since there is not a standardized test to prove the presence or concentration of Fulvic acid. Technically speaking, Fulvic acid is a low molecular weight Humic acid. Fulvic acid works especially well with hydroponics. Humic acid is slower at enhancing nutrient absorption, and much less expensive. It is favored for soil cultivation though Fulvic is superior for both soil and hydroponics. Our product called Diamond Nectar is Fulvic acid derived from Leonardite, although we can’t make label claims due to regulations.

What other compounds are used by growers?

A group of compounds called Plant Growth Regulators (PGRs) have been developed to enhance certain characteristics in growing plants. For example, rooting stimulators are used to make cuttings grow roots and become copies or clones of the original donor, or mother plant. In this case the PGR is usually IBA (indole butyric acid) or NAA (naphthaleneacetic acid), or a combination. Plant tissue naturally contains IAA (indole acetic acid), a naturally occurring rooting hormone, and as a result cuttings will root without the added PGR if given adequate moisture and oxygen. The synthetic IBA is preferred because it is stable in a bottle and quite effective; IAA rapidly breaks down and does not store well.

There are many PGRs that are used by professional growers to enhance rooting, ripening, stem elongation or shortening, and numerous other unique characteristics. The entire family of PGR compounds is highly regulated, some are natural and safe, and some are synthetic and quite dangerous. Generally they are mutagens that cause radical changes in plant morphology. Labels will warn users to use skin and respiratory protection. They are generally regulated, not as fertilizers, but as pesticides. It is a bit strange that they all fall under the rules of pesticides even though they do not function as pesticides, another case of the rules being off track. The bottom line is that PGRs are often approved for ornamental plants but not for consumables. In some cases special licensing is required to purchase and use PGRs, as is the case with many pesticides and fungicides. This is heavy chemistry and not for amateurs. This is the antithesis of ‘organic’ cultivation even though most of the compounds fall under the scientific definition of ‘organic chemistry.’

I am aware of cases where manufacturers have added PGRs to fertilizers or supplements without proper registration or even a mention on the label. This is an area of moral responsibility and too many people are drawn by a desire for profit at the expense of the consumer’s safety. It is especially troubling for those who consume the produce grown with these powerful chemicals.

I will close by saying that, though I have issues with regulatory definitions and the way the rules are written and applied, the rules exist to protect the consumer and the environment. Growers should educate themselves and apply commonsense based on real knowledge when they grow produce for consumption. We all have a responsibility to use technology in a proper way, to grow better produce and to protect the environment. Just being an ‘organic’ grower is not enough. We are learning new things all the time and with the accumulation of knowledge and experience we can be productive and profitable while also being ethical.

One thing’s for sure: a big decision that divides growers is their choice of base nutrients – the type, as well as the brand. We often receive emails from growers asking us if two-part nutrients are better than one-parts, for instance, or if a three-part nutrient is the gold standard. So we decided to hook up with Simon Spinks and Callie Fixter, biological scientists from British nutrient company VitaLink, to try and discover some homegrown truths and perhaps dispel some myths along the way …

Everest – Hi Callie, Simon – thanks for dropping into Urban Garden HQ! Now, I know you guys are probably keen to wax lyrical about how marvelous your nutrients are, but can we start by addressing a certain ‘prejudice’ that some growers have towards one-part nutrients? Can you, as people who know their nutes, tell me straight: are one-part nutrients designed for numpties?

Callie – (laughs) Numpties!?

Everest – Novice growers.

Callie – Oh no. Not at all.

Everest – Really?

Callie – No, but I can’t say I haven’t heard it before. And not just from growers either. A lot of retailers also believe this. In fact, we’ve heard of several retailers advising their customers that a two-part nutrient is preferable to a one-part. Then I guess that customer passes this advice on to their friend and so forth, leading to the reputation that a one-part nutrient does not deliver the goods like a two-part.

Everest – So what do you say to growers who claim that one-part nutrients are “weaker” in some way?

Callie – Well … admittedly there were some one-part nutrients available in the 1990s that didn’t deliver very good results – perhaps that’s why the two-parts took off like they did. It used to be very difficult to stop individual nutrients and elements within a one-part nutrient from reacting with each other in the bottle. This reaction is detrimental to plant growth because it effectively causes nutrient lock-out, meaning plants don’t get all of the nutrients and elements they need. Two-part nutrients separate the calcium from the phosphates and sulphates by putting them in different containers (i.e. A+B). This avoids the chemical reaction and prevents a precipitate or solid from forming at the bottom of the bottle.

A Menu for Healthy Plant Growth

A Good Nutrient Provides:

• All of the nutrients and elements your plants require.
• Nutrients and elements in the right amounts.
• Nutrients that your plants can readily absorb.

Simon – A lot. Technology and nutrient manufacturing has moved on considerably. Today, one-part nutrients are made very differently than two and three-part nutrients. As a result, VitaLink, along with a number of other respectable nutrient manufacturers, offers, growers a one-part nutrient that takes the fuss out of mixing, whilst still offering great plant results.

Everest – Ok, but what exactly is different?

Simon – Well, that depends on who you talk to, Everest. There are a number of ways one-part nutrients can be made. One method that we use is called ‘Suspension Technology.’ A ‘suspension’ usually refers to a solid within a liquid. In the case of the VitaLink one-part nutrients ‘Easy’ and ‘Coir,’ the ‘suspension’ is a mixture of various minerals and a very important biological ingredient. The biological ingredient acts like a cage, absorbing a large proportion of the calcium to prevent it from reacting with the other nutrients. As well as preventing these nutrients from reacting with each other, this biological ingredient also helps your plants to absorb a maximum amount of nutrient, promoting fast, healthy growth. This way of making a one-part nutrient means that when the bottle is shaken (it’s vital to shake a one-part nutrient), you can add one blended dose of nutrients and elements in a form that your plants can easily absorb.

Most growers also don’t know that the way we formulate our one-part nutrients actually helps with the pH stability when they start feeding it to their plants. This is because the biological ingredient present actually helps to buffer the pH. This buffering effect prevents the pH of the nutrient from changing too rapidly. This means that the maintenance of your nutrient tank is a lot easier because the need for pH Up and Down is reduced.

Everest – Fair enough. So you’ve developed some biological “jizz” to keep everything fine and dandy. But isn’t it just better to go for a two or a three-part nutrient if you know what you’re doing?

Callie – No, not necessarily. It’s a common misconception: ‘more parts equals more yield.’ But I don’t think this is true. A three-part nutrient definitely offers you more control over what you are feeding your plants. It allows you to ‘tweak’ the NPK ratio throughout the growth cycle, enabling you to respond to any signals that your plants are giving. Three-part nutrient manufacturers provide usage directions, which I would recommend following. But the added complexity from the feed schedule of a three-part nutrient also makes it easier to make a mistake, so use with care.

Everest – But aren’t we back to where we began? Three-part nutrients are more complex to use … meaning one-part nutrients are simpler, i.e. they are designed for beginners!

Callie – No, one-part nutes are designed for growers who want to make life easier for themselves!

Everest – Yeah but no but yeah but no but WHICH IS THE BEST? One or two-part?

Simon – Look Everest … without meaning to sound like we’re sitting on the fence, it basically comes down to choice, which is why we developed both one and two-part nutrients. We knew there was a market for both, so we made both. Our newer one-part nutrients are increasingly popular with novice growers, but are also great for any grower looking for low-maintenance growing. At the same time, our two-part nutrient, VitaLink ‘Max,’ has enjoyed great popularity in the UK and throughout Europe too.

Everest – Okay, I’m hearing you. Thanks for coming in to say hello. How about we do a side-by-side trial of your one and two-part nutrients one of these days?

Simon – Sounds good to me!

Nutrient Types: Advantages, Disadvantages and Tips

One-part
Ideal for new growers or those looking for the simplest growing. Easy to use, low-maintenance. The bottle needs to be shaken to ensure a complete dose of all nutrients. Shake the bottle and simply pour until you reach your target nutrient strength/conductivity.

Two-part
A great choice for all abilities. Many growers using a one-part nutrient go onto a two-part nutrient for experimentation. Extremely popular, gives more control over the mixing process than a one-part nutrient. More risk of mixing errors than with a one-part nutrient. Always adjust the pH after you add your nutrients.

Three-part
Maximum control over mixing process. Mixing errors are more likely. Always follow the feed schedule supplied with the nutrients.

What’s your opinion on one part vs. two part vs. three part nutrients? Tell us where your allegiance lies!

For more information on VitaLink, please contact the following distributors:

Hydrogarden www.hydrogarden.com
Nutriculture www.nutriculture.com
Maxigrow www.maxigrow.com