We've updated our Privacy Policy to make it clearer how we use your personal data.

We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. You can read our Cookie Policy here.

Advertisement

Air Quality Improvements May Have Led to Other Contamination Issues

Field of sweetcorn with trees in the distance and a cloud-studded sky.
Credit: David Mark, Pixabay.

Want a FREE PDF version of This News Story?

Complete the form below and we will email you a PDF version of "Air Quality Improvements May Have Led to Other Contamination Issues"

Technology Networks Ltd. needs the contact information you provide to us to contact you about our products and services. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time. For information on how to unsubscribe, as well as our privacy practices and commitment to protecting your privacy, check out our Privacy Policy

Read time:
 

Sulfur, an essential nutrient for plants, was as free as air back in the 1980s, drifting down onto farmer’s fields from the polluted sky. The nutrient also caused acid rain, however, and it triggered chemistry that meant more mercury in fish. Regulations led to less sulfur in the air, but in the Midwest, where sulfur-hungry corn and soybean fields were proliferating, crops still needed the nutrient.


“We find a clear increase in sulfur fertilizer use commensurate with a decline in atmospheric deposition,” said Eve-Lyn Hinckley, a CIRES Fellow, CU Boulder ecologist, and lead author of a new assessment of sulfur fertilizer use. “We have compiled the first time-series of sulfur fertilizer data spanning decades, from 1985-2015.”


As sulfur stopped dropping from the sky, farmers began applying it directly, Hinckley and her colleague,  Charles Driscoll from Syracuse University, reported in late December in the journal Communications Earth & Environment. Moreover, sulfur fertilization accelerated quickly, they found, far outpacing the growth in use of other nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus.

Want more breaking news?

Subscribe to Technology Networks’ daily newsletter, delivering breaking science news straight to your inbox every day.

Subscribe for FREE

That’s significant, because sulfur’s impacts can be serious: the chemical can essentially make heavy metals, including toxic mercury, more “mobile” and more likely to make their way into fish, for example.


Hinckley said it’s not yet clear how extensively sulfur fertilization impacts the mercury cycle. “It’s the same form of sulfur as was going on with acid rain. However, that was diffuse, widespread atmospheric deposition, and this is intense, targeted applications in much larger amounts.” She and her colleagues are already digging into the connection, “looking at the potential interaction between agricultural sulfur runoff and stimulation of methylmercury formation downstream.”


Even with the environmental risks, farmers do need sulfur fertilizers, Hinckley said, and her work does not suggest prohibiting them. In the case of other nutrients that can cause environmental harm when applied in excess of crop requirements—such as nitrogen and phosphorus—agricultural experts have learned how to minimize damage with selective timing and amounts of application. That’s the goal of her work with sulfur, she said. “We want to help people use it smartly and understand what it does in the environment.”


Reference: Hinckley ELS, Driscoll CT. Sulfur fertiliser use in the Midwestern US increases as atmospheric sulfur deposition declines with improved air quality. Commun Earth Environ. 2022;3(1):1-5. doi:10.1038/s43247-022-00662-9



This article has been republished from the following materials. Note: material may have been edited for length and content. For further information, please contact the cited source.


Advertisement