# Liquid Aerification Snake Oil



## viva_oldtrafford

https://www.kktv.com/home/headlines/19163139.html

http://planttalk.colostate.edu/topics/lawns/1545-liquid-lawn-aeration/


----------



## high leverage

Where are the air-8 fan boys at?


----------



## stotea

To be fair, neither of those articles is any more scientific than the claims made by producers and sellers of liquid aerification products. And no kidding they're mostly water. Wtf else would be the primary ingredient of a liquid product? And $35 for core aeration service? BS. No one is even going to drive by your house for that.


----------



## craigdt

I use both.

And make my own liquid snake oil so its pennies on the dollar.


----------



## Suburban Jungle Life

high leverage said:


> Where are the air-8 fan boys at?


Check out this thread for plenty of info, some research, and results some have posted.

As for humic or urea or whatever they were saying these companies were putting down, I don't believe that does much regarding aeration or reducing compaction. Air8 on the other hand contains KOH which I believe is the key to it's success. Not the humic content. That just happens to be there since they bottle it in the middle of the process of making their RGS and other humate products. Personally, I've had standing water in spots for years and with 2 apps of Air8, there is no more puddle. I'm sold. Does it have to be air8, no, I'd be happy to apply a KOH solution but I'm not really interested in experimenting and seeing if I can figure out my own version at the current cost per app of air8. If you have a large yard, then cost would be a bigger concern. I think most liquid aerating products are snake oil since they are mostly surfactants but air8 is not a surfactant.

We all have our opinions on products but I'm going to keep recommending people try it before an install of a drainage system due to the low cost of application compared to installing a drainage system. If it works, it's much easier to spray it then dig trenches.


----------



## Brackin4au

I agree those articles have no more scientific weight than any random thing on the internet. You can find anything online to back up your personal opinion. No matter what it is. I have no experience with air8 to back any personal feelings, so I cannot comment on it specifically. But one thing in both of those articles that really bothers me is the generic "it's always been done this way so it's the best" type of mentality. Just because mechanical aeration has been done for many years does not mean it's the best method. People used to work the land with a horse and plow, but now tractor companies are really on to something...


----------



## pennstater2005

This is the type of topic that can get out of control quickly. I appreciate everyone keeping it civil and hope it stays that way.


----------



## Spammage

I believe that "liquid aeration" is unfortunately a catch-all phrase for a lot of different products. I've found some products help my calcareous silty clay and some don't. Mechanical aeration of my soil can also be ineffective. If there is to much moisture in my soil, the plugs get stuck in the hollow tines and effectively become a punch that makes holes without pulling any soil from the ground. That only leads to further compaction. The flipside is that if my soil is to dry, the machine can't even break the surface and just rides on the tines. I'm positive that someone in Florida will have different results than someone in DFW or Colorado, so I think it's just best to think that one "best" approach won't be best for every situation.


----------



## TheTurfTamer

I have used sand, manure, gypsum, lime, liquid compost and biosolids to improve my soil. I have done this along with plug, tine, and slit aeration at different depths. 1 inch to 6 inch depth. I just refuse to pay $100.00 for 5% potash and 8% Humic acid mixed with water.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4v2AXt-UuA

Watch this everyone!


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

Aawickham78 said:


> I have used sand, manure, gypsum, lime, liquid compost and biosolids to improve my soil. I have done this along with plug, tine, and slit aeration at different depths. 1 inch to 6 inch depth. I just refuse to pay $100.00 for 5% potash and 8% Humic acid mixed with water.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch this everyone!


creating surface area". Like, soil aggregates?


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

Brackin4au said:


> I agree those articles have no more scientific weight than any random thing on the internet. You can find anything online to back up your personal opinion. No matter what it is. I have no experience with air8 to back any personal feelings, so I cannot comment on it specifically. But one thing in both of those articles that really bothers me is the generic "it's always been done this way so it's the best" type of mentality. Just because mechanical aeration has been done for many years does not mean it's the best method. People used to work the land with a horse and plow, but now tractor companies are really on to something...


I get that. I wasn't going for the nail in the coffin approach - well, I was, but there's no real scholarly mateiral on it....the universites are too busy on the stuff that actually works. Anyhow, it is a publication from an extension office and an interview from an actual turf science in which both parties agree, it's a waste of money.


----------



## jonthepain

Another tool in the toolbox, if the science is behind it.


----------



## SCGrassMan

I'm sure by combining with proper mechanical aeration it works great &#128514;


----------



## TheTurfTamer

:thumbup:


SCGrassMan said:


> I'm sure by combining with proper mechanical aeration it works great 😂


----------



## Brackin4au

Aawickham78 said:


> I have used sand, manure, gypsum, lime, liquid compost and biosolids to improve my soil. I have done this along with plug, tine, and slit aeration at different depths. 1 inch to 6 inch depth. I just refuse to pay $100.00 for 5% potash and 8% Humic acid mixed with water.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch this everyone!


I'm confused... so you mention you do all the mechanical stuff, and refuse to pay for the liquid stuff, but then reference Matt's video where he specifically states that the science checks out and Air8 does provide aeration. He mentions not all "liquid aeration" products are legitimate, and I definitely agree. But he does think Air8 is legit.

Do you just choose not to use it? Or do you think it's snake oil?


----------



## Zabak80

It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....


----------



## Greendoc

Spammage said:


> I believe that "liquid aeration" is unfortunately a catch-all phrase for a lot of different products. I've found some products help my calcareous silty clay and some don't. Mechanical aeration of my soil can also be ineffective. If there is to much moisture in my soil, the plugs get stuck in the hollow tines and effectively become a punch that makes holes without pulling any soil from the ground. That only leads to further compaction. The flipside is that if my soil is to dry, the machine can't even break the surface and just rides on the tines. I'm positive that someone in Florida will have different results than someone in DFW or Colorado, so I think it's just best to think that one "best" approach won't be best for every situation.


If I mechanically aerate a lawn where I am at, I draw up plugs of sticky mud that make a mess and cannot be dragged or otherwise be made to break down. On the other hand, if I correct pH, correct bases, and add humic, my soil structure is way better. YMMV Alkaline products such as KOH do not do what acid based treatments do for me.


----------



## ABC123

Not one thing can cure everything. We're dealing with CEC's of many here.

http://soilquality.org.au/factsheets/water-repellency


----------



## iFisch3224

Zabak80 said:


> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....


He is NOW, he wasn't at the time of that video... just sayin'


----------



## TheTurfTamer

Brackin4au said:


> Aawickham78 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have used sand, manure, gypsum, lime, liquid compost and biosolids to improve my soil. I have done this along with plug, tine, and slit aeration at different depths. 1 inch to 6 inch depth. I just refuse to pay $100.00 for 5% potash and 8% Humic acid mixed with water.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused... so you mention you do all the mechanical stuff, and refuse to pay for the liquid stuff, but then reference Matt's video where he specifically states that the science checks out and Air8 does provide aeration. He mentions not all "liquid aeration" products are legitimate, and I definitely agree. But he does think Air8 is legit.
> 
> Do you just choose not to use it? Or do you think it's snake oil?
Click to expand...

It will work in some types of soil and help with compaction that being said, I think you will get the same results with a $20.00 bag of soil conditioner and watering it in. Its is way overpriced, That's the problem I have with it. I referenced the video so everyone can listen to how it works. That being said, I believe it is a waste of money due to the price.


----------



## g-man

Zabak80 said:


> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....


I know Matt has integrity and will not say the science behind the product is good just to help another company sell more of it. He actually said at around 15:20min on that video that he has not used enough of the product to see if it works.

Some members here have stated they see a soil difference after using the product. Time will tell if the differences are enough to continue using it. I do think that your soil composition matters (pH, CEC, calcium), since it is in essence destroying the soil structure. Therefore not everyone will see the same effects.


----------



## TheTurfTamer

g-man said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> I know Matt has integrity and will not say the science behind the product is good just to help another company sell more of it. He actually said at around 15:20min on that video that he has not used enough of the product to see if it works.
> 
> Some members here have stated they see a soil difference after using the product. Time will tell if the differences are enough to continue using it. I do think that your soil composition matters (pH, CEC, calcium), since it is in essence destroying the soil structure. Therefore not everyone will see the same effects.
Click to expand...

I agree, Matt is one of the few that I trust 100% on Youtube. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

g-man said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> I know Matt has integrity and will not say the science behind the product is good just to help another company sell more of it. He actually said at around 15:20min on that video that he has not used enough of the product to see if it works.
> 
> Some members here have stated they see a soil difference after using the product. Time will tell if the differences are enough to continue using it. I do think that your soil composition matters (pH, CEC, calcium), since it is in essence destroying the soil structure. Therefore not everyone will see the same effects.
Click to expand...

16:00 "this is not going to agglomerate the soil. What this is going to do it extract the organic acids in the soil, move them deeper in the root system. It is going to extract the minerals and move it deeper into the soil so it can come in contact with the root. these high CEC, cation exchange capacity. The soil surface area, all of this plays in. all of a sudden you're moving this deeper into the soil, you're increasing your CECs. your CECs are going to be these ionic bonds, and these free floating positive ions that are plant available immediately that can be housed in all this surface area that's been generated."

More CEC = slower drainage. Negatively charged particles (clay & OM) can increase CEC, yes. But since they are negatively charged, they also hold more water (water is polar)- and that water is hygroscopic. How can we increase water infil and perc by + CEC?

How does it extract the organic acids? What organic acids? What compounds exactly? Can I make these acids synthetically and apply them? How does this product affect surface area? Will it help bind a 100% sand with 98% VC sand and make it more water retention friendly? Clay already has a very large surface area, can this product increase the surface area of clay? We know aggregation helps soils, how is agglomeration different from aggregation?

Free floating ions? Would they not be flushed if they are free floating? How are remaining in place? Will free Na remain in place in a soil with CEC 13 but Ca count of 3k? Gravitational (free moving) water is unusable - adhesion and cohesion are the forces we rely on for root uptake. Why are free floating ions all of a sudden accessible by plant roots?


----------



## Ridgerunner

Zabak80 said:


> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....


Aeration discussion/debates, in one form or another, never go away.

Regarding Matt Martin: In all of my interactions with him, I've found him to be extremely knowledgeable and very intelligent. His explanation (although quite simplified for the audience) of how KOH could work in the soil to reduce bulk density is based on sound science, at least as to how I understand the science- FWTW. He presented the science and theory behind it and, having not tested it, leaves the reality of the results unaddressed.

As an analogy: Fact: The addition of H+ will lower the pH of a solution. Theory: The addition of a H+ producing product (e/g elemental sulfur or ammonium fertilizer) to soil will lower the pH of the soil. Reality/Results: A study in which 230lbs/M of sulfur was applied to a pH 8 soil was conducted by Agvise. For the next 4 years the soil pH dropped and held at 7.6, thereafter it rose to 7.8, where it remained. 7.6 pH is far higher than the "ideal" target of pH 6.5-6.8 and 230lbs/M of sulfur is a lot of sulfur. Was the benefit to the plant, if any, due to lowering the pH to 7.6 for four years worth the cost and effort? Is elemental sulfur snake oil? What if they had only applied 10lbs/M rather than 230 lbs? Would the resultant less change in pH make it snake oil?


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

Ridgerunner said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> Aeration discussion/debates, in one form or another, never go away.
> 
> Regarding Matt Martin: In all of my interactions with him, I've found him to be extremely knowledgeable and very intelligent. His explanation (although quite simplified for the audience) of how KOH could work in the soil to reduce bulk density is based on sound science, at least as to how I understand the science- FWTW. He presented the science and theory behind it and, having not tested it, leaves the reality of the results unaddressed.
> 
> As an analogy: Fact: The addition of H+ will lower the pH of a solution. Theory: The addition of a H+ producing product (e/g elemental sulfur or ammonium fertilizer) to soil will lower the pH of the soil. Reality/Results: A study in which 230lbs/M of sulfur was applied to a pH 8 soil was conducted by Agvise. For the next 4 years the soil pH dropped and held at 7.6, thereafter it rose to 7.8, where it remained. 7.6 pH is far higher than the "ideal" target of pH 6.5-6.8 and 230lbs/M of sulfur is a lot of sulfur. Was the benefit to the plant, if any, due to lowering the pH to 7.6 for four years worth the cost and effort? Is elemental sulfur snake oil? What if they had only applied 10lbs/M rather than 230 lbs? Would the resultant less change in pH make it snake oil?
Click to expand...

Do you have an articles on the KOH / bulk density statement? Any testing data?

Your proposed scenario produced fact based, data driven results. Tangible data. A process that can be replicated across many different scenarios. User error or the inability to make proper or continuous applications doesn't preclude it from being fact based science.

Show the results on the Air8...not just "so and so saw results after 3 days". Really? You saw +/- in total porosity? You saw +/- in macro or micropores? The infil and perc rates greatly increased? It's a product with Fe, you should see some immediate change.

How exactly is Air8 aerating my profile by increasing my CEC? And if increasing the CEC is the name of the game, why not just add OM or something like calcined clay? What does this product do that those products can't? And can you explain the free floating ion thing?


----------



## Zabak80

Ridgerunner said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> Aeration discussion/debates, in one form or another, never go away.
> 
> Regarding Matt Martin: In all of my interactions with him, I've found him to be extremely knowledgeable and very intelligent. His explanation (although quite simplified for the audience) of how KOH could work in the soil to reduce bulk density is based on sound science, at least as to how I understand the science- FWTW. He presented the science and theory behind it and, having not tested it, leaves the reality of the results unaddressed.
> 
> As an analogy: Fact: The addition of H+ will lower the pH of a solution. Theory: The addition of a H+ producing product (e/g elemental sulfur or ammonium fertilizer) to soil will lower the pH of the soil. Reality/Results: A study in which 230lbs/M of sulfur was applied to a pH 8 soil was conducted by Agvise. For the next 4 years the soil pH dropped and held at 7.6, thereafter it rose to 7.8, where it remained. 7.6 pH is far higher than the "ideal" target of pH 6.5-6.8 and 230lbs/M of sulfur is a lot of sulfur. Was the benefit to the plant, if any, due to lowering the pH to 7.6 for four years worth the cost and effort? Is elemental sulfur snake oil? What if they had only applied 10lbs/M rather than 230 lbs? Would the resultant less change in pH make it snake oil?
Click to expand...

I'm sure Matt is a great guy. I'm sure he knows quite a bit.

I'm also sure that if someone is recommending the same product they're selling.....well....there is no way around even at best the perception of a conflict of interest.

And given that there is actual science from extension programs disputing his findings...that's a cause for concern.

It's just amazing that 10/10 youtubers are recommending the same products they sell...hmmmmmmmm.


----------



## Brackin4au

iFisch3224 said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> He is NOW, he wasn't at the time of that video... just sayin'
Click to expand...

+1


----------



## Brackin4au

Aawickham78 said:


> Brackin4au said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aawickham78 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have used sand, manure, gypsum, lime, liquid compost and biosolids to improve my soil. I have done this along with plug, tine, and slit aeration at different depths. 1 inch to 6 inch depth. I just refuse to pay $100.00 for 5% potash and 8% Humic acid mixed with water.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused... so you mention you do all the mechanical stuff, and refuse to pay for the liquid stuff, but then reference Matt's video where he specifically states that the science checks out and Air8 does provide aeration. He mentions not all "liquid aeration" products are legitimate, and I definitely agree. But he does think Air8 is legit.
> 
> Do you just choose not to use it? Or do you think it's snake oil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It will work in some types of soil and help with compaction that being said, I think you will get the same results with a $20.00 bag of soil conditioner and watering it in. Its is way overpriced, That's the problem I have with it. I referenced the video so everyone can listen to how it works. That being said, I believe it is a waste of money due to the price.
Click to expand...

Understandable


----------



## Ridgerunner

@viva_oldtrafford I was speaking solely to the science behind the theory. As I mentioned, the debate over liquid aeration and mechanical aeration has been going on for years. I assume aerification refers to relieving compaction which is measured via bulk density, If not read no farther. As you know, the first liquid aeration products were sodium laureth sulfate and water (shampoo). It could make soil "wetter", for longer, but there was no basis in science that it could affect bulk density. At least with products like Air8 and Liquid Chisel, there is a scientific basis for the theory that KOH might affect balk density.
Whether or not it can effectively change bulk density enough to alleviate compaction, I very much doubt., but I've seen no studies one way or the other. ( @Zabak80 could you link to the studies you have seen please).
The extraction/solubilization of HA and FA from soils, coal, peat, compost, etc using KOH (or NaOH) is well documented, but here are articles on the topic and methods:
http://aesl.ces.uga.edu/sera6/PUB/MethodsManualFinalSERA6.asp
http://ejtafs.mardi.gov.my/jtafs/37-2/Humic%20acid.pdf
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjce/v31n3/10.pdf

Bulk density is weight divided by volume W/V.



You can improve (lower) bulk density by increasing the volume (mechanical aeration) or by removing mass (weight) by employing KOH to dissolve and leach out HA and FA acids. Even if KOH removed the total OM content in the soil to create fractures/space, there would not be enough change in mass to make a significant change in bulk density/compaction.

The science may be there, but I don't see this method delivering significant reductions in bulk density. I suspect those who have seen soil improvement (like better drainage and reduced ponding), it's not because of any change in compaction, but through another effect of KOH that relieved different condition.


----------



## Green

I believe John Perry and others take the approach that the micro-channels created via the KOH allow nutrient movement into the root-zone, and that it's the root growth itself that affects the soil quality in deeper layers of soil over time if those roots have incentive to push down further than when they were more limited by the forces that caused the chemical compaction originally...or something like that.

How does this argument hold up in the real world?


----------



## Green

g-man said:


> I do think that your soil composition matters (pH, CEC, calcium), since it is in essence destroying the soil structure. Therefore not everyone will see the same effects.


Can you elaborate on this idea?


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

Green said:


> I believe John Perry and others take the approach that the micro-channels created via the KOH allow nutrient movement into the root-zone, and that it's the root growth itself that affects the soil quality in deeper layers of soil over time if those roots have incentive to push down further than when they were more limited by the forces that caused the chemical compaction originally...or something like that.
> 
> How does this argument hold up in the real world?


This assumes that KOH can create "micro channels". They need to substantiate that claim first.

Second, it also assumes that there is a limit to the depth in which nutrients can move. A stopping point based on bulk density (bd). Where do these nutrients stop? What bd is the needed to act as a backstop? I've seen soil at moderate depths (well below rooting depth), with a varity of bd, contain nutrients. Are they saying that up to a certain point, the soil is sterile / void of nutrients, macro and micropores?

Would you consider deeper rooting "aeration"? If the roots are moving down into the soil, there is already some O2 in the profile - roots hate anaerobic conditions and will not survive too long in that envrionment. They are claiming to add something to a soil that already exists, if I have this right.


----------



## Anthony Drexler

I'm pretty sure that they're not talking about GCF. I also believe there is a lot of science behind their products, so I'm not going to rush to judge.

I choose to mix up my own kelp, fish and sugars, curtesy from Fox Farm fertilizers. I also like following Jerry Bakers lawn tonics.

C'mon spring... I need to get outside, and enjoy the growing season. So stoked!


----------



## Delmarva Keith

FWIW, my understanding is that the KOH expands (certain types) of clay particles non-uniformly. In other words, the particles change from nice uniform flat overlapping and interlocking to highly irregularly surfaced particles with little expanded "nubbins" all over them. This would indeed increase the surface area of each particle greatly and reduce the "shingling" effect which tends to make clay impermeable. The effect is not permanent.

I have used Air8. It seems to help on my soil type (areas of poor infiltration). I plan to continue using it and have recommended trying it to others. In the big picture, it's expensive but not that expensive.

Mechanical aeration, among other things, can improve oxygen exchange in the surface layer of soil. I also mechanically aerate every year. Roots need oxygen as much as they need water.


----------



## Ridgerunner

Delmarva Keith said:


> FWIW, my understanding is that the KOH expands (certain types) of clay particles non-uniformly. In other words, the particles change from nice uniform flat overlapping and interlocking to highly irregularly surfaced particles with little expanded "nubbins" all over them. This would indeed increase the surface area of each particle greatly and reduce the "shingling" effect which tends to make clay impermeable. The effect is not permanent.
> 
> I have used Air8. It seems to help on my soil type (areas of poor infiltration). I plan to continue using it and have recommended trying it to others. In the big picture, it's expensive but not that expensive.
> 
> Mechanical aeration, among other things, can improve oxygen exchange in the surface layer of soil. I also mechanically aerate every year. Roots need oxygen as much as they need water.


Keith, do you have a link to the article or study that you based your comments on regarding KOH "nubbins" creation, and improved soil conditions?
Although not conclusive to all soils, I would cite this study on the possible detrimental effect OH can produce in soil. 
Sorry that this is only the abstract. It seems the full pdf version is no longer accessible:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02571862.2007.10634773


----------



## Delmarva Keith

Ridgerunner said:


> Delmarva Keith said:
> 
> 
> 
> FWIW, my understanding is that the KOH expands (certain types) of clay particles non-uniformly. In other words, the particles change from nice uniform flat overlapping and interlocking to highly irregularly surfaced particles with little expanded "nubbins" all over them. This would indeed increase the surface area of each particle greatly and reduce the "shingling" effect which tends to make clay impermeable. The effect is not permanent.
> 
> I have used Air8. It seems to help on my soil type (areas of poor infiltration). I plan to continue using it and have recommended trying it to others. In the big picture, it's expensive but not that expensive.
> 
> Mechanical aeration, among other things, can improve oxygen exchange in the surface layer of soil. I also mechanically aerate every year. Roots need oxygen as much as they need water.
> 
> 
> 
> Keith, do you have a link to the article or study that you based your comments on regarding KOH "nubbins" creation, and improved soil conditions?
> Although not conclusive to all soils, I would cite this study on the possible detrimental effect OH can produce in soil.
> Sorry that this is only the abstract. It seems the full pdf version is no longer accessible:
> https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02571862.2007.10634773
Click to expand...

I got the info from research @g-man did. It was a study with I think SEM photos or at least some type of microscopy. @g-man do you remember your post on this? I think it was some really good info.


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

Delmarva Keith said:


> FWIW, my understanding is that the KOH expands (certain types) of clay particles non-uniformly. In other words, the particles change from nice uniform flat overlapping and interlocking to highly irregularly surfaced particles with little expanded "nubbins" all over them. This would indeed increase the surface area of each particle greatly and reduce the "shingling" effect which tends to make clay impermeable. The effect is not permanent.
> 
> I have used Air8. It seems to help on my soil type (areas of poor infiltration). I plan to continue using it and have recommended trying it to others. In the big picture, it's expensive but not that expensive.
> 
> Mechanical aeration, among other things, can improve oxygen exchange in the surface layer of soil. I also mechanically aerate every year. Roots need oxygen as much as they need water.


So can enough KOH affect the surface area enough that it turns clay > silt > sand? Can we eliminate clay particles altogether with enough KOH? Can it increase surface area of sand?


----------



## Ware




----------



## Delmarva Keith

viva_oldtrafford said:


> Delmarva Keith said:
> 
> 
> 
> FWIW, my understanding is that the KOH expands (certain types) of clay particles non-uniformly. In other words, the particles change from nice uniform flat overlapping and interlocking to highly irregularly surfaced particles with little expanded "nubbins" all over them. This would indeed increase the surface area of each particle greatly and reduce the "shingling" effect which tends to make clay impermeable. The effect is not permanent.
> 
> I have used Air8. It seems to help on my soil type (areas of poor infiltration). I plan to continue using it and have recommended trying it to others. In the big picture, it's expensive but not that expensive.
> 
> Mechanical aeration, among other things, can improve oxygen exchange in the surface layer of soil. I also mechanically aerate every year. Roots need oxygen as much as they need water.
> 
> 
> 
> So can enough KOH affect the surface area enough that it turns clay > silt > sand? Can we eliminate clay particles altogether with enough KOH? Can it increase surface area of sand?
Click to expand...

I can only base an answer on my understanding of how it works. No, no and no. It reacts with certain types of clay to expand the tiny particles non-uniformly. That's about it. Using huge quantities of KOH would not seem to increase the effect once it occurred and would likely kill plants, give you alkaline burns on your feet if you walked on it, etc.

A link that I just came across for an oil field process. https://patents.google.com/patent/US4280560A/en

I don't really have the time or background to study it carefully but the gist of it seems to be that slow injection of KOH into sandstone formations with mobile clay or other fines, will stabilize the clay through expansion by the KOH so the sandstone doesn't get clogged. Not sure what that means for us but it's interesting.

I also note that the clay around me is generally kaolinite clay. It is reported to react with KOH. Other soil types may not.


----------



## Ridgerunner

Delmarva Keith said:


> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Delmarva Keith said:
> 
> 
> 
> FWIW, my understanding is that the KOH expands (certain types) of clay particles non-uniformly. In other words, the particles change from nice uniform flat overlapping and interlocking to highly irregularly surfaced particles with little expanded "nubbins" all over them. This would indeed increase the surface area of each particle greatly and reduce the "shingling" effect which tends to make clay impermeable. The effect is not permanent.
> 
> I have used Air8. It seems to help on my soil type (areas of poor infiltration). I plan to continue using it and have recommended trying it to others. In the big picture, it's expensive but not that expensive.
> 
> Mechanical aeration, among other things, can improve oxygen exchange in the surface layer of soil. I also mechanically aerate every year. Roots need oxygen as much as they need water.
> 
> 
> 
> Keith, do you have a link to the article or study that you based your comments on regarding KOH "nubbins" creation, and improved soil conditions?
> Although not conclusive to all soils, I would cite this study on the possible detrimental effect OH can produce in soil.
> Sorry that this is only the abstract. It seems the full pdf version is no longer accessible:
> https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02571862.2007.10634773
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I got the info from research @g-man did. It was a study with I think SEM photos or at least some type of microscopy. @g-man do you remember your post on this? I think it was some really good info.
Click to expand...

I think I found the g-man post. Funny how repetitive this topic is.
https://thelawnforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3246&hilit=hydroxide&start=100


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

Ridgerunner said:


> Delmarva Keith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> Keith, do you have a link to the article or study that you based your comments on regarding KOH "nubbins" creation, and improved soil conditions?
> Although not conclusive to all soils, I would cite this study on the possible detrimental effect OH can produce in soil.
> Sorry that this is only the abstract. It seems the full pdf version is no longer accessible:
> https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02571862.2007.10634773
> 
> 
> 
> I got the info from research @g-man did. It was a study with I think SEM photos or at least some type of microscopy. @g-man do you remember your post on this? I think it was some really good info.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think I found the g-man post. Funny how repetitive this topic is.
> https://thelawnforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3246&hilit=hydroxide&start=100
Click to expand...

"KOH solutions were used as influent solutions. Aggregate stability and Ks decreased with increased concentration of hydroxide solutions, while clay dispersion increased as concentration of the hydroxide increased. NaOH, which is more commonly used for industrial cleaning, had more negative effects on soil structural stability compared to KOH."

"It was concluded that disposal of sewage sludge/effluent high in hydroxides, such as those of sodium (Na) and potassium (K)1 would result in reduced structural stability and Ks."

People are claiming this as a benefit? It destroys structure by decreasing aggregates and dispersing clays- though not as bas as NaOH.


----------



## g-man

Like I said in a previous post, it is destroying the soil structure. How much? It depends on the rate/concentration. Beneficial? It depends on the original structure. Can the flocculation reduce compactation? Sure it can, but it could also hurt.


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

g-man said:


> Like I said in a previous post, it is destroying the soil structure. How much? It depends on the rate/concentration. Beneficial? It depends on the original structure. Can the flocculation reduce compactation? Sure it can, but it could also hurt.


Flocculated particles are now bad? Fwir, it's either dispersed or flocculated. We should always try and achieve flocculated- it's why we don't want Na dominant in a profile.

https://turf.arizona.edu/publications/presentations/041107walworth.pdf


----------



## thegrassfactor

Zabak80 said:


> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....


No, I don't. They distribute my granular product. We have no stake in each other's companies. I have never and will never be paid to promote, speak about, or use GCF liquids. I come at this from a pro perspective, and that perspective is that I support John's efforts to educate the pro side of the industry. His liquids that I was able to incorporate were well priced. And the transparency around his processes were incredibly appealing. My hunt in the whole thing is providing information. 
I still research this and other products every. single. day. You don't have to use Air8 if you're that skeptical.



viva_oldtrafford said:


> How does it extract the organic acids? What organic acids? What compounds exactly? Can I make these acids synthetically and apply them? How does this product affect surface area? Will it help bind a 100% sand with 98% VC sand and make it more water retention friendly? Clay already has a very large surface area, can this product increase the surface area of clay? We know aggregation helps soils, how is agglomeration different from aggregation?


KOH is the industry standard in extracting organic acids from organic acid rich material like peat or leonardite shale. The organic acids in question, humic, is soluble in high pH. Fulvic is soluble in a wide range of pHs. Could you perform the extraction at home? yes. Can you produce synthetic organic acids? yes, see synthetic chelates.

Supplying carbon to the soil is always a good thing. Humic is rich in carbon. Carbon will decrease bulk density of soil. Is there enough in air8 or humic acid to provide quick shifts in bulk density? No. Is it going to increase the surface area of clay? no. Can anything increase surface area of clay? Could it reduce resistance in the root zone? Possibly - and I personally lean towards the yes based on more experience than conducted trials. Agglomeration, aggregation, and flocculation all apply here and all work towards "aerification." My big case in point was spraying it on my bermuda in transition and the flush of growth that came from it. For a few weeks I was consistently cutting an additional full inch of clippings off the liquid aeration side. Would this apply to all lawns? I have no idea. It could be contributed to my soil pH (really low), potassium levels (80ppm), or soil composition (silty clay. Is the goal of using air8 to move humic substances quickly into the rootzone by using a KOH carrier, seeing as it does flush pretty quickly? With the increase of microbial activity (http://www.soil-biotics.com/files/3. Humic Acids Effects EDIT.pdf) that comes through the application of humates can this be the sauce, more so than decreasing bulk density? I dont know.

I think the big argument here that's often overlooked is the amount of actual compaction that takes place on a home lawn vs. sports turf. What you see on a golf green (grass maintained at an unbelievably unnatural height of cut) and walking is extremely stressful, given its situation - sand, incredibly low hoc, full exposure, traffic. The low height of cut alone is threatened by the presence of organic matter. In a home lawn, 4" fescue we'll say for fun, you simply will not face the compaction issues that cannot be overcome through fertility (see @Greendoc and his aeration schedule). Of course there are some exceptions - cane corso's, kids, etc, but it's not like the 50 yard line of a football field. So if you shifted your focus towards utilizing the roots to provide your aerification, could you make the switch to a liquid product to provide a carbon source, and "extract" acids from your soil humus/organic matter layer and get a similar benefit that you would from aerating a lawn that doesn't have the demands of sports turf? And if you're not collecting your plugs and backfilling with a product to hold porosity, how effective is your aeration really?

I'm not telling you definitely use the product, I'm just keeping the conversation going with my own rationale.


----------



## g-man

You are correct, but too much flocculation can hurt since the soil would not be able to hold nutrients or water.

The KOH causes clay dispersion. This is from the publication: "The effect of hydroxide solutions on the structural stability and saturated hydraulic conductivity of four tropical soils "



> The hydroxides of Na and K affect aggregate stability and clay dispersion in various ways; (i) the displacement of multivalent cations from exchange sites by Na + promote dispersion and does not allow binding of soil particles, (il) the diffuse double layer is increased by the increased concentration of monovalent cations, due to their greater hydration radius and (iii) monovalent cations weaken cationic water interaction because of their greater hydration radii which do not allow particles to come closer together for dipole moments to act (Chidyal & Tripathi, 1987). High pH of hydroxides solutions increase the net negative charge on the soil resulting in increased inter-particle repulsions (Oades, 1984). This encourages the clay to swell and disperse. The high pH of the solution might have prohibited the binding action of the sesquioxides, which made the particles remain in suspension (Childyal & Tripathi, 1987) as these have variable charge.
> 
> The reduction in Ks was attributed to the migration of dispersed clay and dissolved organic matter from the surface soil
> layer and its subsequent deposition in the pore necks thereby changing the pore size distribution of the soil due to pore
> clogging (Tarchitzky et aI., 1999). The time required for dispersion and the subsequent deposition to reduce Ks depends
> on the concentration of the solution (Lieffering & McLay, 1996), and decreases with increasing solution concentration.
> The retention of dissolved organic matter seems to be of less significance in clay soils because the organic matter content of both IAE and HRS soil was relatively low when compared to clay content. However in sandy soils retention of dissolved organic matter may be the main cause of the reduction in Ks, especially at Pension farm where organic matter was six times higher than at· Churu and yet this did not result in higher aggregate stability and less clay dispersion due to effluent / sewage sludge addition.


https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02571862.2007.10634773

Reference: J. Nyamangara , S. Munotengwa , P. Nyamugafata & G. Nyamadzawo (2007) The effect of hydroxide solutions on the structural stability and saturated hydraulic conductivity of four tropical soils, South African Journal of Plant and Soil, 24:1, 1-7, DOI: 10.1080/02571862.2007.10634773

By the way, the soils in study had a pH ~5.

The image shows how the clay changes with NaOH under a microscope.



Source: Swelling on Natural Soils https://pp.bme.hu/ci/article/download/8185/7302


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

thegrassfactor said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> No, I don't. They distribute my granular product. We have no stake in each other's companies. I have never and will never be paid to promote, speak about, or use GCF liquids. I come at this from a pro perspective, and that perspective is that I support John's efforts to educate the pro side of the industry. His liquids that I was able to incorporate were well priced. And the transparency around his processes were incredibly appealing. My hunt in the whole thing is providing information.
> I still research this and other products every. single. day. You don't have to use Air8 if you're that skeptical.
> 
> 
> 
> viva_oldtrafford said:
> 
> 
> 
> How does it extract the organic acids? What organic acids? What compounds exactly? Can I make these acids synthetically and apply them? How does this product affect surface area? Will it help bind a 100% sand with 98% VC sand and make it more water retention friendly? Clay already has a very large surface area, can this product increase the surface area of clay? We know aggregation helps soils, how is agglomeration different from aggregation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> KOH is the industry standard in extracting organic acids from organic acid rich material like peat or leonardite shale. The organic acids in question, humic, is soluble in high pH. Fulvic is soluble in a wide range of pHs. Could you perform the extraction at home? yes. Can you produce synthetic organic acids? yes, see synthetic chelates.
> 
> Supplying carbon to the soil is always a good thing. Humic is rich in carbon. Carbon will decrease bulk density of soil. Is there enough in air8 or humic acid to provide quick shifts in bulk density? No. Is it going to increase the surface area of clay? no. Can anything increase surface area of clay? Could it reduce resistance in the root zone? Possibly - and I personally lean towards the yes based on more experience than conducted trials. Agglomeration, aggregation, and flocculation all apply here and all work towards "aerification." My big case in point was spraying it on my bermuda in transition and the flush of growth that came from it. For a few weeks I was consistently cutting an additional full inch of clippings off the liquid aeration side. Would this apply to all lawns? I have no idea. It could be contributed to my soil pH (really low), potassium levels (80ppm), or soil composition (silty clay. Is the goal of using air8 to move humic substances quickly into the rootzone by using a KOH carrier, seeing as it does flush pretty quickly? With the increase of microbial activity (http://www.soil-biotics.com/files/3. Humic Acids Effects EDIT.pdf) that comes through the application of humates can this be the sauce, more so than decreasing bulk density? I dont know.
> 
> I think the big argument here that's often overlooked is the amount of actual compaction that takes place on a home lawn vs. sports turf. What you see on a golf green (grass maintained at an unbelievably unnatural height of cut) and walking is extremely stressful, given its situation - sand, incredibly low hoc, full exposure, traffic. The low height of cut alone is threatened by the presence of organic matter. In a home lawn, 4" fescue we'll say for fun, you simply will not face the compaction issues that cannot be overcome through fertility (see @Greendoc and his aeration schedule). Of course there are some exceptions - cane corso's, kids, etc, but it's not like the 50 yard line of a football field. So if you shifted your focus towards utilizing the roots to provide your aerification, could you make the switch to a liquid product to provide a carbon source, and "extract" acids from your soil humus/organic matter layer and get a similar benefit that you would from aerating a lawn that doesn't have the demands of sports turf? And if you're not collecting your plugs and backfilling with a product to hold porosity, how effective is your aeration really?
> 
> I'm not telling you definitely use the product, I'm just keeping the conversation going with my own rationale.
Click to expand...

Your standard lawn is going to have more compaction than most any putting green built by today's standards. We build greens out of sand because, even under maximum compaction, we still maintain a required (USGA) level of micro and macropores. The growing trend is to not aerify newly established greens until the 6-7 year mark. We don't aerify greens because of compaction, we aerify to remove OM from the profile. In our case, OM (carbon) is detrimental beyond 3% (weight). In my case, my soil isn't my limiting factor as it pertains to rooting, my hoc is (.110-.140"). I collect core and replace with 100% sand - actually allowing O2 into the profile (age and design of green (usga, california , push up) play a large role too). When I'm only taking single digit % of my surface area, I have enough left behind to hold my water and nutrients.

Adding OM (carbon) to a profile adds water retention (nutrient retention also increases too). In my case, adding OM would have negative side effects - decreased infil & perc, softer greens. With that said, how are you creating micropores with the addition of a product that is scientifically engineered (negative charge) to hold water (polar)? Why would a root decide to move deeper into a profile that is now wetter? Where do the micropores come from? Are you creating them? I would argue that they are already present in the soil (total porosity micro+macro). However, we know that under the right conditions, micropores will convert to macropores (freely settled soil for example, over time, loses O2 in the profile and micropores take their place - it's why measuring total porosity in a soil is a bad practice. 1 can dominate.)

Soil OM can help bulk density. It's the aggregrate forming help of OM that allows this. Knowing this, why would you elect to add something (KOH) which (according to one of these links posted) has been shown to have a devastating impact on aggregates: "
"KOH solutions were used as influent solutions. Aggregate stability and Ks decreased with increased concentration of hydroxide solutions, while clay dispersion increased as concentration of the hydroxide increased. NaOH, which is more commonly used for industrial cleaning, had more negative effects on soil structural stability compared to KOH.""

Why would you want to add something that can disperse your clay particles? It makes 0 sense.


----------



## viva_oldtrafford

Ridgerunner said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> Aeration discussion/debates, in one form or another, never go away.
> 
> Regarding Matt Martin: In all of my interactions with him, I've found him to be extremely knowledgeable and very intelligent. His explanation (although quite simplified for the audience) of how KOH could work in the soil to reduce bulk density is based on sound science, at least as to how I understand the science- FWTW. He presented the science and theory behind it and, having not tested it, leaves the reality of the results unaddressed.
> 
> As an analogy: Fact: The addition of H+ will lower the pH of a solution. Theory: The addition of a H+ producing product (e/g elemental sulfur or ammonium fertilizer) to soil will lower the pH of the soil. Reality/Results: A study in which 230lbs/M of sulfur was applied to a pH 8 soil was conducted by Agvise. For the next 4 years the soil pH dropped and held at 7.6, thereafter it rose to 7.8, where it remained. 7.6 pH is far higher than the "ideal" target of pH 6.5-6.8 and 230lbs/M of sulfur is a lot of sulfur. Was the benefit to the plant, if any, due to lowering the pH to 7.6 for four years worth the cost and effort? Is elemental sulfur snake oil? What if they had only applied 10lbs/M rather than 230 lbs? Would the resultant less change in pH make it snake oil?
Click to expand...

Of course it's not. You have tangible data (and it can be replicated) that illustrated the effectiveness. The fact that we could replicate this scenario over a variety of real world scenarios (admittedly not all) precludes it from being snake oil. If you misapplied the product at 10#/M, the lack of results are on you.

Don't tell me that by increasing CEC you're increasing infil and perc rates...and aerating the soil..how's that work? macro and micropores just all of a sudden appear out of thin air?


----------



## thegrassfactor

viva_oldtrafford said:


> Your standard lawn is going to have more compaction than most any putting green built by today's standards. We build greens out of sand because, even under maximum compaction, we still maintain a required (USGA) level of micro and macropores. The growing trend is to not aerify newly established greens until the 6-7 year mark. We don't aerify greens because of compaction, we aerify to remove OM from the profile. In our case, OM (carbon) is detrimental beyond 3% (weight). In my case, my soil isn't my limiting factor as it pertains to rooting, my hoc is (.110-.140"). I collect core and replace with 100% sand - actually allowing O2 into the profile (age and design of green (usga, california , push up) play a large role too). When I'm only taking single digit % of my surface area, I have enough left behind to hold my water and nutrients.


Forgive me, I've been out of golf for the last ten years. I understand OM management is primary cause for aerification, but to say compaction alleviation is not on the agenda for aerifying greens is a bit strong.



viva_oldtrafford said:


> Adding OM (carbon) to a profile adds water retention (nutrient retention also increases too). In my case, adding OM would have negative side effects - decreased infil & perc, softer greens. With that said, how are you creating micropores with the addition of a product that is scientifically engineered (negative charge) to hold water (polar)? Why would a root decide to move deeper into a profile that is now wetter? Where do the micropores come from? Are you creating them? I would argue that they are already present in the soil (total porosity micro+macro). However, we know that under the right conditions, micropores will convert to macropores (freely settled soil for example, over time, loses O2 in the profile and micropores take their place - it's why measuring total porosity in a soil is a bad practice. 1 can dominate.)





> A two‐stage process explains the decrease in ks when strongly alkaline solutions are applied to soil. First, organic matter dissolution decreases aggregate stability, with the rate of organic matter dissolution depending on hydroxide concentration; and second, increased repulsion of soil particles (due to increased pH) causes movement of dislodged particles into pore spaces, resulting in decreased Ks.


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2389.1996.tb01370.x

Again, the hydraulic conductivity influence is directly related to the concentration of hyroxides applied. I'd argue it's not enough to cause significant dispersion, repulsion, or movement. But If the hydraulic conductivity at the surface is actually decreasing, i'd argue that the roots would not be sitting shallow, rather moving downward and away from the dehydrated or less hydraulic areas.



viva_oldtrafford said:


> Soil OM can help bulk density. It's the aggregrate forming help of OM that allows this. Knowing this, why would you elect to add something (KOH) which (according to one of these links posted) has been shown to have a devastating impact on aggregates: "
> "KOH solutions were used as influent solutions. Aggregate stability and Ks decreased with increased concentration of hydroxide solutions, while clay dispersion increased as concentration of the hydroxide increased. NaOH, which is more commonly used for industrial cleaning, had more negative effects on soil structural stability compared to KOH.""


Soil OM can help bulk density, but is it the aggregate forming help of OM or just the fact that OM has a low bulk density? Adding something with a lower bulk density to a higher bulk density drops your overall average. How that pertains to aggregate forming help is above my level of understanding.

When combining something that decreases aggregation and promotes aggregation (KOH, HA) - how does that affect the overall response of the soil?

Also, I'm not seeing air8 being recommended for greens. Maybe it is, I honestly don't know.

I don't know the answers so I'm just thinking out loud here.


----------



## Buffalolawny

Thread sounds like a oil vs oil, fuel additive vs fuel additive on 4 vs v8's forum

If Ben from Lawntips a youtube channel is the 3rd Greenkeeper to tell me that all these products only lasts about a month MAX if that.

So, if it works for your situation keep doing it and like to spend the money every month. keep doing it.

Why didnt the first app work why two was applied?

*******MODERATORS PLEASE DELETE MY POST IS NOT CONTRIBUTING TO THIS THREAD********


----------



## Delmarva Keith

I have to give another shout out to @g-man for the research he conducted on this which was what got me interested in it, what seems like long ago. I also appreciate the perspectives shared by everyone who is contributing info without an axe to grind, for or against. It's ok to question someone's motives but I think it's unfair to do so based on conjecture and not fact. Matt @thegrassfactor has for many years shared his knowledge freely without bias and his say so that he does not profit from the product is rock solid as far as I am concerned.

And speaking of facts, I'll be the first to admit facts on the KOH /humic / magic elixir remains pretty thin. One point that needs some resolution and harmonization is the apparent acceptance by at least some that KOH causes clay dispersion in all cases. To add to (my) confusion, interspersed with mention of dispersion is discussion of flocculation. Doesn't make sense to me - I don't see how there can be concern about dispersion and flocculation caused by the same substance. One or the other, no?

I previously posted the patent for KOH stabilization of clays and I forgot about this article, https://www.onepetro.org/journal-paper/SPE-11721-PA It just doesn't make sense to me that if application of KOH caused dispersion in all cases that it could be used to stabilize clays. Still makes more sense to me that at least for some clay types and methods of KOH application, non-uniform particle expansion helps to lock the particles together (basic friction between two non-uniform surfaces) as a mechanism of stabilization. The secondary outcomes would include increased surface area and increased permeability.

Anyway, I'm just guessing in the dark as much as anyone else. Very interesting discussion though.


----------



## bmitch05

Reading through a lot of very complicated analysis on this thread, most of it out of my wheelhouse. One thing I can add is that I have been using Air 8 for 1 full season and just applied my first app of the year about a week ago and it works for me.

When watered in I can see visible results within 3 or 4 days of the application and have also noticed improved drainage in the shady areas of my lawn along the side yard and especially in the back yard where I have a small hill. Most of the rain water would collect in that area and sit for several days, now all of that has improved over that last year. I live in the mid west and have very dense clay soil, not only is the nutrient uptake a challenge but so is the drainage and water retention in the root zone in my area. I have seen improvements in all of the previously stated and I have ZERO scientific backing on any of these claims. Once I began using Humic/Fulvic and introducing micro nutrients I could see the response from the turf grass. Again, just by observation it works for me.


----------



## 95mmrenegade

Last year I documented root growth going from 3.5" average to 6.5" average and standing water dissipation time went from a few hours to about 45 minutes. Noticeable results I can't deny.
Before after a heavy rain, your probably 2-3 days at best to mow. Now I can hammer down the next day almost regardless of how much rain we get. Maybe my yard is special.


----------



## Colonel K0rn

I do have a dog in this fight, considering that my back yard used to flood when I got 1/2" of rainfall. My yard was completely neglected by the previous owners, and prior to my giving a crap about the condition of it other than just mowing the weeds, it was getting worse by the year. I'll chime in with the results that I've had using AIR-8.

Similar to the results that @95mmrenegade had, I would get a similar amount of rainfall in a similar period as a year before, and I would have some standing water, but it would disperse faster than the years prior. I've seen an improvement over the past year of using NEX-T products.

My soils situation gave me the option of spending *thousands* of dollars to install drainage or apply a magical brown substance for a fraction of the cost. I chose the latter, and if it doesn't work or if I didn't see any improvement, I would discontinue its usage. But here's the thing, I have seen improvement, I have noticed a shift in the health of the turf both in my renovation and the mutt yard in the back. As it has been described before, I have "muck" soil. Really really old clay that has broken down over a very long time. I'd love to have some loam, hell, even some red clay... but I don't. I'm dealing with what's on my lot. I'm trying the products, and they're working with me. So snake oil it is, and the results are speaking for themselves.

Another thing, don't make me go all Chris Crocker on y'all when it comes to trying to say that @thegrassfactor is trying to be a salesperson for GCF. He's said it before that he was highly skeptical, and he'll say it again that he set out to disprove the claims that John Perry was making when he found out about the products. But once he got educated, he could understand the science behind the synergy of how the products he offered works and he's left it at that. But Matt's a big boy, and he can handle himself, and doesn't need me to speak on his behalf. For that matter, I trust Pete and Allyn as well. :beer:

FWIW, I did find a Gallon of Snake Oil for sale.


----------



## Wes

I'm just going to chime in here and say that topics like this are what bring me back TLF over and over again.

I found TLF shortly after it was founded and one of the core tenants that stuck with me was that this was a "safe place" to have discussions about things such as this.

In my opinion soil fertility and amendments are ground zero for debates on just about any forum, and I would guess it's the same within the scientific community as well.

Perhaps we aren't asking the right questions; or maybe we are asking the right questions, but framing them wrong.

I remember seeing pictures of @Colonel K0rn's yard when it flooded before. If he's seeing improvement then something appears to be happening. Perhaps it's not aerification in the traditional sense, maybe it's not aerification at all, but it's working for him.

Aspirin is a good example of a product that's main use (heart attack prevention) is different than what its original intended use (pain reliever). Which by the way, doctors are no longer recommending as a preventer of heart attacks.

One only has to look at the soil texture triangle to see that soil is complex. It's hard to imagine that one single product formulation would work for all of the possible combinations. Perhaps it is working in some instances, but perhaps it is doing something completely different that is affecting the soil and/or turf in a positive way.










I think there are several successive questions that should be asked before we call it snake oil:

1. Is the product improving the soil and/or turf?
2. What is is being affected.
3. What is causing this effect?
4. Does this change occur in all soils/grasses?

On a related note, if in fact @thegrassfactor decided to sell the product after vetting it, what's the harm? I don't think it's prudent to assume that everyone who sells something doesn't care about the people that are buying that product and they only care about the money. If I had a following like Matt and I came across a new product that I believed in, I might be inclined to sell that product.


----------



## Zabak80

Yeah...so you're partners with the company.



thegrassfactor said:


> Zabak80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's because Matt is PARTNERS with the COMPANY that SELLS AIR8....
> 
> 
> 
> No, I don't. They distribute my granular product. We have no stake in each other's companies. I have never and will never be paid to promote, speak about, or use GCF liquids. I come at this from a pro perspective, and that perspective is that I support John's efforts to educate the pro side of the industry. His liquids that I was able to incorporate were well priced. And the transparency around his processes were incredibly appealing. My hunt in the whole thing is providing information.
> I still research this and other products every. single. day. You don't have to use Air8 if you're that skeptical.
> 
> 
> 
> viva_oldtrafford said:
> 
> 
> 
> How does it extract the organic acids? What organic acids? What compounds exactly? Can I make these acids synthetically and apply them? How does this product affect surface area? Will it help bind a 100% sand with 98% VC sand and make it more water retention friendly? Clay already has a very large surface area, can this product increase the surface area of clay? We know aggregation helps soils, how is agglomeration different from aggregation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> KOH is the industry standard in extracting organic acids from organic acid rich material like peat or leonardite shale. The organic acids in question, humic, is soluble in high pH. Fulvic is soluble in a wide range of pHs. Could you perform the extraction at home? yes. Can you produce synthetic organic acids? yes, see synthetic chelates.
> 
> Supplying carbon to the soil is always a good thing. Humic is rich in carbon. Carbon will decrease bulk density of soil. Is there enough in air8 or humic acid to provide quick shifts in bulk density? No. Is it going to increase the surface area of clay? no. Can anything increase surface area of clay? Could it reduce resistance in the root zone? Possibly - and I personally lean towards the yes based on more experience than conducted trials. Agglomeration, aggregation, and flocculation all apply here and all work towards "aerification." My big case in point was spraying it on my bermuda in transition and the flush of growth that came from it. For a few weeks I was consistently cutting an additional full inch of clippings off the liquid aeration side. Would this apply to all lawns? I have no idea. It could be contributed to my soil pH (really low), potassium levels (80ppm), or soil composition (silty clay. Is the goal of using air8 to move humic substances quickly into the rootzone by using a KOH carrier, seeing as it does flush pretty quickly? With the increase of microbial activity (http://www.soil-biotics.com/files/3. Humic Acids Effects EDIT.pdf) that comes through the application of humates can this be the sauce, more so than decreasing bulk density? I dont know.
> 
> I think the big argument here that's often overlooked is the amount of actual compaction that takes place on a home lawn vs. sports turf. What you see on a golf green (grass maintained at an unbelievably unnatural height of cut) and walking is extremely stressful, given its situation - sand, incredibly low hoc, full exposure, traffic. The low height of cut alone is threatened by the presence of organic matter. In a home lawn, 4" fescue we'll say for fun, you simply will not face the compaction issues that cannot be overcome through fertility (see @Greendoc and his aeration schedule). Of course there are some exceptions - cane corso's, kids, etc, but it's not like the 50 yard line of a football field. So if you shifted your focus towards utilizing the roots to provide your aerification, could you make the switch to a liquid product to provide a carbon source, and "extract" acids from your soil humus/organic matter layer and get a similar benefit that you would from aerating a lawn that doesn't have the demands of sports turf? And if you're not collecting your plugs and backfilling with a product to hold porosity, how effective is your aeration really?
> 
> I'm not telling you definitely use the product, I'm just keeping the conversation going with my own rationale.
Click to expand...


----------



## Ware

@Zabak80 this topic is not about Matt Martin, yet 3 of your 5 total posts here at TLF involve you making accusations against him. Discussions here should be about issues, not people. If you disagree with an idea, go ahead and marshal all your forces against it - but please do not confuse ideas with the people posting them. Attacks on individuals, baiting or other attempts to sow dissension are not acceptable. Please understand that continuing to make baseless accusations against another TLF member will not be tolerated.


----------



## SCGrassMan

Just rent an "Air8or" from a tool rental place and top dress with sand. You're talking 200-300 bucks tops for 80% of the yards in here.


----------



## Spammage

Ware said:


> @Zabak80 this topic is not about Matt Martin, yet 3 of your 5 total posts here at TLF involve you making accusations against him. Discussions here should be about issues, not people. If you disagree with an idea, go ahead and marshal all your forces against it - but please do not confuse ideas with the people posting them. Attacks on individuals, baiting or other attempts to sow dissension are not acceptable. Please understand that continuing to make baseless accusations against another TLF member will not be tolerated.


So much this @Zabak80. I don't know Matt and I have never communicated with him prior to this thread. I didn't buy his product or any that he sells, but he (and others) went above and beyond to try to help me with a problem. That's what makes this website so great. Any disparaging remarks about Matt are unnecessary, unwarranted, and inappropriate in my opinion.


----------



## stepper

I put down 9oz/M of Air8 down in my backyard on 3/16. We had a heavy downpour on 3/24 in DFW. My rain gauge said 1.25" and it all happened in maybe 2 hours. The first pictures in the dark were at 10:05PM after storm had passed. The pictures during the day were taken yesterday between 5:45PM and 7:45PM. We did have sun all day long yesterday, but normally this would take at least 48 hours to completely dry out.

I'll keep track of the next storm we have where it stays cloudy the next day.


----------



## Suburban Jungle Life

I wonder if air8 could be classified more as a wetting agent or penterra type of thing?


----------



## stepper

Suburban Jungle Life said:


> I wonder if air8 could be classified more as a wetting agent or penterra type of thing?


That was really all I was looking to get out of it. More expensive, but it was a gift.


----------



## NWGALawn706

Great thread and debate. 
I have used Air8, RGS, Humic12, and MicroGreen for a few months now. In the 5 1/2 years I've lived at my current residence, my lawn has never looked better. There are clear improvements in thickness of the grass, the density of the lawn, the soil condition, and color of the grass.


----------



## Glen_Cove_5511

@NWGALawn706 I just purchased the same products. I have applied everything except MicroGreen the past two days. I'm hoping to see the same results in my TTTF lawn.


----------



## NWGALawn706

Glen_Cove_5511 said:


> @NWGALawn706 I just purchased the same products. I have applied everything except MicroGreen the past two days. I'm hoping to see the same results in my TTTF lawn.


I'll keep up with your post and see if you come back and give us an update. Here's my lawn.


----------



## Glen_Cove_5511

@NWGALawn706 That looks really nice. My lawn was established from seed last October. It's doing okay but I plan to overseed this fall to help it get thicker. Constant battle right now with heat stress, fungus and dog urine spots.


----------



## NWGALawn706

Glen_Cove_5511 said:


> @NWGALawn706 That looks really nice. My lawn was established from seed last October. It's doing okay but I plan to overseed this fall to help it get thicker. Constant battle right now with heat stress, fungus and dog urine spots.





Glen_Cove_5511 said:


> @NWGALawn706 That looks really nice. My lawn was established from seed last October. It's doing okay but I plan to overseed this fall to help it get thicker. Constant battle right now with heat stress, fungus and dog urine spots.





Glen_Cove_5511 said:


> @NWGALawn706 I just purchased the same products. I have applied everything except MicroGreen the past two days. I'm hoping to see the same results in my TTTF lawn.


VERY nice! Looks like a great spot to just sit and relax!


----------

