There's another thread going on which relates to this very question. I'll keep my words sparse, as I sense I opened a can of worms over there and don't wish to do the same here, but one thing I will say is that it's not water content per se that determines whether a compost ingredient is a "green" or a "brown". It's the ratio of carbon to nitrogen that counts.

-Diggity

Here's a neat table I found when I googled "carbon nitrogen ratio" Maybe it'll help.

Here is a link that might be useful: Organic Gardening & Compost

Diggity, I searched up your "My mulching mower theory thread". I hope you get an answer because it would answer some of my questions too.
Thank you MMQ for the link. There must be a resource out there somewhere that gives the difference nutrients and the change percentage from a green to a brown. One of the posters on the above mentioned thread said that if it was dead when it was cut, it's brown. if it was green when it was cut, it is green. There's got to be a lot of room for nitrogen and chemical changes between those two. ~Tom

here's a lot of info I found. I gave the main index link but if you scroll down and find article 51 on Green Manures, it talks about wet and dry and the amount of nitrogen lost to decay. ~Tom

Here is a link that might be useful: EAP Publicatons

The practice of composting has been so oversimplified by the use of meaningless colors that it is almost impossible to find any useful information. What you are trying to achieve with a compost pile is a mix of foods for microbes that will not only speed up decomposition, but will not stink while decomposing. The ratios we have all seen ascribed to 'green' and 'brown' ingredients would be much better described as protein and carbohydrates. But it is still not that simple. There are proteins and carbohydrates that decompose fast and slow. Blood and purified sugar are a protein and carb that decompose quickly. Feathers and sawdust are a protein and carb that take months to decompose. Materials that decompose fast usually smell bad when decomposing without any control. The slow decomposing materials are used along with air to control the speed of the overall decomposition.

"If I dry Dandelions or grass clippings or plants in the sun, does that convert them from nitrogen greens to carbon browns?"
That depends on how they were dried. Hay, a grass is cut and cured and the Nitrogen stays high and is stabilized so that hay can be used as a high protein food for animals. If your do the same with green plant material the Nitrogen will remain and the plan material will be a "green". All that the green color of a plant indicates is that the plant has a lot of chlorofil.

"Will converted greens to browns take care of the carbon quotas in the compost pile?"
Yes.
"Won't these recent greens have a higher nutrient quality than long dead carbons have, like, say newspaper or sawdust?"
Depends.
"To be considered brown from a recent green, does almost all the water content have to be dried up? taken from?"
Water has nothing to do with how much Nitrogen is in the plant tissue, although water can be why that plants tissue does not have good quality Nitrogen.

You thought these were "simple questions". ;) "Simple" answers (not totally accurate, but "simple"):

No.
No.
Only nitrogen.
Not relevant.

If browns are what you need, stick with high carbon sources for best results - the more diversified, the better.

Dave

If you want to read several prior discussions on this do a search using "grass green or brown". The question comes up frequently. ;)

O.K. then. If newer grass clippings are say, 25 to 1 and if straw is about 100:1, wasn't straw cut while greenish and still in the ground dying off? So if we take it that they are not the same but similar, then degradation of nitrogen occurs as the age of the deceased plant increases.
~Tom

wasn't straw cut while greenish and still in the ground dying off

Straw, no. Hay, yes. Straw is pure carbon, hollow-reed stems of field dried crops such as wheat, oats, and barley that are never harvested green (avg. moisture content is less then 10%) as the crop has to go directly into storage or it has moisture added back to it for immediate processing into flour, etc.

Hay is solid-stem, nitrogen-rich, field grasses such as alfalfa, timothy, bermuda, etc. and is mowed green, wind-rowed, allowed to dry just enough to bale, and then baled while still green. A bale of hay that is cracked a year later is still quite green and moist in the middle.

Hope this helps.

Dave

Here are some more examples:

One of our best protein sources is brown colored wheat. It is fairly high in protein and will remain high in protein in the silo until it gets eaten either by us or microbes. Age and color of the ingredients have nothing to do with anything.

Blood is extremely high in protein (nitrogen). Blood meal is similarly extremely green. Moisture content has nothing to do with anything.

If you want to read several prior discussions on this do a search using "grass green or brown". The question comes up frequently. ;)

I've been reading them here for years.

Grass clippings, according to most all C:N ratio charts are 19:1, fresh and/or properly cured.
Hay, also a grass, has a ratio of 12:1.
Straw is a grass that is not cut until the seed heads, the grain we eat, is ready to be harvested and then the stems, the straw, is a brown since all the energy from that plant went into making those drains, and straw has a C:N ratio of 80:1.
As a general rule a plant will not, necessarily, loose the Nitrogen unless that Nitrogen is used up in the seed making process, mostly annuals that have not learned to store nutrients for the future in the plant or plants we grow that are not compatible with our weather.

Stupid question time:

You say Grass clippings have a C/N ratio of 19:1
Then you say:
Straw has a C/N ratio of 80:1

Like I said, stupid question time:

Is the C always on the left, and if not, then wouldn't it be correct to say that the N/C ratio of Grass clippings...or turn the numbers around?

You're confusing me. Esp since I know that you're talking about a green and a brown, so the numbers can't POSSIBLY represent the same thing on the same sides of the ratio.

Thanks.

Hey Diggity! You know that can of worms you opened over there, they forgot to consider the effect of the extra worm casings on the lawn! ROFL!

Sometimes I think about these composting details too, but, I think big picture, the details dont matter, I just keep throwing a bunch of stuff in the bin and it turns black. All I need to know.

:)

The C is always on the left.

Greens don't necessarily have more nitrogen than carbon. They're relatively higher in Nitrogen when compared with other materials.

Since you're aiming for a mixture where the C:N ratio is 30:1, anything higher in C than 30:1 is a brown, and anything lower than 30:1 is a green, so grass, at 19:1 has more N than the 30:1 ratio, making it a green.

dorisl- I totally agree...I really don't give a hoot about the details, but when I'm researching stuff, I like to know that I understand them to some degree. LOL!

IALBTC.

Yeah, it's funny - 99.999999% of the rest of the world would think this whole conversation is incredibly boring and trivial. But if you've followed these threads this far, congratulations! You're a certified compost wacko! :-)

Dchall, I like your way of thinking about compost ingredients as carbohydrates and proteins instead of greens and browns. I guess neither taxonomy paints the full picture - for example, what is urine? It's not a carbohydrate or a protein.
A green or a brown? Hopefully neither! :-)

-Diggity

Quote with my emphasis:
Quote:...composting has been so oversimplified by the use of meaningless colors that it is almost impossible to find any useful information....

I really try to be nice, often failing but I try, but the first person to have invented this brown/green jargon should be....

bpgreen- Well, now I GET IT!!! Thank you! I thought it was that if C was higher than N it was C (and vise-versa) I get it! I get it!!!

"what is urine? It's not a carbohydrate or a protein.
A green or a brown? Hopefully neither! :-)"

It's a green (or protein). In fact, urea is sometimes used as an additive in animal feed to increase protein content. The urea used that way is synthesized, but it is the same chemical compound as the urea in urine.

now we got yellow turning green....

"now we got yellow turning green...."

Yet another example of why so many people dislike the use of brown/green instead of carbohydrate/protein of high carbon/high nitrogen. My wife watches Martha Stewart, and I heard MS use the terms Carbonaceous and Nitrogenous.

Somebody came up with the idea of "simplifying" the concept by using the colors brown and green. I think it only adds to the confusion.

Sorry, but I'm afraid urea is not a protein.

You are correct, however, that it is added to some livestock feeds. I'm not real clear on why they do this, but I'm pretty sure it somehow replaces protein as the raw materials so to speak so the animals can build more proteins (meat).

And of course, it is considered a "green" from a composting point of view.

-Diggity

I'm sure the terminology of green or brown was meant to simplify things in order to make composting easier for a wider base of people. Thus not scaring people off for fear they couldn't compost without a chemistry degree and, after all, encouraging more folks to compost is a good thing (sorry Martha). It could be called green/brown, nitrogen/carbon, black/blue, Peter/Paul for all I care. As long as it gets people to start (keyword- start) understanding composting, I won't knock it.

tj

As long as it gets people to start (keyword- start) understanding composting, I won't knock it.

Same here. Want to compost? Make a pile of lots of different kinds of stuff and let it rot. Viola'! Compost. ;)

Is it perfectly balanced with just the right C:N ratio? Your garden and plants could care less.

Dave

Green or Brown? I was thinking figuratively with green as alive and brown as dead. It just doesn't make sense to me, that the difference of the nitrogen content was whether it went to seed first before being pulled up or mowed. It doesn't make sense to me that it matters whether or not you pulled a live plant up, or found a dead one that died of natural causes. I thought that green grass mowed would be higher in nitrogen than if it layed around a long time and turned brown. ~Tom

here's why I am confused and led to believe that the older a green becomes, then it becomes less nitrogen:

http://www.compostguide.com/
Grass Clippings break down quickly and contain as much nitrogen as manure. Since fresh grass clippings will clump together, become anerobic, and start to smell, mix them with plenty of brown material. If you have a lot of grass clippings to compost, spread them on the driveway or other surface to bake in the sun for at least a day. Once it begins to turn pale or straw-like, it can be used without danger of souring.

So, does the above mean that the nitrogen is released or reduced or converted? Or does it mean that the water is reduced and reduced the clumping ability? Doesn't 'souring' mean smelling and isn't that a sign of too much nitrogen?
~Tom

or how about this one which indicates a 25 percent difference in green and dried?
http://www.ranchomondo.com/compost/cnratio.htm
Some Common C/N Ratios

sawdust 150-200 leaves from oak, maple 40-60
peatmoss 50 sun-dried grass clippings 20
straw 50-150 hay from legumes 15
raw garbage 25 fresh grass clippings 15
cow manure 30 fresh garden debris 20

Or even more strange:
http://web.extension.uiuc.edu/homecompost/materials.html

Grass clippings, dried
C
Grass clippings, fresh
N
I'm not being argumentative. I'm pointing out how confusing this issue is to me.
~Tom

The following quote is about 1/2 down this long online research Word Document Under the Berkely Rapid Method :

http://www.fao.org/AG/agL/agll/compost/docs/On-farm%20Composting%20methods%2014%2005%20021.doc.

For the composting process to work most effectively, material to be composted should have a carbon to nitrogen ratio of 30:1. Mixing equal volumes of green plant material with equal volumes of naturally dry plant material will give approximately a 30:1 carbon to nitrogen (C/N) ratio. Green material can be grass clippings, old flowers, green prunings, weeds, fresh garbage and fruit and vegetable wastes. Dried material can be dead, fallen leaves, dried grass, straw and somewhat woody materials from prunings.

Good references, Tom, thanks! So fresh clippings are indeed higher in nitrogen than dried. That's what I though.

I'd still love to know exactly where the nitrogen goes as the clippings are drying out. Actually, I think the "where" is the atmosphere. "How?" is really the question. Based on some of the other articles referenced over the past few days, I'm thinking it probably has something to do with the breakdown of chlorophyll. This process may be aided by (but not necessarily dependent on) water.

-Diggity

Tom - no one is saying that there aren't "degrees" of greens and brown. Sure dried grass has less nitrogen than does fresh mowed. But that doesn't make the dried grass (as most use the term) a brown/carbon.

Grass clippings, as has been discussion here in several previous posts, will EVENTUALLY become mostly carbon as the nitrogen and the moisture leach off into the air and the ground. The key word is "eventually" - year maybe more depending on how stored (much much longer than 99% of folks would be willing to let their grass lay around to dry).

For that reason, clarity to those new to the process, dried grass clippings should NOT be considered a carbon component in composting.

Your original question:

If I dry Dandelions or grass clippings or plants in the sun, does that convert them from nitrogen greens to carbon browns? The answer is no because practically speaking, you don't have the time to wait for that to happen.

Will converted greens to browns take care of the carbon quotas in the compost pile?

Again, the answer is no. You will get anerobic (stinking) compost. It will sour, it will smell like hot urine (ammonia), it will smell like a huge chicken farm on a 95 degree day and flies from 4 counties will be attracked to it from all the nitrogen evaporating into the air. The product, if it could be used around plants will likely damage or kill them from nitrogen burn and your neighbors will throw rocks at you. ;) Been there, done that.

Dave

"from all the nitrogen evaporating into the air". My point exactly. ~Tom

"from all the nitrogen evaporating into the air". My point exactly.

I don't understand your reply above. My point was all the references you quoted about dried grass clippings as carbons are talking about really, really dried grass clippings - texture of dust blowing in the wind dried grass clippings. Very few folks have the time, interest, or patience to achieve the necessary level of dryness to make them count as a carbon when so many other and better carbons are readily available. But if you wish to try - by all means go for it. ;)

Yes, nitrogen can evaporate during the composting process. No debating that. But the point is to prevent/retard that from happening as much as possible so that the nutrient is retained in the finished compost. That is the role of the carbons, stabilizing the process to retard nitrogen loss. If you don't add enough carbons or you add only weak-ranked carbons you can't achieve the needed ratio much less maintain it. So you get stinky compost that mats and clumps and slimes and can easily turn anaerobic.

However, it is clear by now that we won't be able to convince you.;) So why not try your own experiment. Make your pile out of layers of green grass clippings alternated with layers of grass clippings/weeds you have dried and then report back to all of us on what happens.

That's the best way to learn how the process works.

Dave

ok, I will experiment by drying grass. Btw, here's a very well done research paper on the loss of Nitrogen with cut grass after 4 weeks of laying around:

This study clearly shows that the decomposition of grass clippings provides rapidly released N within the thatch layer of turfgrass.

Here is a link that might be useful: International Crop Science Congress

Another great reference Tom - thanks! One thing I thought as I was reading it was that the study brings up a point that I think ALL of us have neglected in this thread; that while nitrogen is escaping from the clippings, carbon is escaping too!

I do, however, have a problem with the conclusion the authors draw:

"This study clearly shows, however, that the decomposition of grass clippings provides rapidly released N within the thatch layer of turfgrass. It is reasonable to assume that a portion of that N will become available to the turfgrass during the growing season. Therefore, N fertilization rates should be reduced when clippings are returned to turfgrass managed as a residential lawn."

While it may be reasonable to assume that a certain portion is returned to the lawn, what is that portion? Is it 90%? 50%? 10%? *How Much* should fertilization rates be reduced? Please understand, I'm not being critical of the study - these questions were not within its scope.

The authors have shown that nitrogen (and carbon) are quickly released from cut clippings. They have NOT shown where they go. My hypothesis (conjecture, postulate, theory, guess, question, whatever) is that less of these nutrients are returned to the grass than is commonly believed. Most of it escapes to the air.

The corollary to this hypothesis is that the compost pile does a much better job at capturing nitrogen (and carbon), and "sequestering" them as biomass.

So again...
in a "perfect world"...
and with full realization that said perfect world does not exist...
and with all due respect to those who own and love mulching mowers...
and with complete agreement that mulching clippings is waaaay smarter than taking them to the curb....
... I resubmit my humble opinion: that the highest and best use for grass clippings is as food for the compost pile.

So bag your clippings and then RUN at top speed to the compost pile with them! Quickly now! You're losing nitrogen! Allez! Allez! :-)

-Diggity