Hydrophobic coatings to improve the physical quality parameters of fertilizers

Abstract

A fertilizer composition that includes a base fertilizer granule with a hydrophobic or superhydrophobic coating that reduces fertilizer caking and dust formation. The coating may include a roughness component, which creates surface roughness at the micrometer scale, and a hydrophobic coating. Together, the coating components physically protect the water-soluble fertilizer granules from moisture ingress and caking, and increase the granules' resistance to abrasion.

Description

Hydrophobic coatings to improve the physical quality parameters of fertilizers! QRf* 1 n / ίZРZ / ^ / YILI CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 5 62 / 793,582 filed on January 17, 2019, which is incorporated herein in its entirety by reference. FIELD OF INVENTION The embodiments described herein relate to a hydrophobic or superhydrophobic coating for reducing agglomeration (clumping), degradation (breakdown), and dust generation of granulated fertilizers during storage, transport, and application. Specifically, this disclosure describes a rough coating or surface treatment with a low surface energy compound that minimizes the effect of moisture and temperature cycling of the fertilizer to reduce agglomeration, degradation, and dust. In some embodiments, the coating can be added to the fertilizer in a single step and may also contain one or more micronutrients and / or secondary nutrients, resulting in free-flowing properties. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Many agricultural fertilizers are produced by granulation, followed by drying and cooling, before being stored for extended periods prior to application to the soil. An inherent problem during this conventional storage time is the high propensity of a significant portion of the fertilizer to form lumps and agglomerates. The formation of hard lumps and agglomerates is generally a consequence of cyclical humidity changes with day-night temperature variations. When humidity increases, moisture condenses in the air and / or moisture within the granules migrates outward, and the fertilizer begins to dissolve. When humidity decreases and the temperature cools, crystal bridges form during the recrystallization process, creating salt bridges that block the granules. These lumps and agglomerates occur in most fertilizer storage facilities. Fertilizer that has clumped together is more likely to produce dust when packaged or transported due to the shedding of these crystals. This makes the fertilizer much more difficult to handle and distribute in the soil, as the dust is prone to becoming airborne and its application is difficult to control, ultimately causing uneven nutrient distribution and potential health and safety issues for users. When fertilizer clumps are hard and unaffected by transport, they can cause blockages in spreading equipment, which also leads to uneven nutrient distribution and equipment wear. The critical relative humidity (CRH) at which most fertilizers absorb moisture from the air and undergo physical degradation due to caking is between 60 and 75% relative humidity (at 35°C or 95°F). At this humidity, moisture from the air is deposited on the fertilizer and initiates the surface dissolution process. When fertilizers with different CRHs are blended, the CRH of the mixture changes and is influenced by the component with the lower CRH, which can make the mixture susceptible to caking under normal storage conditions. This can significantly limit some potential blending partners and their storage capacity. Coating granular fertilizers reduces the likelihood of degradation. However, many of the hydrophobic coatings used on fertilizers are prohibitively expensive for widespread commercial use, and are therefore only used in more lucrative, high-value product sectors, such as the turf industry, for example, on golf courses. Measures have been taken to incorporate hydrophobic coatings into fertilizers to significantly slow the release of nutrients from the fertilizer, thus forming controlled-release or slow-release fertilizers, such as those described in U.S. Patent No. 7,452,399, entitled "Coating for Fertilizers," U.S. Patent No. 4,857,098, entitled "Sulfur-Coated Fertilizer Granules and Process for Manufacturing The Same," and App. 14 / 351,560, entitled "Encapsulated Nitrogen Fertilizer Composition with Fire Extinguishing and Prevention Options Corresponding to the Manufacturing and Application Process," all of which are incorporated by reference in their entirety. However, these coatings do not necessarily provide improvements in the tendency to caking and dust formation.Furthermore, these types of coatings are usually derived from synthetic polymers, whose long-term effects on the soil have not been tested. Natural products, such as waxes and oils, are sometimes applied for their anti-caking properties, as described in U.S. Patent No. 6,355,083B1, entitled "Composition for the Control of Fertilizer Dust and Method of Treating the Same," incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. However, these coatings generally do not provide the benefits with the longevity required for fertilizer storage. Consequently, these coatings can result in a significantly shortened fertilizer shelf life and are often difficult to apply evenly on uneven surfaces. Inert inorganic particles have been included in some coatings as fillers 35 to try to seal the pores of fertilizer macrogranules, slowing the ingress of water and thus the release of nutrients from the product, as discussed, for example, in PCT Application No. WO 2000 / 076649, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. To control and slow the release of nutrients by using fillers, quantities of up to 20% by weight of the coating are required, as described, for example, in European Patent Application No. EP 0976699, and the inclusion of other hydrophobic compounds, such as amines, is often needed to further slow dissolution, as described in French Patent Application No.FR 2155883A2, both incorporated into this document by reference in their entirety; however, this is not necessary for an anti-caking coating. Therefore, an environmentally responsible and low-cost coating is needed that reduces the tendency of water-soluble fertilizers to clump, especially those with irregular and angular particles, such as compacted potassium chloride, which makes uniform coating difficult to achieve. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION The modality(ies) of this disclosure generally relate to a hydrophobic or superhydrophobic coating for fertilizer granules. A hydrophobic coating is one in which the contact angle is 90 degrees or greater when measured from a surface, and a superhydrophobic coating is one in which the contact angle is 140 degrees or greater. Hereafter, for simplicity, hydrophobic is used to describe a hydrophobic or superhydrophobic state. The hydrophobic coatings of modality(ies) include a particle roughness additive and a low surface energy hydrophobic component, such as a wax coating, wax emulsion, or oil treatment agent.In the forms described herein, the hydrophobic coating additive(s) result in a micrometer-scale surface roughness on the fertilizer surface, which may, but does not necessarily, add hydrophobicity and / or nutrient value to the fertilizer. The hydrophobic coating on the fertilizer granule is used to protect water-soluble fertilizer granules from moisture ingress. In one application method, a hydrophobic coating material is in a liquid or molten state. One or more additives are then incorporated into the molten or liquid hydrophobic coating material. The hydrophobic coating material is applied by spraying or rotating onto the surface of a base fertilizer granule containing one or more primary nutrients, such as phosphorus, nitrogen, and / or potassium-based fertilizers (collectively, NPK fertilizers).In the various forms, suitable fertilizer granules may include, for example, nitrogen-containing fertilizers such as nitrates and ureas, potassium-containing fertilizers such as potashes, including muriate of potash (MOP) or potassium sulfate (SOP), phosphorus-containing fertilizers such as phosphate fertilizers, including ammonium phosphates such as monoammonium phosphate (MAP) or diammonium phosphate (DAP), calcium phosphate fertilizers such as single superphosphate (SSP) or triple superphosphate (TSP), potassium phosphates, calcium phosphates, or any combination thereof.The additives in the hydrophobic coating provide a roughness that decreases the contact area between the surface and the water droplets, encouraging the water to run off the surface and thus preventing or reducing water ingress. In another formulation, a fertilizer granule is first coated with a rough material. In this formulation, a particulate roughening additive is first applied, for example, using conventional coating methods such as spray coating, in one or more continuous or discontinuous layers around the base fertilizer granule. After the granule has been coated with a particulate roughening compound, a low-energy hydrophobic material, such as a wax and / or oil, is applied in one or more continuous or discontinuous layers around the coated base fertilizer granule. The time between the application of the roughening compound and the coating can vary depending on the process design requirements. In a third scenario, surface roughness results from physical treatment, such as mechanical abrasion or the creation of a rough surface through polishing during the base granule manufacturing process. An example of this would be controlling the crystallization rate and the degree of annealing of the base granules to ensure the required surface roughness. Sufficient surface roughness may then only require a coating of the low-energy superhydrophobic coating, with or without additives. In another alternative, the hydrophobic coating, with or without roughness additives, is applied to the base fertilizer granules and shaped, either at the time of application or in a subsequent application to the granule. For example, a microfilm can be formed with the coating while it is still in a liquid, molten, or otherwise fluid state to create a micro-rough surface pattern. The foregoing summary does not purport to describe every illustrated embodiment or every implementation of the present invention. The detailed description that follows exemplifies these embodiments more specifically. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS The subject matter of this document can be better understood by considering the following detailed description of various modalities in relation to the attached figures, in which: FIGURE 1 is a cross-sectional view of a fertilizer granule containing a superhydrophobic coating according to an embodiment of the present invention; FIGURE 2 is a cross-sectional view of a fertilizer granule containing a superhydrophobic coating according to an alternative embodiment of the present invention; FIGURE 3 is a perspective view of the rough fertilizer according to embodiment 5 of the present invention; FIGURE 4 is a comparison of fertilizer granules representing the effect of various fertilizer coatings on the tendency of the fertilizer to clump according to the embodiments of the present invention; FIGURE 5 is a graph comparing the moisture absorption for fertilizer 10 according to the embodiments of the present invention; FIGURES 6A and 6B are a comparison of moisture repellency and absorption according to the embodiments of the present invention; FIGURE 7 is a graph comparing the tendency of the fertilizer to clump according to the modalities of the present invention; FIGURE 8 is a graph comparing the abrasion resistance of coated fertilizers according to the embodiments of the present invention; FIGURE 9 is a graph comparing the powder of the coated fertilizer product according to the embodiments of the present invention; FIGURE 10 is a graph comparing the degradation of the product of the coated fertilizers 20 according to the modalities of the present invention. While several embodiments are susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, the details of these have been shown by way of example in the drawings and will be described in detail. It should be understood, however, that the intention is not to limit the claimed inventions to the particular embodiments described. On the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives that fall within the spirit and scope of the subject matter defined by the claims. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS According to a disclosure modality illustrated in FIGURE 1, a hydrophobically coated fertilizer granule 100 may comprise a fertilizer core portion 102 and a hydrophobic coating material 103 containing a particle roughness additive or component 104 and a low surface energy hydrophobic material 106 coated or otherwise applied to at least a portion of the fertilizer 102. Depending on the modalities, the portion of fertilizer 102 may comprise any suitable fertilizer, such as nitrates, ureas, potashes, phosphate fertilizers such as monoammonium phosphate (MAP), diammonium phosphate (DAP), single superphosphate, triple superphosphate, potassium phosphates, calcium phosphates, or combinations thereof. According to the embodiments, the hydrophobic coating material 103 may comprise a dispersion, emulsion, suspension, or mixture of a particulate grinding additive 104 or a low surface energy material grinding agent 106. In the embodiments, this grinding additive 104 may comprise silicates, sand, phosphate rock, calcium carbonate, gypsum, micronutrients, stearates, including, for example, but not limited to, sodium stearate and zinc stearate, fatty acids such as stearic acid, potash powder, or any combination thereof. In alternative embodiments, any crystalline or amorphous particulate compound with a solubility lower than that of a base granule may be used. In one embodiment, the coating 103 comprises from approximately 0.01 wt% to approximately 10 wt%, more specifically from approximately 0.01 wt% to approximately 5 wt%, and more specifically from approximately 0.01 wt%.1% by weight to approximately 1.0% by weight of crystalline or amorphous roughness additive based on the total weight of the granule. These additives may or may not be hydrophobic. The roughing additive 15 104 may be dispersed, emulsified, or otherwise suspended in the hydrophobic material. 106. Depending on the embodiment, the low surface energy hydrophobic material 106 may comprise candelilla wax, beeswax, carnauba wax, recycled food industry waxes, wax emulsions, or combinations thereof. In other embodiments, the hydrophobic material 106 may be any vegetable-based or chemical wax with a melting point between 50°C and approximately 105°C (approximately 122°F to approximately 221°F). In another embodiment, the hydrophobic material 106 may be a petroleum industry wax, such as slaked wax, paraffin wax, microcrystalline waxes, or combinations of oils and waxes. The combination of natural and synthetic waxes with or without oil 25 may be applied to create a hydrophobic or superhydrophobic coating. In another embodiment, the hydrophobic material 106 is composed of any suitable natural, mineral, or synthetic oil. The oils may be any suitable natural, mineral, or synthetic oil, such as a white mineral oil, but preferably a vegetable oil including canola oil, sunflower oil, soybean oil, castor oil, linseed oil, olive oil, or modified vegetable oils. Other hydrophobic fatty acids, such as stearic acid, may also be used. In the embodiments, a combination of any of the waxes, oils, or fatty acids may be considered. In the embodiments, the hydrophobic wax, oil additive, or mixture of wax and oil additive coating the fertilizer granule comprises from 0.01 to 10 percent, more particularly from 0.1 to 5 percent by weight, and more particularly from 0.5 to 2.0 percent by weight of the fertilizer granule.A thin coating ensures hydrophobicity or superhydrophobicity while also providing the benefit of dust control, without inhibiting the release of nutrients from the fertilizer once applied to the soil. In one embodiment according to FIGURE 1, a method for forming a coated fertilizer granule 100 comprises combining a predetermined amount of a rough material 104 with a predetermined amount of hydrophobic material 106 to form a superhydrophobic coating material for coating the formed fertilizer granule. In this embodiment, the hydrophobic coating material 106 may be in a liquid, solid, or molten form and may be sprayed, curtain-coated, or coated by any number of suitable coating techniques to form a continuous or discontinuous coating over the formed base fertilizer granules 102 to form a quantity of coated fertilizer granules 100. The granules are then dried or cooled. In one embodiment according to FIGURE 2, the particle roughener 204 can be applied to the surface of the fertilizer granule 202, prior to the application of a low-energy material 206 to the fertilizer granule 202. In this embodiment, the particle roughener 204 can be applied as a liquid, solid, or molten material and can be sprayed, curtain-coated, or applied using any suitable coating technique to form a continuous or discontinuous coating on the formed fertilizer granules 202 to create a quantity of coated fertilizer granules. According to the embodiment, the crystalline or amorphous particle-coated granules are then coated with a low-energy material 206.The low surface energy material 206 can be a liquid, a solid, an emulsion, or a molten form and can be sprayed, curtain-coated, or applied using a number of suitable coating techniques to form a continuous or discontinuous coating over the crystalline coated fertilizer granules to form a quantity of coated fertilizer granules 200. The granules are then dried or cooled. According to one disclosure modality represented in FIGURES 1 and 2, crystalline or amorphous particle additives produce micrometer-scale roughness on the fertilizer surface.104,204 In this modality, fertilizer granule roughness can be created using a wide range of the crystalline or amorphous particle additives described above. The additives can range in size from about 50 nm to about 250 pm. In the preferred modality,30 these materials can range in size from 10 pm to 150 pm. In other embodiments, the size of the additives is greater than 150 µm. According to the disclosure embodiments illustrated in FIGURE 3, the micrometer-scale surface roughness ensures that the surface areas shared by any deposited moisture droplets and the fertilizer granule 306 are minimal compared to the absence of coating 302. The roughness ensures that the water droplets remain spherical so that air trapped between the fertilizer 306 and the water droplet does not allow water to penetrate the fertilizer granule. These coatings can also be applied to granules heated to temperatures above ambient to aid in wetting the surface of the low-energy hydrophobic coating and optimize coating homogeneity. In these embodiments, the particle-removal compound and the low-energy hydrophobic additives produce a roughness that increases the coating's hydrophobicity with minimal effect on its flowability, sprayability, or covering capacity. In the preferred embodiments, the coating must be sufficiently degradable once applied to the soil so that the fertilizer nutrients are readily released into the soil. Particular embodiments of the invention are discussed in the following examples. The equipment used in preparing each example was a SPEX 8000M mixer mill with an electric motor mounted on the damper. In some examples, the mixer mill operated with an oscillating motion of 5.9 cm forward and backward, and 2.5 cm side to side at 1060 cycles / min. The sample materials were prepared in batches by first loading the vials with 15 uncoated MOP granules, followed by the addition of the appropriate particle grinding material, mixing for one minute, then heating together with the low surface energy material and mixing further while cooling naturally to room temperature. Example 1: MOP, MOP + wax, and MOP + wax and particle grinder The clumping of uncoated MOP was compared with that of wax-coated MOP and with wax-coated MOP and a grinding compound. The test conditions were 4 g samples subjected to 35°C with 1 kg of weight applied at a relative humidity of 80% for 7 days. The tendency of MOP to caking is relatively high due to the particle size distribution and the angular shape of the product. In bulk storage, caking forms as a crust on MOP stocks as moisture cycles naturally. As illustrated in Figure 4, MOP coated with finely ground phosphate rock and candelilla wax resulted in significantly less caking compared to untreated MOP and MOP coated only with wax. Example 2: Moisture capture for MOP with wax and grinding Moisture absorption (percent weight gain) was compared at relative humidities of 75% and 80% for fertilizers coated with 1.5% candelilla wax and a series of roughers (FIGURE 5). The roughers used in this example included phosphate rock, bentonite clay, calcium carbonate (CaCO3), diatomite, elemental sulfur (El35S), apatite nanoparticles (Ca5(PO4)3(F,Cl,OH)) from SKY Spring Nanoparticles Inc., apatite nanoparticles from MK Nano, dolomite (CaCO3.MgCO3), gypsum (CaSO4.2H2O), and zinc oxide (ZnO). The roughing agents were added in proportions ranging from 0.1% (elemental S) to 2.4% (dolomite). Moisture absorption was evaluated after 3 hours of exposure to 75 and 80% relative humidity (25°C). As shown in the graph in FIGURE 5, at 80% relative humidity, the 5 coated fertilizer composition using candelilla wax and phosphate rock resulted in less moisture absorption. Example 3: Tendency to caking of MOP, MOP + ZnO in wax emulsions and zinc stearate grinder with candelilla wax In this example, the MOP particles were coated with wax emulsion coatings applied at a rate of 1.5 wt% over the fertilizer containing 0.5 wt% ZnO, or with a Zn stearate / candelilla coating. Referring to Figures 6A and 6B, after 15 days at 80% RH, moisture is repelled from the coated fertilizer composition (see Figure 6A) but absorbed by the uncoated MOP particles (see Figure 6B). The force required to break up ~3 g samples of compacted fertilizer after being subjected to 80% RH at 22°C for 30 d, followed by overnight drying at 40°C and equilibration to room temperature is shown in FIGURE 7. As demonstrated, ZnO and Zn stearate roughers, both in wax emulsion and melts, significantly reduced the tendency of uncoated MOP to compact. Example 4: Abrasion resistance over time for MOP and ZnO-coated MOP and wax emulsions containing different proportions and sources of wax. The percentage of degradation was calculated as the weight percentage of particles <250 µm remaining after subjecting a 10 g sample (+1-3.35 mm) to 30 s in a Spex mixer / mill (8000 M) replicated in triplicate. Compared to the uncoated sample, the % degradation was reduced by -10 times for these coatings, as shown in FIGURE 8. Example 5: Product degradation and dust formation Referring to Figures 9 and 10, product degradation and dust formation were compared for samples with a moisture-control coating, such as the one described herein, to uncoated MOP. In the figures, Samples #1A-C and #2-C were coated with a sodium stearate roughener at a rate of 2 lb of stearate per ton of fertilizer granules, and with a hydrophobic coating consisting of VM160 petroleum oil with 5% amine at a rate of 3 lb of coating per ton of granules. Sample No. 3 was coated with the same roughener and hydrophobic coating formulations, but the roughener was increased to 3.5 lb / ton. As can be seen in the graphs, dust generation and the percentage of breakage of the samples... ORP1 n / LZnZ / q / YILI coated samples were significantly reduced compared to the uncoated reference sample. The invention can be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its essential attributes; therefore, the illustrated embodiments should be considered in all respects as illustrative and not restrictive. The claims provided herein are for the purpose of establishing foreign priority and not for any other purpose. This document describes various embodiments of systems, devices, and methods. These embodiments are provided only by way of example and are not intended to limit the scope of the claimed inventions. Furthermore, it should be appreciated that the various features of the described embodiments can be combined in various ways to produce numerous additional embodiments. Moreover, although various materials, dimensions, shapes, configurations, and locations, etc., have been described for use with the disclosed embodiments, others may be used in addition to those disclosed without exceeding the scope of the claimed inventions. Those with ordinary knowledge in the relevant arts will recognize that the subject matter of this document may comprise fewer features than those illustrated in any single modality described above. The modalities described herein are not intended to be an exhaustive presentation of the ways in which the various features of the subject matter of this document may be combined. Accordingly, the modalities are not mutually exclusive combinations of features; rather, the various modalities may comprise a combination of different individual features selected from different individual modalities, as understood by those with ordinary knowledge in the field. Furthermore, elements described with respect to one modality may be implemented in other modalities, even when not described in those modalities, unless otherwise indicated. Although a dependent claim may refer in the claims to a specific combination with one or more other claims, other embodiments may also include a combination of the dependent claim with the subject matter of each of the other 30 dependent claims or a combination of one or more features with other dependent or independent claims. These combinations are proposed herein unless otherwise indicated. Any incorporation by reference from prior documents is limited such that no subject matter is incorporated that would be contrary to explicit disclosure in this document. Any incorporation by reference from prior documents is further limited such that none of the claims contained in those documents are incorporated by reference. Any incorporation by reference from prior documents is even more limited such that any definition provided in those documents is not incorporated by reference in this document unless expressly included herein. For the purposes of interpreting the claims, it is expressly intended that the provisions of 35 USC § 112(f) not be invoked unless the specific terms "means to" or "step to" are recited in a claim.

Claims

1. A fertilizer product characterized in that it comprises a plurality of moisture-controlling granules 5, each of the coated granules comprising: a base fertilizer granule; and a moisture-control coating applied to the base fertilizer granule, which includes a hydrophobic material component and a roughness component.

2. The fertilizer product according to claim 1, characterized in that the roughing component has a lower solubility than the base fertilizer granule.

3. The fertilizer product according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the roughing component comprises particles having a particle size in the range of approximately 10pm to approximately 150pm.

4. The fertilizer product according to any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the roughing component is selected from the group consisting of silicates, sand, phosphate rock, calcium carbonate, gypsum, zinc, manganese, iron, copper, molybdenum, boron, chloride, cobalt, sodium, sulfur in the form of sulfate, elemental sulfur, zinc stearate, sodium stearate, stearic acid, potash powder, and combinations thereof.

5. The fertilizer product according to any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the roughing component is present in an amount of approximately 0.01% by weight to approximately 10% by weight based on the total weight of the granule.

6. The fertilizer product according to claim 5, characterized in that the roughing component is present in an amount of approximately 0.1% by weight to approximately 1.0% by weight of the total weight of the granule.

7. The fertilizer product according to any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the hydrophobic material component comprises a wax, an oil, a fatty acid, or combinations thereof. 30 8. The fertilizer product according to claim 7, characterized in that the hydrophobic material component comprises a wax selected from the group consisting of candelilla, beeswax, carnauba, vegetable-derived wax, a paraffin, slaked wax, microcrystalline wax, a wax and oil emulsion, and combinations thereof.

9. The fertilizer product according to claim 7, characterized in that the hydrophobic material component comprises an oil selected from the group which consists of white mineral oil, petroleum oil, canola oil, sunflower oil, soybean oil, castor oil, linseed oil, olive oil, modified vegetable oils and combinations thereof.

10. The fertilizer product according to any of the preceding claims 5, characterized in that the hydrophobic material is present in an amount of approximately 0.01 to approximately 10 percent of the total fertilizer granules.

11. The fertilizer product according to claim 10, characterized in that the hydrophobic material is present in an amount of approximately 0.5 to approximately 2.0 percent by weight of the whole fertilizer granule.

12. The fertilizer product according to any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the base fertilizer granule is selected from the group consisting of nitrates, ureas, muriate of potassium, potassium sulfate, monoammonium phosphate (MAP), diammonium phosphate (DAP), single superphosphate, triple superphosphate, potassium phosphates, calcium phosphates 15 and combinations thereof.

13. The fertilizer product according to claim 1, characterized in that the moisture control coating comprises a wax emulsion containing ZnO.

14. The fertilizer product according to claim 1, characterized in that the moisture control coating comprises sodium stearate and / or zinc stearate 20 as a roughness component, and one of the amine petroleum oils and candelilla wax as a hydrophobic material.

15. The fertilizer product according to any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the outermost surface of the granules has a microscale surface roughness due to the moisture-control coating. 25 16. A method for providing a moisture control treatment to fertilizer granules, characterized in that it comprises: providing a plurality of fertilizer granules; and coating the fertilizer granules with a moisture control treatment material comprising a hydrophobic material and a roughness component. 30 17. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the coating of the fertilizer granules comprises: coating the fertilizer granules with the roughing component; and subsequently coating the fertilizer granules with the roughing component applied thereto with the hydrophobic material. 35 18. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the coating of the fertilizer granules comprises: combining the roughing component and the hydrophobic material; and subsequently coating the fertilizer granule with the combined roughing component and hydrophobic material.

19. The method according to any of claims 16-18, 5 characterized in that the roughing component comprises particles having a particle size in the range of approximately 10pm to approximately 150pm.

20. The method according to any of claims 16-19, characterized in that the roughing component is selected from the group consisting of silicates, sand, phosphate rock, calcium carbonate, gypsum, zinc, manganese, iron, copper, molybdenum, boron, chloride, cobalt, sodium, sulfur in the form of sulfate, elemental sulfur, zinc stearate, sodium stearate, stearic acid, potash powder and combinations thereof.

21. The method according to any of claims 16-20, characterized in that the roughing component is present in an amount of approximately 0.01% by weight to approximately 10% by weight based on the total weight 15 of the granule.

22. The method according to claim 21, characterized in that the roughing component is present in an amount of approximately 0.1% by weight to approximately 1.0% by weight of the total weight of the granule.

23. The method according to any of claims 16-22, 20 characterized in that the hydrophobic material component comprises a wax, an oil, a metallic salt of a fatty acid, or combinations thereof.

24. The method according to claim 23, characterized in that the hydrophobic material component comprises a wax selected from the group consisting of candelilla, beeswax, carnauba, vegetable-derived wax, a paraffin, slaked wax, microcrystalline wax, a wax and oil emulsion, and combinations thereof.

25. The method according to claim 23, characterized in that the hydrophobic material component comprises an oil selected from the group consisting of white mineral oil, petroleum oil, canola oil, sunflower oil, soybean oil, castor oil, linseed oil, olive oil, modified vegetable oils and 30 combinations thereof.

26. The method according to any of claims 16-25, characterized in that the hydrophobic material is present in an amount of approximately 0.01 to approximately 10 percent of the total fertilizer granules. 35 27. The method according to claim 26, characterized in that the hydrophobic material is present in an amount of approximately 0.5 to approximately 2.0 percent by weight of the whole fertilizer granule.

28. The method according to any of claims 16-27, characterized in that the base fertilizer granule is selected from the group consisting of nitrates, ureas, muriate of potash, potassium sulfate, monoammonium phosphate (MAP), diammonium phosphate (DAP), single superphosphate, triple superphosphate, potassium phosphates, calcium phosphates and combinations thereof.

29. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the moisture control coating comprises a wax emulsion containing ZnO.

30. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the moisture control coating comprises zinc stearate and / or sodium stearate as a roughness component, and one of the amine petroleum oils and candelilla wax as a hydrophobic material.