4 ms·
Speaking purely utilitarian that may be true. In practice though it's not that easy. Good luck convincing people on how wasteful and pollutant beef production
by nosuchthing 11y ago
Speaking purely utilitarian that may be true.
In practice though it's not that easy. Good luck convincing people on how wasteful and pollutant beef production is, or solving the issue of affordable housing for the masses near city centers.
I'd be interested in seeing a city-state attempt to design a modern planned-city architecture incorporating local food production. Maybe even something akin to Paolo Soleri's 'Archology' ; https://www.google.com/search?q=paolo+soleri&biw=1303&bih=785&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&#tbs=ic:gray&tbm=isch&q=paolo+soleri+arcology https://www.google.com/search?q=paolo+soleri&biw=1303&bih=78...
- petra 11y ago>> Good luck convincing people In a world with a real pressing population problem, coupled with good alternatives(meatless meat that's good as the real thing, healthier ,cheaper, marketed well) it seems doable. >> local food production. In the grand scale of things, i'm not sure that's a huge problem. food miles are just 10% of food emissions, and we have some other ways to get rid of that(clean transport, greenhouses spread around cities) that seem more practical. But if you're interested, there's some interesting research on large-scale vertical agriculture[pdf]: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/4526/3952 http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/down... But to build it would be expensive - 200 million euro, and as far as i can remember , it wasn't price competitive.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- bloaf 11y agoYou don't have to do any convincing. If people are starving, they will eat your vegi-mass. If people have no other alternatives, they will live in your people-pods.