4 ms·

Agriculture is set for the next big revolution in the next few decades. Many thousands of years ago, developments like horticulture, domestication, the wheel, r

Agriculture is set for the next big revolution in the next few decades. Many thousands of years ago, developments like horticulture, domestication, the wheel, roads, and non-nomadic life styles collided together and built upon each other exponentially, ushering the first agricultural revolution. Then we had breakthroughs in trains, synthetic fertilizer, refrigerated cars, and all of the other industrialization technologies in the 19th century, which again changed the face of food and how it was grown and distributed. I'm sure I missed a few eras but these are the two big ones. Now we've got globalization resulting in much cheaper technology and expanded markets, artificial intelligence and machine learning, ultra cheap wireless communication, ubiquitous software, and last but not least, biotechnology. As the latter advances, it will kick everything into high gear, as it already has with companies like Monsanto and Climate Corporation. Even something as simple as eliminating nitrogen from fertilizer through genetic engineering or directed evolution would have a tremendous impact on the sustainability and ecological impact of industrialized farming. This is a good time for farmers who are always at the mercy of so many variables which they are finally starting to dig into, quantify, and control. Farms, especially smaller ones, are almost always in debt that they have to borrow before every planting and a single underperforming harvest can wipe out the business so all this added certainty is going to do everyone a world of good.

justaaron 10y ago
we could stand studying how ecosystem components interact a bit more. These "variables" and "externalities" you describe are the real world outside our bubble of infantile understandings and knowledge.
- akiselev 10y ago
  Our understanding is infantile because our technology is infantile and there is no way to escape that. How would you propose we study an ecosystem where we can't even isolate and analyze the majority of bacterial, fungal, and viral species let alone study or simulate their interactions with each other and crops at the scale of even a square meter plot? I agree that we should be studying this area more (a LOT more), but there will always be existential risks with everything we do, regardless of how much time and care we put into our work. I for one refuse to let hundreds of millions or billions suffer and die when we have the technology to save them just because the unknowable risks offend someone's sensibilities. You and I will likely be dead by the time the consequences are felt, but we can't let all those hungry people die in the mean time just because of FUD.
fanquake 10y ago
"..have to borrow before every planting" This is not limited to just small farms. In Western Australia, farm debt has been growing 8% per annum since 2000. The average farm size here is ~3500ha (8650acres).
- akiselev 10y ago
  I'm curious if Australia is a special case because of the drought [1]. It began in earnest in 1995 and was named record setting by 2003 so I can imagine the farms had to do a lot more borrowing and refinancing at unfavorable terms in order to make it through more than a decade and a half of very low rainfall. According to [2] the Australian government provided $4.5 billion in exceptional circumstance assistance which included monetary payments and interest rate subsidies. Even with that assistance I would imagine that the drought hit Australian farmers really hard. I tried looking at the agriculture.gov.au site for import statistics but couldn't easily figure out if agricultural imports grew during that time period, and whether that hurt the domestic farms as well. It'll be interesting to see if California farms' debt balloons like this too as they have to borrow more and more to pay for water rights and infrastructure like wells. California is basically the US's fertile crescent so maybe there will be a lot more subsidies and federal assistance just to maintain food security as a national strategic goal. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_Australian_drought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_Australian_drought [2] http://www.theage.com.au//breaking-news-national/minister-declares-end-of-drought-20120427-1xpgi.html http://www.theage.com.au//breaking-news-national/minister-de...

justaaron 10y ago

we could stand studying how ecosystem components interact a bit more. These "variables" and "externalities" you describe are the real world outside our bubble of infantile understandings and knowledge.

akiselev 10y ago
Our understanding is infantile because our technology is infantile and there is no way to escape that. How would you propose we study an ecosystem where we can't even isolate and analyze the majority of bacterial, fungal, and viral species let alone study or simulate their interactions with each other and crops at the scale of even a square meter plot? I agree that we should be studying this area more (a LOT more), but there will always be existential risks with everything we do, regardless of how much time and care we put into our work. I for one refuse to let hundreds of millions or billions suffer and die when we have the technology to save them just because the unknowable risks offend someone's sensibilities. You and I will likely be dead by the time the consequences are felt, but we can't let all those hungry people die in the mean time just because of FUD.

fanquake 10y ago

"..have to borrow before every planting" This is not limited to just small farms. In Western Australia, farm debt has been growing 8% per annum since 2000. The average farm size here is ~3500ha (8650acres).

akiselev 10y ago
I'm curious if Australia is a special case because of the drought [1]. It began in earnest in 1995 and was named record setting by 2003 so I can imagine the farms had to do a lot more borrowing and refinancing at unfavorable terms in order to make it through more than a decade and a half of very low rainfall. According to [2] the Australian government provided $4.5 billion in exceptional circumstance assistance which included monetary payments and interest rate subsidies. Even with that assistance I would imagine that the drought hit Australian farmers really hard. I tried looking at the agriculture.gov.au site for import statistics but couldn't easily figure out if agricultural imports grew during that time period, and whether that hurt the domestic farms as well. It'll be interesting to see if California farms' debt balloons like this too as they have to borrow more and more to pay for water rights and infrastructure like wells. California is basically the US's fertile crescent so maybe there will be a lot more subsidies and federal assistance just to maintain food security as a national strategic goal. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_Australian_drought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_Australian_drought [2] http://www.theage.com.au//breaking-news-national/minister-declares-end-of-drought-20120427-1xpgi.html http://www.theage.com.au//breaking-news-national/minister-de...