5 ms·

Actually, they aren't free. That's the point, that's what's cool about indoor farming. It is the ultimate in agricultural intensification, even if marketed as

Actually, they aren't free. That's the point, that's what's cool about indoor farming. It is the ultimate in agricultural intensification, even if marketed as some sort of sustainability. The land required to support a human goes way down as agricultural intensity goes up. It is actually weird, but a hunter gatherer "living in harmony with nature" actually does orders of magnitude more ecological damage per human than industrialized society. Having a 1 acre garden as a hobby, is huge ecological violence since industrialized agriculture requires far less than half an acre per person and the loss of habitat is the same.

wavefunction 9y ago
>a hunter gatherer "living in harmony with nature" actually does orders of magnitude more ecological damage per human than industrialized society. I'm not sure how this is true. Perhaps you can persuade me? A one acre garden is not a "hobby" in my opinion. The amount of work involved in cultivating an entire acre is immense. As well, a personal garden is unlikely to be a monoculture which is even worse ecologically in my opinion than a loss of efficiency. Plus there's all that Round-up...
- freeflight 9y ago
  >I'm not sure how this is true. Perhaps you can persuade me? This could actually apply to the hunter&gatherer because those didn't care much about sustainability. When a region was picked/hunted empty they simply moved to a new region, few enough of us around back then so this actually worked and regions had time to recover. Now imagine nearly 7 billion humans living the same way: Gathering/hunting everything in their closest region until most of it is gone just to move on to a new region, no permaculture at all. It wouldn't take long before there wouldn't be anything left to hunt or gather. >A one acre garden is not a "hobby" in my opinion. The amount of work involved in cultivating an entire acre is immense. Not every one-acre garden is actually cultivated, that's how some people are able to have them as a hobby ;)
m_coder 9y ago
>>Having a 1 acre garden as a hobby, is huge ecological violence Can you explain how this hobby is so violent? I don't think I am following the line of thought. The typical one acre hobby garden is farmed with far fewer chemicals than the typical commercial farm. There is far more diversity and a better balance of minerals. Compost is often used and waste is effectively recycled.
- hs44 9y ago
  >>Having a 1 acre garden as a hobby, is huge ecological violence ..context dropping..compared to the lawn or parking lot that might be there?
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  I think the parent meant that people having 1 acre hobby gardens are wasting space that could be more efficiently used by industrialized agriculture, and thus if you'd replace modern farming with family gardens, you'd destroy many more animal habitats.
  - m_coder 9y ago
    The space isn't what is used efficiently by industrialized agriculture (for the most part). The efficiency comes from saving time by having large machines. Space is used most efficiently when you have people actively involved on small plots.
    - randomdata 9y ago
      > Space is used most efficiently when you have people actively involved on small plots. Wouldn't the area needed for the active involvement of people require more space than commercial agriculture, where large machines can do a lot on a small footprint? A sprayer with 12 inch tires and a 120 foot boom can effectively 'weed' 118 feet of growing area with just two feet required for the tires. I'm not so sure a person with a hoe can beat that.
      - 9y ago
marcosdumay 9y ago
Indoor farming can only be more intense than outdoor if you power it with nuclear or fossil fuels... Humanity is currently migrating into solar power. There's no way you will gain any area by adding conversions on the way through the plants. You get better reliability, easier pest controls (without additives), and lots of other things, but you can never gain in area use.

wavefunction 9y ago

>a hunter gatherer "living in harmony with nature" actually does orders of magnitude more ecological damage per human than industrialized society. I'm not sure how this is true. Perhaps you can persuade me? A one acre garden is not a "hobby" in my opinion. The amount of work involved in cultivating an entire acre is immense. As well, a personal garden is unlikely to be a monoculture which is even worse ecologically in my opinion than a loss of efficiency. Plus there's all that Round-up...

freeflight 9y ago
>I'm not sure how this is true. Perhaps you can persuade me? This could actually apply to the hunter&gatherer because those didn't care much about sustainability. When a region was picked/hunted empty they simply moved to a new region, few enough of us around back then so this actually worked and regions had time to recover. Now imagine nearly 7 billion humans living the same way: Gathering/hunting everything in their closest region until most of it is gone just to move on to a new region, no permaculture at all. It wouldn't take long before there wouldn't be anything left to hunt or gather. >A one acre garden is not a "hobby" in my opinion. The amount of work involved in cultivating an entire acre is immense. Not every one-acre garden is actually cultivated, that's how some people are able to have them as a hobby ;)

m_coder 9y ago

>>Having a 1 acre garden as a hobby, is huge ecological violence Can you explain how this hobby is so violent? I don't think I am following the line of thought. The typical one acre hobby garden is farmed with far fewer chemicals than the typical commercial farm. There is far more diversity and a better balance of minerals. Compost is often used and waste is effectively recycled.

hs44 9y ago
>>Having a 1 acre garden as a hobby, is huge ecological violence ..context dropping..compared to the lawn or parking lot that might be there?
TeMPOraL 9y ago
I think the parent meant that people having 1 acre hobby gardens are wasting space that could be more efficiently used by industrialized agriculture, and thus if you'd replace modern farming with family gardens, you'd destroy many more animal habitats.
- m_coder 9y ago
  The space isn't what is used efficiently by industrialized agriculture (for the most part). The efficiency comes from saving time by having large machines. Space is used most efficiently when you have people actively involved on small plots.
  - randomdata 9y ago
    > Space is used most efficiently when you have people actively involved on small plots. Wouldn't the area needed for the active involvement of people require more space than commercial agriculture, where large machines can do a lot on a small footprint? A sprayer with 12 inch tires and a 120 foot boom can effectively 'weed' 118 feet of growing area with just two feet required for the tires. I'm not so sure a person with a hoe can beat that.
    - 9y ago

marcosdumay 9y ago

Indoor farming can only be more intense than outdoor if you power it with nuclear or fossil fuels... Humanity is currently migrating into solar power. There's no way you will gain any area by adding conversions on the way through the plants. You get better reliability, easier pest controls (without additives), and lots of other things, but you can never gain in area use.