8 ms·

And largely these sensors are unnecessary. Such "precision agriculture" efforts are just doubling down on a broken agricultural paradigm.

by sapote 9y ago

Sargos 9y ago
What does that even mean? Plant seeds, water, temperature is just how nature works. What other "paradigm" of agriculture is there? Maybe you mean everyone growing their own food? That's not sustainable.
- sapote 9y ago
  Two things: * Sure, seeds germinate with water and warmth. But that's true today. In the words of an Australian farmer quoted in a research paper a few years ago: "Mate, we don't need a chip to tell us the soil's dry." * There are other paradigms of agriculture that are actually sustainable. Agroecology is a good example of an alternative scientific paradigm for agriculture, one that thinks of agriculture in ecological terms.
  - macintux 9y ago
    I'm not convinced by the Australian farmer. Microclimates are a thing. Water is not evenly distributed across any sizable plot of land. Being able to tell where the water is (or more importantly isn't) can surely help deploy resources more efficiently. But, I'm a desk jockey, and hope to never, ever be a farmer.
    - ivan_gammel 9y ago
      You are right. I've been working a bit with the software for water management (although related to measurements of humidity over the day). Local management of resources does increase yields and sometimes just saves the crop.
  - DoubleCribble 9y ago
    The Australian farmer might not, but the machine that replaces him will.
    - thaumasiotes 9y ago
      Only if the same machine has to run on every farm in the world, without the option of learning what local conditions are or having them configured. Machines operating farms in Australia can easily just assume the soil is dry, like the farmers do, as long as they don't also have to operate farms in Louisiana.
  - KGIII 9y ago
    Not all things are farmed like you seem to think. I own a commercial wild blueberry operation. Knowing this information, with less effort and cost, can improve harvesting methods and may do things like reduce the reliance on chemical weed mitigation strategies.
- carapace 9y ago
  Applied ecology (Permaculture). Traditional agriculture is about the least productive way to interact with Nature.
  - Udik 9y ago
    As demonstrated by the modest results (population growth from a few hundred thousands to 7.5 billion). /s
    - stellar678 9y ago
      A well-designed permaculture system should exceed industrial farming if you are talking about productivity per square meter. The problem is that the amount of labor required is totally unsustainable to feed billions of people. That's where I see smart technology playing a role. Industrial agriculture involved building farming techniques around the machinery we have available. We "just" need to invert that approach and build smart machinery that enables us to glean food from highly-productive ecosystems.
      - carapace 9y ago
        > the amount of labor required is totally unsustainable to feed billions of people. I disagree: in a well-designed system there may be a lot of labor in the beginning, but it should fall off within a year or two to a very low level, much lower than conventional farming. (I admit a lot of "Permies" don't seem to set it up this way.)
    - carapace 9y ago
      That's actually the conversion of oil into biomass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_fertilizer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_fertilizer Details and other topical information can be had here: "Toby Hemenway - How Permaculture Can Save Humanity and the Earth, but Not Civilization" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nLKHYHmPbo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nLKHYHmPbo Long story short: even a grossly inefficient process can produce massive growth if you have a torrent of free energy.
echion 9y ago
They're unnecessary, but mainly because tractors have equipment that do this anyway. So unless it's needed more frequently than when the tractor's driving around, it's probably not worth the extra cost.
- concede_pluto 9y ago
  I thought it was till, plant, harvest, and in between you just wait for nature to take its course. Do they have occasion to patrol a field with tractors more often than that?
  - marcosdumay 9y ago
    On some crops yes, you spray all kinds of things after plating. On other crops you don't dare passing a tractor around them, else they would be ruined.
- j3097736 9y ago
  I've seen a drone scanning over a large corn field, dropping sensors seems silly when you can outfit infrared tempature sensors/humidity sensors/etc on a drone.
otakucode 9y ago
Farmers might be interested in reclaiming the data for themselves, though. Right now, they're in a situation where John Deere uses sensors in the tires of the tractors the farmers license (they can't buy them) to get soil density and similar data as the farmers use them... then they sell that data to Monsanto and other seed companies. The farmers are completely cut out of it and can not benefit from the data. In fact, it would be against the law for them to try to intercept or peek at the data themselves.

And largely these sensors are unnecessary. Such "precision agriculture" efforts are just doubling down on a broken agricultural paradigm.

by sapote 9y ago

And largely these sensors are unnecessary. Such "precision agriculture" efforts are just doubling down on a broken agricultural paradigm.

Sargos 9y ago

What does that even mean? Plant seeds, water, temperature is just how nature works. What other "paradigm" of agriculture is there? Maybe you mean everyone growing their own food? That's not sustainable.

sapote 9y ago
Two things: * Sure, seeds germinate with water and warmth. But that's true today. In the words of an Australian farmer quoted in a research paper a few years ago: "Mate, we don't need a chip to tell us the soil's dry." * There are other paradigms of agriculture that are actually sustainable. Agroecology is a good example of an alternative scientific paradigm for agriculture, one that thinks of agriculture in ecological terms.
- macintux 9y ago
  I'm not convinced by the Australian farmer. Microclimates are a thing. Water is not evenly distributed across any sizable plot of land. Being able to tell where the water is (or more importantly isn't) can surely help deploy resources more efficiently. But, I'm a desk jockey, and hope to never, ever be a farmer.
  - ivan_gammel 9y ago
    You are right. I've been working a bit with the software for water management (although related to measurements of humidity over the day). Local management of resources does increase yields and sometimes just saves the crop.
- DoubleCribble 9y ago
  The Australian farmer might not, but the machine that replaces him will.
  - thaumasiotes 9y ago
    Only if the same machine has to run on every farm in the world, without the option of learning what local conditions are or having them configured. Machines operating farms in Australia can easily just assume the soil is dry, like the farmers do, as long as they don't also have to operate farms in Louisiana.
- KGIII 9y ago
  Not all things are farmed like you seem to think. I own a commercial wild blueberry operation. Knowing this information, with less effort and cost, can improve harvesting methods and may do things like reduce the reliance on chemical weed mitigation strategies.
carapace 9y ago
Applied ecology (Permaculture). Traditional agriculture is about the least productive way to interact with Nature.
- Udik 9y ago
  As demonstrated by the modest results (population growth from a few hundred thousands to 7.5 billion). /s
  - stellar678 9y ago
    A well-designed permaculture system should exceed industrial farming if you are talking about productivity per square meter. The problem is that the amount of labor required is totally unsustainable to feed billions of people. That's where I see smart technology playing a role. Industrial agriculture involved building farming techniques around the machinery we have available. We "just" need to invert that approach and build smart machinery that enables us to glean food from highly-productive ecosystems.
    - carapace 9y ago
      > the amount of labor required is totally unsustainable to feed billions of people. I disagree: in a well-designed system there may be a lot of labor in the beginning, but it should fall off within a year or two to a very low level, much lower than conventional farming. (I admit a lot of "Permies" don't seem to set it up this way.)
  - carapace 9y ago
    That's actually the conversion of oil into biomass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_fertilizer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_fertilizer Details and other topical information can be had here: "Toby Hemenway - How Permaculture Can Save Humanity and the Earth, but Not Civilization" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nLKHYHmPbo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nLKHYHmPbo Long story short: even a grossly inefficient process can produce massive growth if you have a torrent of free energy.

echion 9y ago

They're unnecessary, but mainly because tractors have equipment that do this anyway. So unless it's needed more frequently than when the tractor's driving around, it's probably not worth the extra cost.

concede_pluto 9y ago
I thought it was till, plant, harvest, and in between you just wait for nature to take its course. Do they have occasion to patrol a field with tractors more often than that?
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  On some crops yes, you spray all kinds of things after plating. On other crops you don't dare passing a tractor around them, else they would be ruined.
j3097736 9y ago
I've seen a drone scanning over a large corn field, dropping sensors seems silly when you can outfit infrared tempature sensors/humidity sensors/etc on a drone.

otakucode 9y ago

Farmers might be interested in reclaiming the data for themselves, though. Right now, they're in a situation where John Deere uses sensors in the tires of the tractors the farmers license (they can't buy them) to get soil density and similar data as the farmers use them... then they sell that data to Monsanto and other seed companies. The farmers are completely cut out of it and can not benefit from the data. In fact, it would be against the law for them to try to intercept or peek at the data themselves.