>hopefully in 60 years there is tech to replace all the plants that can no longer be grown. And if it turns out the cheapest and best "tech" is soil conservati

>hopefully in 60 years there is tech to replace all the plants that can no longer be grown. And if it turns out the cheapest and best "tech" is soil conservation, what then? "Tech" tends to mean high-tech, but high-tech is also high cost (see vertical farming). It's quite possible that low tech / appropriate tech solutions will win in the end. Also, how many decades of R&D delay for this (rather... ambitious) Replace All The Plants Project are you asking for? The whole 60 years? Or should we tap the brakes (ie implement known soil conservation techniques) before going off the cliff?