4 ms·

> We worried about food back in the 70s but then we got better at agriculture, except it isn't sustainable what we do to boost the yields, the soil is getting u

> We worried about food back in the 70s but then we got better at agriculture, except it isn't sustainable what we do to boost the yields, the soil is getting used up. We can do better, but there are simply limits, and with no deaths we will find them much sooner. See but when you're saying this and mention expanding off earth in the next sentence - why do we need soil to produce food ? Or plants even ? Even now there's efforts to process algae into protein etc. It wouldn't surprise me at all that we have specific nutrient production farms via some simple GMO organism in some large scale industrial setting - vertical stacking, ocean surface farms, etc. Compared to space colonisation this seems far less far fetched.

galangalalgol 5y ago
For protein we can probably crispr in the ability for us to synthesize the essential amino acids that we currently cannot. Synthesizing mono unsaturated fats directly from co2 and water is also certainly possible. Carbs seem harder but likely possible, agriculture might become just the way we get micronutrients, and all macros require no land. So I agree all that is far more possible in the near future than leaving earth. The energy required for that stuff is still a huge problem. Even if all our power generation was renewable, simply using all that power dumps the heat into our environment. Right now that isn't so noticeable, but our power demands are growing exponentially, the estimates on when that starts being a climate issue vary from centuries to decades, but its out there.