5 ms·

I mean, we have been depleting soil fertility through the use of synthetic fertilizers for decades. It’s been a self-destructive cycle. Perhaps some farmers mi

by hosh 5y ago

I mean, we have been depleting soil fertility through the use of synthetic fertilizers for decades. It’s been a self-destructive cycle. Perhaps some farmers might switch to practices that are not so dependent upon as much to external inputs … but even switching to things like no-till or using local inputs like manure, or using soil-regenerating practices like polycropping or integrated pest-control is going to take time. It’s doable though. The Cubans have been operating their agriculture without imported oil and fertilizers since the US shut down imports. That also meant that use of tractors became limited, as are long-distance transport for food. Better than food security is food sovereignty, and people within a locality being able to feed themselves.

Bayart 5y ago
> Better than food security is food sovereignty, and people within a locality being able to feed themselves. That's all well and good, but the implication is that people should live where they grow their food, or move where it can be done. Implementing it at scale would mean either billions of dead or billions of refugees.
unmole 5y ago
Cubans on average lost ~6kgs during the crisis in the 90's. Sure, diabetes and heart disease dropped as a result but I would much rather have a food surplus.
mcguire 5y ago
From the link I posted above: "Fifty-six percent of all land used for corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton was on farms that used no-till/strip-till on at least part of their cropland in 2010-11."
Manuel_D 5y ago
> It’s doable though. The Cubans have been operating their agriculture without imported oil and fertilizers since the US shut down imports. That also meant that use of tractors became limited, as are long-distance transport for food. This resulted in widespread food insecurity, with the Cuban government rationing food to UN poverty levels [1]. Cuba also experienced food shortages due to COVID [2]. Cuba's agricultural experience is not a very good case for organic farming. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Period#Caloric_intake_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Period#Caloric_intake_... 2. https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/07/12/cubas-food-shortages-and-pandemic-fueled-economic-woes-drive-biggest-protest-in-decades/?sh=36cac30472fb https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/07/12/cubas-f...
maxerickson 5y ago
Most manure is already spread on fields and probably mostly contains nitrogen that came from industrial fertilizer.
Beached 5y ago
this is possibly, but yields go way down, in some cases by 50% or more. the amount of land that will need to be utilized for food growth will have to drastically increased. not saying this is a bad thing. soil regeneration and more sustainable farming practices are a good thing Imo. it's just that we can't switch to that instantly. yield goes down, takes time to switch, cost likely will increase to make the same $/acre of land, etc.
- hosh 5y ago
  Yields for a specific crop goes down in polycropping. Yield across the entire portfolio goes up. Plus, crop failure and marker failure of any one crop doesn’t mean complete failure — the other crop still yields something. It becomes less of betting the farm. And, soil rebuilding takes time. No-till won’t really start becoming advantageous until about year 4 or 5. But like I said — the Cubans had to do this. They were not given the time to switch.
  - Terry_Roll 5y ago
    TL;DR Fertilizer is a chemical soup like the chemical soup that keeps the Henrietta Lack cancer cell line still alive to this day. TL;DR Fertilizer dilutes the taste and nutrition of plants by making them bigger not better. > And, soil rebuilding takes time. So modern day farm equipment, ploughs which dig deeper cause soil erosion which in turn means more fertilizers plus an increase in the seeds grown to yield highly in certain chemical profile environments. Alot of plants classed as weeds can also be used. So the Mediterranean diet which is supposed to help you live a long life is actually based on picking wild herbs and plants, not the stuff you buy from a supermarket! You can eat dandelions and other wild plants. Wild blackberries taste so much better than any you can buy in a shop and the plants you can buy from a garden centre dont produce black berries which taste anywhere near as good as wild blackberries. Even wild strawberries although tiny like the size of a petit pois pea, have so much more flavour, although I will try a £350 Japanese strawberry (yes just 1 strawberry costs £350). https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/12/paul-hollywood-eats-japan-viewers-gobsmacked-350-strawberry-12694122/ https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/12/paul-hollywood-eats-japan-vie... Japan doesnt have the land mass so couldnt compete on quantity, so they lead on quality food, thats why their food is the most expensive in the world. When the horse and horse drawn ploughs are used, less soil erosion is seen as more white root masses are seen holding the soil together. Not so long ago < 10-30years, it was common to spread manure on field instead of using fertilizer because the bacteria in the manure benefits the ground and crops, its also where we found/find our antibiotics. I only know of one farm equipment manufacturer who is actively developing smaller farm robots/equipment (German) where as everyone else is going bigger and bigger. I'd bet on the smaller farm equipment manufacturer because people will be looking for labour saving devices in their gardens ( & country estates) where you can have more control over the quality of the food grown, but I also understand many people live in new build estates with a tiny garden and no robots will really needed. EU regs and their intentions mean more land has to be left wild and more hedgerows planted which means smaller fields. When fertilizers use jumped years ago many farmers started ripping up their hedgerows, now in Europe there is a trend to replace these massive plain's like fields with smaller tithe like fields which means its incompatible with large farm equipment. Protecting the wildlife is paramount. The problem with neonicotinoids which is seeds coated with nicotine like chemicals (manmade tend to be longer lasting because they dont break down in the environment) and it messed up insects in particular bee nervous systems. Man Made Pyrethrin's are the same, they dont break down easily unlike whats found naturally in Chrysanthemum flowers. Ironically organic veg is using nicotine and nothing else which is what your grand parents used to use after the war. They used to smoke roll ups and place the used fag but's in a jam jar with water, that dark brown liquid was then sprayed onto the garden as an insecticide/pesticide. You pay a premium for this today in the super markets, but you could just buy a packet of rolling tobacco and put some baccy in a jam jar with water, let it soak and then use that liquid if you dont want to take up smoking! >Yields for a specific crop goes down in polycropping. Yield across the entire portfolio goes up. This is because the defensive chemicals in different plants compliment each other so instead of having a monocrop with one chemical defence, there is a range of chemicals which is enough to deter a wider range of pests. The same mentality is seen in warfare, you dont bet on just the Airforce, you need the Navy and Army as well to really win a war. Its also why I would invest in small robot manufacturers & AI companies which can tend to individual crops than an instrument which doesnt offer anything personal to a plant. Its also why Bill Gates is the largest land owner in the US.
sergiosgc 5y ago
Synthetic fertilizers do not deplete soil fertility. Some agricultural practices do, with a strong emphasis on mono-culture, but it is wrong to throw everything in the same bag. Growing without synthetic fertilizers appeals to the symbiotic Nature living, I get that. It's an ideal like any other, maybe worth of pursuit. But we first need to make peace with the fact that we'll either: a) Be able to feed about a billion humans at most; or b) Completely destroy many pristine ecosystems by multiplying arable land area by 5. Removal of synthetic fertilizers would induce a yield drop of 80%: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-crop-yield-vs-fertilizer-application?xScale=linear&yScale=linear https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-crop-yield-vs-fert...
- jvanderbot 5y ago
  Synthetic fertilizer does have negative impacts, but saying they have negative food impacts borders on oxymoron. Runoff to freshwater inducing toxicity is one major impact from over fertilization, which is not an implication of the product itself, but it's over use. I'm told. IANA farmer but I know many and worked with ag and water quality researchers for a few years in MN, USA.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Not just overuse, but use on land that is too close to bodies of water without riparian buffers.
    - marcosdumay 5y ago
      And also wrong dispersal. All the fertilizer that gets on the water is wasted and does nothing but increase the farmer expenses.

by hosh 5y ago

Bayart 5y ago

> Better than food security is food sovereignty, and people within a locality being able to feed themselves. That's all well and good, but the implication is that people should live where they grow their food, or move where it can be done. Implementing it at scale would mean either billions of dead or billions of refugees.

unmole 5y ago

Cubans on average lost ~6kgs during the crisis in the 90's. Sure, diabetes and heart disease dropped as a result but I would much rather have a food surplus.

mcguire 5y ago

From the link I posted above: "Fifty-six percent of all land used for corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton was on farms that used no-till/strip-till on at least part of their cropland in 2010-11."

Manuel_D 5y ago

> It’s doable though. The Cubans have been operating their agriculture without imported oil and fertilizers since the US shut down imports. That also meant that use of tractors became limited, as are long-distance transport for food. This resulted in widespread food insecurity, with the Cuban government rationing food to UN poverty levels [1]. Cuba also experienced food shortages due to COVID [2]. Cuba's agricultural experience is not a very good case for organic farming. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Period#Caloric_intake_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Period#Caloric_intake_... 2. https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/07/12/cubas-food-shortages-and-pandemic-fueled-economic-woes-drive-biggest-protest-in-decades/?sh=36cac30472fb https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/07/12/cubas-f...

maxerickson 5y ago

Most manure is already spread on fields and probably mostly contains nitrogen that came from industrial fertilizer.

Beached 5y ago

this is possibly, but yields go way down, in some cases by 50% or more. the amount of land that will need to be utilized for food growth will have to drastically increased. not saying this is a bad thing. soil regeneration and more sustainable farming practices are a good thing Imo. it's just that we can't switch to that instantly. yield goes down, takes time to switch, cost likely will increase to make the same $/acre of land, etc.

hosh 5y ago
Yields for a specific crop goes down in polycropping. Yield across the entire portfolio goes up. Plus, crop failure and marker failure of any one crop doesn’t mean complete failure — the other crop still yields something. It becomes less of betting the farm. And, soil rebuilding takes time. No-till won’t really start becoming advantageous until about year 4 or 5. But like I said — the Cubans had to do this. They were not given the time to switch.
- Terry_Roll 5y ago
  TL;DR Fertilizer is a chemical soup like the chemical soup that keeps the Henrietta Lack cancer cell line still alive to this day. TL;DR Fertilizer dilutes the taste and nutrition of plants by making them bigger not better. > And, soil rebuilding takes time. So modern day farm equipment, ploughs which dig deeper cause soil erosion which in turn means more fertilizers plus an increase in the seeds grown to yield highly in certain chemical profile environments. Alot of plants classed as weeds can also be used. So the Mediterranean diet which is supposed to help you live a long life is actually based on picking wild herbs and plants, not the stuff you buy from a supermarket! You can eat dandelions and other wild plants. Wild blackberries taste so much better than any you can buy in a shop and the plants you can buy from a garden centre dont produce black berries which taste anywhere near as good as wild blackberries. Even wild strawberries although tiny like the size of a petit pois pea, have so much more flavour, although I will try a £350 Japanese strawberry (yes just 1 strawberry costs £350). https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/12/paul-hollywood-eats-japan-viewers-gobsmacked-350-strawberry-12694122/ https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/12/paul-hollywood-eats-japan-vie... Japan doesnt have the land mass so couldnt compete on quantity, so they lead on quality food, thats why their food is the most expensive in the world. When the horse and horse drawn ploughs are used, less soil erosion is seen as more white root masses are seen holding the soil together. Not so long ago < 10-30years, it was common to spread manure on field instead of using fertilizer because the bacteria in the manure benefits the ground and crops, its also where we found/find our antibiotics. I only know of one farm equipment manufacturer who is actively developing smaller farm robots/equipment (German) where as everyone else is going bigger and bigger. I'd bet on the smaller farm equipment manufacturer because people will be looking for labour saving devices in their gardens ( & country estates) where you can have more control over the quality of the food grown, but I also understand many people live in new build estates with a tiny garden and no robots will really needed. EU regs and their intentions mean more land has to be left wild and more hedgerows planted which means smaller fields. When fertilizers use jumped years ago many farmers started ripping up their hedgerows, now in Europe there is a trend to replace these massive plain's like fields with smaller tithe like fields which means its incompatible with large farm equipment. Protecting the wildlife is paramount. The problem with neonicotinoids which is seeds coated with nicotine like chemicals (manmade tend to be longer lasting because they dont break down in the environment) and it messed up insects in particular bee nervous systems. Man Made Pyrethrin's are the same, they dont break down easily unlike whats found naturally in Chrysanthemum flowers. Ironically organic veg is using nicotine and nothing else which is what your grand parents used to use after the war. They used to smoke roll ups and place the used fag but's in a jam jar with water, that dark brown liquid was then sprayed onto the garden as an insecticide/pesticide. You pay a premium for this today in the super markets, but you could just buy a packet of rolling tobacco and put some baccy in a jam jar with water, let it soak and then use that liquid if you dont want to take up smoking! >Yields for a specific crop goes down in polycropping. Yield across the entire portfolio goes up. This is because the defensive chemicals in different plants compliment each other so instead of having a monocrop with one chemical defence, there is a range of chemicals which is enough to deter a wider range of pests. The same mentality is seen in warfare, you dont bet on just the Airforce, you need the Navy and Army as well to really win a war. Its also why I would invest in small robot manufacturers & AI companies which can tend to individual crops than an instrument which doesnt offer anything personal to a plant. Its also why Bill Gates is the largest land owner in the US.

sergiosgc 5y ago

Synthetic fertilizers do not deplete soil fertility. Some agricultural practices do, with a strong emphasis on mono-culture, but it is wrong to throw everything in the same bag. Growing without synthetic fertilizers appeals to the symbiotic Nature living, I get that. It's an ideal like any other, maybe worth of pursuit. But we first need to make peace with the fact that we'll either: a) Be able to feed about a billion humans at most; or b) Completely destroy many pristine ecosystems by multiplying arable land area by 5. Removal of synthetic fertilizers would induce a yield drop of 80%: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-crop-yield-vs-fertilizer-application?xScale=linear&yScale=linear https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-crop-yield-vs-fert...

jvanderbot 5y ago
Synthetic fertilizer does have negative impacts, but saying they have negative food impacts borders on oxymoron. Runoff to freshwater inducing toxicity is one major impact from over fertilization, which is not an implication of the product itself, but it's over use. I'm told. IANA farmer but I know many and worked with ag and water quality researchers for a few years in MN, USA.
- giantg2 5y ago
  Not just overuse, but use on land that is too close to bodies of water without riparian buffers.
  - marcosdumay 5y ago
    And also wrong dispersal. All the fertilizer that gets on the water is wasted and does nothing but increase the farmer expenses.