3 ms·

Yep, read that in TFA as well. Doesn't answer the question "why" does it?

bombcar 4y ago
The "crops" are not wheat or corn or something that the rotted remains can be plowed into the ground next year - they're apparently orchards, trees basically, that need to be ground up or burnt (or left to rot over periods of years).
- 0des 4y ago
  Sugar cane crops are burned every year, it returns micronutrients to the soil and allows for mycchorizae to re-establish before the next season. Tilling and decomposing not only take longer, but it reduces yield and the tillings can add other fungi that outcompete the natural mycchorizae, making your next crop a season late and less able to intake nutrients efficiently, which increases the cost of fertilizer. Fertilizer runoff is what causes the yellow/green algae blooms in runoff ditches and holding ponds. That high of a concentration of nitrates, nitrites, phosphates, etc are bad for the environment in that concentration, on a similar level to the waste holding areas of a pig farm. It's a net negative for plant and animal life, including humans in the vicinity.
  - ASalazarMX 4y ago
    > Sugar cane crops are burned every year, it returns micronutrients to the soil and allows for mycchorizae to re-establish before the next season Holy cow, have you hit a nerve in me! I lived years in two Mexican cities adjacent to Texas, and I swear they burn the sugar cane when the winds are southbound, so all the contamination ends up in Mexico. Early winter you can see greyed skies and small amounts of ash and soot everywhere. Burning the cane makes it easier to harvest, but there are machines now that do that job, and as a bonus, you don't dehydrate or sterilize the upper soil. To be fair, some farmers also burn their crops in this side too, seeing how little environmental regulation there is. December and January are hard for your lungs there.
- im3w1l 4y ago
  What chopping the trees down for fuel then? Burn them in a powerplant? Or turn into biogas or something?
  - bombcar 4y ago
    I suspect the energy density is low enough that the activity of moving them to a location for processing would be net-energy negative. Also the idea of getting California to approve a wood-burning powerplant is amusing.
yellowapple 4y ago
"because it's cheaper than grinding, and because so many acres are being abandoned due to drought"
prvc 4y ago
In a word, cost.

The "crops" are not wheat or corn or something that the rotted remains can be plowed into the ground next year - they're apparently orchards, trees basically, that need to be ground up or burnt (or left to rot over periods of years).

0des 4y ago
Sugar cane crops are burned every year, it returns micronutrients to the soil and allows for mycchorizae to re-establish before the next season. Tilling and decomposing not only take longer, but it reduces yield and the tillings can add other fungi that outcompete the natural mycchorizae, making your next crop a season late and less able to intake nutrients efficiently, which increases the cost of fertilizer. Fertilizer runoff is what causes the yellow/green algae blooms in runoff ditches and holding ponds. That high of a concentration of nitrates, nitrites, phosphates, etc are bad for the environment in that concentration, on a similar level to the waste holding areas of a pig farm. It's a net negative for plant and animal life, including humans in the vicinity.
- ASalazarMX 4y ago
  > Sugar cane crops are burned every year, it returns micronutrients to the soil and allows for mycchorizae to re-establish before the next season Holy cow, have you hit a nerve in me! I lived years in two Mexican cities adjacent to Texas, and I swear they burn the sugar cane when the winds are southbound, so all the contamination ends up in Mexico. Early winter you can see greyed skies and small amounts of ash and soot everywhere. Burning the cane makes it easier to harvest, but there are machines now that do that job, and as a bonus, you don't dehydrate or sterilize the upper soil. To be fair, some farmers also burn their crops in this side too, seeing how little environmental regulation there is. December and January are hard for your lungs there.
im3w1l 4y ago
What chopping the trees down for fuel then? Burn them in a powerplant? Or turn into biogas or something?
- bombcar 4y ago
  I suspect the energy density is low enough that the activity of moving them to a location for processing would be net-energy negative. Also the idea of getting California to approve a wood-burning powerplant is amusing.

yellowapple 4y ago

"because it's cheaper than grinding, and because so many acres are being abandoned due to drought"

prvc 4y ago

In a word, cost.