4 ms·

Good luck having any form of modern agriculture if you can't get the produce to the destination before it rots.

by MrZander 4y ago

Paianni 4y ago
A lot of it would have to be localised.
- prmoustache 4y ago
  A lot of things would have to change yes. But saying I need a car because ... shouldn't be fixed by buying said car but by fixing the reasons we say we need it.
dopidopHN 4y ago
What about growing stuff closer to where they are going to be eaten. Yeah, it’s not great for economy of scale, but let’s tap into the 30% of food we do produce and go to waste directly. It seems like theirs is both low hanging fruits and actual mileniums of experience we can leverage in terms of growing food and feeding people without flying the output across the globe. Edit : I missed you mention modern agriculture. That might be the issue here, those post WW2 technics are terrible for the mid-term quality of our soils. ( we see large % decline roughly 60 years after already ) While more work intensive methods using less intrants seems to be able to produce the same amount of food. ( cf : French research on permaculture, INRA and such ) The issue with those is that you need way, way more farmers. I see that as a opportunity to address un-employment and vocational crisis. Nothing is bullshit about a job where you grown food. It’s foundation to everything.
- myshpa 4y ago
  > What about growing stuff closer to where they are going to be eaten You want to reduce the carbon footprint of your food? Focus on what you eat, not whether your food is local Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%. Very little food is air-freighted; it accounts for only 0.16% of food miles. Many of the foods people assume to come by air are actually transported by boat – avocados and almonds are prime examples. Shipping one kilogram of avocados from Mexico to the United Kingdom would generate ... only around 8% of avocados’ total footprint. Even when shipped at great distances, its emissions are much less than locally-produced animal products. https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local
  - dopidopHN 4y ago
    Oh, yes. Absolutely. Sorry I realized that’s I was internalizing that. I don’t eat much meat, if ever. Great resources, too. At this point, I think we should do both of course. Eating food that make sense, and growing it locally when it’s sensible. For instance olive and wallnuts would replace avocado and almond in my particular location.
prmoustache 4y ago
Well we shouldn't be able to buy Mango in Sweden for a start. There are things we take for granted that we shouldn't, like using AC all day long to live in barely liveable places by Irish descendants standard like in Texas or Arizona.

Good luck having any form of modern agriculture if you can't get the produce to the destination before it rots.

Paianni 4y ago

A lot of it would have to be localised.

prmoustache 4y ago
A lot of things would have to change yes. But saying I need a car because ... shouldn't be fixed by buying said car but by fixing the reasons we say we need it.

dopidopHN 4y ago

What about growing stuff closer to where they are going to be eaten. Yeah, it’s not great for economy of scale, but let’s tap into the 30% of food we do produce and go to waste directly. It seems like theirs is both low hanging fruits and actual mileniums of experience we can leverage in terms of growing food and feeding people without flying the output across the globe. Edit : I missed you mention modern agriculture. That might be the issue here, those post WW2 technics are terrible for the mid-term quality of our soils. ( we see large % decline roughly 60 years after already ) While more work intensive methods using less intrants seems to be able to produce the same amount of food. ( cf : French research on permaculture, INRA and such ) The issue with those is that you need way, way more farmers. I see that as a opportunity to address un-employment and vocational crisis. Nothing is bullshit about a job where you grown food. It’s foundation to everything.

myshpa 4y ago
> What about growing stuff closer to where they are going to be eaten You want to reduce the carbon footprint of your food? Focus on what you eat, not whether your food is local Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%. Very little food is air-freighted; it accounts for only 0.16% of food miles. Many of the foods people assume to come by air are actually transported by boat – avocados and almonds are prime examples. Shipping one kilogram of avocados from Mexico to the United Kingdom would generate ... only around 8% of avocados’ total footprint. Even when shipped at great distances, its emissions are much less than locally-produced animal products. https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local
- dopidopHN 4y ago
  Oh, yes. Absolutely. Sorry I realized that’s I was internalizing that. I don’t eat much meat, if ever. Great resources, too. At this point, I think we should do both of course. Eating food that make sense, and growing it locally when it’s sensible. For instance olive and wallnuts would replace avocado and almond in my particular location.

prmoustache 4y ago

Well we shouldn't be able to buy Mango in Sweden for a start. There are things we take for granted that we shouldn't, like using AC all day long to live in barely liveable places by Irish descendants standard like in Texas or Arizona.