4 ms·

The calculus for what plants make sense in space is entirely different than what plants make sense on earth. Cereals provide the bulk of earth calories because

by cmsmith 13y ago

The calculus for what plants make sense in space is entirely different than what plants make sense on earth. Cereals provide the bulk of earth calories because they optimize things like warm days, long term storage, transportation, water consumption, etc. The critical resources in space are things like 3D space, waste, preparation requirements, or even smell, so it would make no sense to choose space crops based on what stacks best in a grain silo.

thaumasiotes 13y ago
We didn't choose to farm grains based on what would stack best in a grain silo. We built grain silos because we liked grain so much. Lettuce is mostly water; you won't be able to feed even one person on it, no matter how efficiently you can grow it.
- beambot 13y ago
  I don't think that's true -- we didn't choose grain because "we like it so much". Grain is easy to store and has a long shelf life, which means it can last long enough to get you through the long non-growing seasons. When you scale up production, you need somewhere to put it... hence silos. By way of another analogy: refrigeration is the motivating force behind much of the food we consume now. In my grandmother's day, all food post-harvest was either dried (grains and meats), canned, or pickled.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    This is fair. We chose grain because we hated starving to death in the winter. But we like grain now! History and evolution are on its side at this point. Refrigeration enables us to eat many things that people two generations ago literally couldn't, but I note that cereals are still a very large portion of what we, in all our riches, choose to eat. My family eats a lot of bread, without bothering to refrigerate it. Some things that we refrigerate now, but historically didn't have to, are eggs and milk. Do you know how those were treated in your grandmother's day? The image I have from history is that milk was produced and consumed in large quantities, and "refrigerated" (iceboxed) then as now. But clearly (?), what was good enough for milk was too good for... lettuce? ;) Just as a fun side observation, there are some other obvious concerns, if you're starting from a hunter-gatherer state: jerky keeps significantly better than grain does, and is packed full of calories, and is ultra-low-tech, but grain production can be scaled up in a way that would be extremely difficult for jerky. So we built granaries and tolerated massive losses to rats essentially because even after the losses we could produce more grain than "other food".
    - beambot 13y ago
      Eggs and Milk came right from the chickens and cows. Thankfully, I was spared this lifestyle (thanks mom!). Some of the earliest practical refrigeration on the farm (eg. the Icy Ball [1]) is from the early-late 1920s. That was during my grandmother's lifetime. If you think about it, the change in lifestyles she's witnessed in ~100 years is pretty bloody impressive: refrigeration, electricity, telephones, computers, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icyball https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icyball
    - HeyLaughingBoy 13y ago
      Be careful with your "we." The US is one of the few countries where eggs are typically refrigerated. Eggs will last for months if merely kept cool. Historically, milk was "preserved" by turning it into cheese.
- Retric 13y ago
  Lettuce and grains are hardly the only options. Potatoes, rice, olives, a wide range of beans, even aqatic plants etc are all with considering. After all the fact grains need little water is one of there main apeals, but water can easily be recycled in an enclosed environment so the constraints are vary different.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    Of course, and I wouldn't be making fun of a plan to grow potatoes (such a plan was already discussed in another comment when I made mine). But what they are growing is lettuce, and the comment I responded to specifically supported lettuce over grains because it was easier to grow. And I'm sure that that's why they're growing it right now... but if we wanted to produce food in space, lettuce would be a terrible choice, because it's barely food. The current efforts are more of a because-it's-there thing than a what-would-we-like-to-grow thing, and at some point "the calculus for what plants make sense in space" will have to take into account which plants we actually want to consume. EDIT: > Potatoes, rice, olives, a wide range of beans, even aq[u]atic plants etc are all w[or]th considering. After all the fact grains need little water is one of the[ir] main ap[p]eals Rice is a grain. A grain that grows in swamps. It could best be described as "water-intensive".
    - JulianMorrison 13y ago
      More like water-tolerant. Rice field flooding is for weed control (or use of land that naturally floods), rice itself prefers not to be waterlogged.
    - Retric 13y ago
      I think the current goal is fresh food and fiber vs reducing takeoff weight. Basicly they can store everything else for over a year but lettuce to make a sandwich in space. Astronauts are also working 12+ hour days so having something that's really easy to grow and harvest can be worth it for morale if nothing else. Not to mention the space and energy costs of trying to be self sustaining. Colonization or really long term missions is where your arguments really take off.

by cmsmith 13y ago

thaumasiotes 13y ago

We didn't choose to farm grains based on what would stack best in a grain silo. We built grain silos because we liked grain so much. Lettuce is mostly water; you won't be able to feed even one person on it, no matter how efficiently you can grow it.

beambot 13y ago
I don't think that's true -- we didn't choose grain because "we like it so much". Grain is easy to store and has a long shelf life, which means it can last long enough to get you through the long non-growing seasons. When you scale up production, you need somewhere to put it... hence silos. By way of another analogy: refrigeration is the motivating force behind much of the food we consume now. In my grandmother's day, all food post-harvest was either dried (grains and meats), canned, or pickled.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  This is fair. We chose grain because we hated starving to death in the winter. But we like grain now! History and evolution are on its side at this point. Refrigeration enables us to eat many things that people two generations ago literally couldn't, but I note that cereals are still a very large portion of what we, in all our riches, choose to eat. My family eats a lot of bread, without bothering to refrigerate it. Some things that we refrigerate now, but historically didn't have to, are eggs and milk. Do you know how those were treated in your grandmother's day? The image I have from history is that milk was produced and consumed in large quantities, and "refrigerated" (iceboxed) then as now. But clearly (?), what was good enough for milk was too good for... lettuce? ;) Just as a fun side observation, there are some other obvious concerns, if you're starting from a hunter-gatherer state: jerky keeps significantly better than grain does, and is packed full of calories, and is ultra-low-tech, but grain production can be scaled up in a way that would be extremely difficult for jerky. So we built granaries and tolerated massive losses to rats essentially because even after the losses we could produce more grain than "other food".
  - beambot 13y ago
    Eggs and Milk came right from the chickens and cows. Thankfully, I was spared this lifestyle (thanks mom!). Some of the earliest practical refrigeration on the farm (eg. the Icy Ball [1]) is from the early-late 1920s. That was during my grandmother's lifetime. If you think about it, the change in lifestyles she's witnessed in ~100 years is pretty bloody impressive: refrigeration, electricity, telephones, computers, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icyball https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icyball
  - HeyLaughingBoy 13y ago
    Be careful with your "we." The US is one of the few countries where eggs are typically refrigerated. Eggs will last for months if merely kept cool. Historically, milk was "preserved" by turning it into cheese.
Retric 13y ago
Lettuce and grains are hardly the only options. Potatoes, rice, olives, a wide range of beans, even aqatic plants etc are all with considering. After all the fact grains need little water is one of there main apeals, but water can easily be recycled in an enclosed environment so the constraints are vary different.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  Of course, and I wouldn't be making fun of a plan to grow potatoes (such a plan was already discussed in another comment when I made mine). But what they are growing is lettuce, and the comment I responded to specifically supported lettuce over grains because it was easier to grow. And I'm sure that that's why they're growing it right now... but if we wanted to produce food in space, lettuce would be a terrible choice, because it's barely food. The current efforts are more of a because-it's-there thing than a what-would-we-like-to-grow thing, and at some point "the calculus for what plants make sense in space" will have to take into account which plants we actually want to consume. EDIT: > Potatoes, rice, olives, a wide range of beans, even aq[u]atic plants etc are all w[or]th considering. After all the fact grains need little water is one of the[ir] main ap[p]eals Rice is a grain. A grain that grows in swamps. It could best be described as "water-intensive".
  - JulianMorrison 13y ago
    More like water-tolerant. Rice field flooding is for weed control (or use of land that naturally floods), rice itself prefers not to be waterlogged.
  - Retric 13y ago
    I think the current goal is fresh food and fiber vs reducing takeoff weight. Basicly they can store everything else for over a year but lettuce to make a sandwich in space. Astronauts are also working 12+ hour days so having something that's really easy to grow and harvest can be worth it for morale if nothing else. Not to mention the space and energy costs of trying to be self sustaining. Colonization or really long term missions is where your arguments really take off.