this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
3 points (80.0% liked)

Science Memes

11217 readers
2685 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Surplusable farming is literally the basis on which all civilization is built

Like the whole point of the way things work for us now is that you don't have to be a farmer or a hunter or a gatherer to be able to have access to a consistent source of food.

People romanticize about the idealic agrarian past but human civilization was literally invented over how back breakingly difficult that kind of work is for people who aren't built for it.

[–] ashok36@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Also the fact that one bad year in your tiny part of the world means you and everyone you know die slow agonizing deaths. Fun!

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This is one of the things I find funny about modern day self sufficient communes. Subsistence farming is awful, industrialized farming is less awful, but still far more work than most are willing to ever do.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The issue is that the current farming techniques are not sustainable.

The fertilizers and pesticides used are burning the land, polluting the underground water pools and killing a bunch of animals and insects.

The agriculture needs to change to something sustainable.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Modern farming techniques consider sustainability, the larger problem is countries using traditional methods that are extremely harmful like burning forests.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

The industrial farming of corn in the US requires using hybrid corn strains to reach the yields it has, which in turn requires the use of fertilizers because the natural soils is incapable of sustaining the density of corn plants that hybrid varieties achive.

Those fertilizers in turn are mainly made from Oil, which is a non-renewable resource, making the whole thing unsustainable. It's is possible to make the fertilizers sustainably, it's just much more expensive so that's not done.

The US is so deeply involved (including outright military invasions) in the Middle East from where most of the oil comes because in the US oil it's not just a critical resource for Transportation and Energy, it's also a critical resource for Food because it's so incredibly dependent on corn (which is estimated to add up directly and indirectly to more than 70% of the human food chain there)

PS: There is a book called The Omnivore’s Dilemma which is a great read on this.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Those fertilizers in turn are mainly made from Oil,

Fertilizer is not made from oil. Oil/gas is used to power the factory but that doesn't make the farming unsustainable.

Because if you use the criteria of where we get our energy from, home gardening isn't sustainable either because your house is powered by oil/gas.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Fertilizers are made from Amonia which in turn is made using the Haber-Bosch process which requires fossil fuels to provide the necessary energy and as reactants (see this related article).

There is also "natural" fertilizer made from organic mass left over from other activities which would otherwise go to waste, but that's insufficient for large scale intensive farming (composting is fine for your community garden or even for supplementing low intensity agriculture, but not for the intensive industrial farming growing things like hybrid corn).

Finally, the use of techniques like crop rotation which lets letting fields lie fallow so that natural nitrate fixation occurs and the soil recovers do not make the soil rich enough in nitrates to support hybrid corn growing because, as I mentioned, the plant density is too high to be supported by natural soil alone without further addition of fertilizers.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

Fertilizers are made from Amonia which in turn is made using the Haber-Bosch process which requires fossil fuels to provide the necessary energy and as reactants

That's exactly what I said! Fertilizer is not made from oil. The factory is powered by oil. Just like your home where you garden is powered by oil.

[–] Roldyclark@literature.cafe 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Some stuff you can def grow yourself easily and not have to buy at the store. I don’t have to buy tomato's all summer just from a few plants. Never buy herbs. But yeah sustenance farming I am not. Support local farmers!

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Local farm has a dirt cheap produce subscription. $40 a week for locally grown produce!

[–] fushuan@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

That's super expensive... 40 a week for just veggies? I spend 40 a week on all my groceries at most.

[–] Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Who the fuck prioritized efficiency over quality in their backyard garden?

My handmade solid maple and walnut furniture will never reach the yield or cost-effectiveness as IKEA. I guess I’ll just have to burn my shop down

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You are missing the point.

It's not about your shop. It's about everyone making their own furniture... which doesn't scale and isn't feasible.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This is a totally specious argument. Everyone doesn't have to make 100% of their own furniture any more than every one has to grow 100% of their food.

If I make two chairs it's more efficient than 1 chair and I only need to spend maybe 70% more time than 1, not 100% I sell/barter one chair to my neighbor, who, because they have grown 6 tomato plants instead of 4 (at most 10% more of their labor), has excess tomatoes and gives me some in exchange.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Bro I think you are vastly overestimating the produce yield of a homegrown tomato plant let alone 6

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm curious if you have numbers on that or you are just assuming low yields.

I happen to know exactly how much a tomato plant grows because over 20 years of commercial farming I kept records. It varies a lot by variety and season and even how we are responding to market needs but in general I tend to get about 800-1400 lbs per 200 ft row for indeterminate tomatoes over the season. A farmer I know at lower elevation gets a lot more but they have a longer season, better soil and, crucially, water a lot more than we do -- my method cuts yield but increases quality. We use a 2 ft spacing for F1 varieties so that's about 100 plants (more like 95, but whatevs) so let's call it 8 pounds per plant = 48 lbs of tomatoes. Again, this is quite generalized and it's often way more. I also happen to know that's going to be on the very low end of home garden yields because people tell me this shit. Also, for cherry tomatoes you can get probably 60-70% more since they are very prolific.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Bro we talking about a home garden here, where do you have that much space? and above all, time to do all that in your home? Not even counting the knowledge needed, fertilizer and soil and the fact that 90% of people starting this will drop it at the second week, it is still overestimating how much they will harvest at the end.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm not your "bro".

I'm using examples from commercial small-scale farms because that shows what's possible when done correctly and by competent people, even at hand scale. I know many home gardeners who are extremely competent and frankly using the example of incompetent home gardeners or those who "drop it at the second week" compared to competent industrial farmers is completely disingenuous and wholly illogical.

the fact that 90% of people starting this will drop it at the second week,

[citation needed]

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago
[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Went to a local farmers' market over the weekend. Everything was very good, y'all should give it a try

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And for the inevitable "it's too expensive" and related comments:

  1. Find the markets where you are buying directly from the farmers, not aggregators/resellers.
  2. Shop around and buy things that are less in demand. You can ask what's not selling and try to negotiate a little and if you go right at the end, say 15-30 minutes before vendors have to pack up, you will find lots of bargains.
  3. Build relationships with growers. You will get better deals and freebees.
[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Not to mention, per kilogram, it's more polluting than simply buying at a grocery store

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you're saying local farmers pollute more then I think you're mistaken. Local farmers by definition are local so they drive closer.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago

It's the same situation as when you grow a pear in Argentina, send it to Malaysia and back to usa.

Boats are simply too big

A local farmer doing restocking trips, buying and transporting, you on trips buying the stuff needed to make those sweet iron and vitamin deficient mini tomatoes, soil, fertilizer, etc, consume lots of energy. Which might seem like a little but multiply that effort by the proposed method of "everyone planting and harvesting their own shit" and you soon see that it was kinder to mother earth and the climate to just transport shit over a cargo ship burning 400 trucks worth of fuel in one trip and transporting the equivalent of 9000 trucks, than you doing the 400 trucks worth of fuel trips and transporting, well 400 trucks worth of goods

It’s basically about scale. Shipping container ships run at low speed and maximize fuel efficiency.

When you drive, most of the fuel is used propelling the car forward, backwards, upwards and downwards. You make up a small amount of the stuff moved. You also change speeds. You come to full stops, take turns, maybe even go the wrong way. All of that is “wasted” energy that goes to the polluting impact of your vitamin deficient mini tomatoes.

However, a ships engine mostly works way more in per portion to move product across the oceans. Importantly once it maps out it’s routes and hits speed, it doesn’t deviate. Once the ship is up to speed getting it to keep going forward isn’t very hard.

It’s almost (because of need if preexisting infrastructure) the same with rail. The ability to carry a ton of stuff and maintain the same course and speed saves so much fuel, lowering the carbon footprint of any transported goods to your place to something miniscule you could never actually achieve by your own machinations

That's why they pollute more. That's right your homegrown tomatoes are more polluting than those of a mega corporation

[–] __Lost__@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand why anyone would argue against a garden. Should my yard just be grass? Why shouldn't I plant something I can eat in it? It doesn't matter if it's less efficient than industrial farming, it's basically unused land to start with.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's because nobody is arguing that. The argument is against people saying that industrial farming is evil and should be stopped, which is a bit of a past time hobby around here.

[–] ZMoney@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Monoculture is terrible for the ecosystem. Fertilizer runoff causes algal blooms and dead zones in the ocean. Multinational agricultural conglomerates force developing world farmers to purchase their GMO seeds sue them for copyright infingement if they try to use their seed stock in the next season. Rainforests are being burned down to make room for pastures of methane emitting cattle and monocultured palm oil plantations. The Haber-Bosch process is responsible for 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Should I go on? At what point am I supposed to like this?

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think at the point where you have food on the table. Without haver, you wouldn't have food on your table and you'd die from hunger

Nobody is claiming it's perfect, nobody is claiming things cannot or should not be improved.

The point is that these systems are there because like it or not, they work. Haber works, you are alive, ain't you? Now from here on we must improve.

Rotate crops more often, cut the stranglehold from agriculture conglomerates, lower the world population by lowering birth rates, be super 8+ billion and rising is just too much for this world to handle... Things like that.

Either way, tonight you can eat, maybe be at least a little grateful for that?

[–] ZMoney@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Haber will obviously continue to be used and work but as long as there's a fossil fuel price to make it happen expect more extreme storms, fires, droughts, floods, ocean acidification, and possibly methane clathrate release triggering a runaway greenhouse effect like during the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 months ago

I know. Same for cars, which cause up to 25% of all CO2 exhaust, much easier to curb that. We can do with much less cars, food would be harder.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

no shit you can't compete with something subsidized lol, how is that an impressive argument?

just.. subsidize the homegrown produce if you want it to be competitive? big brain moment

[–] EunieIsTheBus@feddit.de 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Is probably true. However, one should question their world view if they measure everything as a minimization problem with respect to cost efficience and yield.

[–] Donkter@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think it's less about ruthless efficiency and more about which system will enable even the poorest in society to have nutritious food.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

as if this system has done so..

[–] nxdefiant@startrek.website -1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

250 years ago people would rent pineapples for parties as status symbols because they cost $8000.

Nowadays the most expensive pineapple you can get is barely $400.

That's progress

[–] stiephel@feddit.de 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If it helps, I could sell you a pineapple for more than that.

[–] nxdefiant@startrek.website -1 points 6 months ago

I'll have to see what my social status raising fruit budget looks like.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

Is that Canadian toonies?