31–40 of 297 posts
Most apparent was the $200,000 in annual costs one of the farming operations saved by dumping the agro-chemical suppliers herbicides and pesticides.
Presumably these expenses have benefits, otherwise companies wouldn't be using them? It's like saying a company saved $200k by dumping their computers... so they can do everything on paper.
There are ways to prevent the desertification of the United States, and they don't involve PhDs and lobbying.
He has a bootcamp and I took 2 weeks off from work to try it out in January and I learned alot just by being there. https://wheaton-labs.com/bootcamp/
After that experience I couldn't focus on work anymore so I quit my job (I have 2 years worth of savings) and now my days are spent trying to restore the soil in my backyard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there no way for small farmers to band together for some sort of risk pooling?
Yes, farmers have banded together and make large purchases and grain sales. These are known as 'co-ops' in the US. The idea of them is great. There is a WIDE variance on the quality of co-ops. Some are great and well-run and provide the intended benefits to farmers. Others would make the mafia looks less corrupt (seriously, the CEOs of some co-ops make 500k+ salaries).
> Between cash and cover crops, Wicks and Givens are planting about 4,500 acres this year. Some of that land is leased from Wicks’ mother, who retired in 2019, and the rest they lease from neighbors. They’ve contracted most of the barley to Anheuser-Busch, though they’ll sell some to nearby Hutterite colonies for chicken feed. They’re also growing lentils, chickpeas, Kamut and Einkorn for smaller mills including Timeless Seeds and Montana Flour and Grain, both based in Montana.
> Their yields are smaller than their conventional ones were, but Wicks said it’s worth it. Previously, they were at the mercy of international commodity markets, as well as ever-increasing seed, chemical and fertilizer prices. Organic producers often have more leverage, because they usually grow a diverse range of crops and sell directly to processors. Plus, many Montana organic grain and pulse growers forward-contract their crops, meaning they lock in a per bushel price before even planting. Wicks and Givens often sell their organic crops for two to three times the price of conventionally grown ones.
A similar, likely smaller scale, tale is told in TasteMakers[1]. In this episode I think it was the beef supplier that said that he couldn't count on the commodity price of beef, but by contracting with the local artisan butcher prices were set for the year. Who knows what percent of his herd goes to that butcher.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumably these expenses have benefits, otherwise companies wouldn't be using them? It's like saying a company saved $200k by dumping their computers... so they can do everything on paper.
It's more like saving $200k by switching from Heroku to a dedicated infrastructure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumably these expenses have benefits, otherwise companies wouldn't be using them? It's like saying a company saved $200k by dumping their computers... so they can do everything on paper.
Most agricultural chemical products are profitable in the way a loan is profitable. You get higher yields now, but you're disrupting the environment and making it more vulnerable to pests, drought and erosion in the long run. As these problems start to become apparent, your only solution to maintain yields is to use more and more products, until the land is so marginal it collapses.
Where has this happened?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know why they just don't use something like Acast which will take care of distribution (or maybe others I don't know of). The worst part of it is that Spotify's android app is buggy. Actually, that's an understatement: it's garbage. I shouldn't have it hang waiting for network connection just to navigate the offline portions of the app (e.g. downloaded podcasts). Anyone who writes a simple "music player" andr…
I assume any Spotify-only podcast is because Spotify is paying them to be exclusive?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, farmers have banded together and make large purchases and grain sales. These are known as 'co-ops' in the US. The idea of them is great. There is a WIDE variance on the quality of co-ops. Some are great and well-run and provide the intended benefits to farmers. Others would make the mafia looks less corrupt (seriously, the CEOs of some co-ops make 500k+ salaries).
It seems that banding together on grain sales cuts both ways. I gather that selling to (or is it through?) the co-op gets you access to the commodity markets, which generally makes selling your goods easy. However, when you are buying seed for the next year's crop, you have no guarantee that the market price when you sell it will cover your costs. At least that's part of what I get from: > Between cash and cover crop…
How well can this model scale remains to be seen. Also, do not underestimate the meat cartels. They have deep pockets (and the cutthroat executives) and can go to the mattress far longer than small-time players.
I just got back from touring Oregon and Washington and I got to see a lot of fascinating agriculture. Primarily hazelnut trees along with some berries other speciality crops and "hay." The nut tree farmers need some help. They are spraying water scattershot to soak the ground. What's more is that they have the ground prepared as perfectly flat bare soil--I presume to make automated harvesting possible. It looks like…
Drip irrigation works best when delivering water directly to the roots of small annual plants. Trees have large root systems, and are planted closely enough that you need to water the entire ground. Perhaps a network of smaller sprayers below the leaf canopy would reduce evaporative losses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most agricultural chemical products are profitable in the way a loan is profitable. You get higher yields now, but you're disrupting the environment and making it more vulnerable to pests, drought and erosion in the long run. As these problems start to become apparent, your only solution to maintain yields is to use more and more products, until the land is so marginal it collapses.
>until the land is so marginal it collapses. Where has this happened?
The risk of land collapsing is probably greatest West of the Missouri river where historic rainfall is less and historic topsoil is less (Dakotas, Nebraska, Colorado, Kansas, etc).