It still uses some "95% less" chemicals to kill plants. Why not laser, some pull-from-ground mechanism or scissors to get rid of unwanted plants?
Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
171–180 of 326 posts
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#172This is an improvement within the current paradigm of "big ag", but IMHO tech is opening the possibility of a completely different way of doing things. For example, this comment which is below the linked video imagines a robot-maintained food forest, I think it's on point because I, too, believe that the future is swarms of small robots rather than a few big tractors: > Imagine, a few years down the line, applying th…
> the future is swarms of small robots A key problem with small autonomous robots is their energy supply and mass. Batteries have low energy density. Actuators have bad power to weight ratios too. Living things are enormously more efficient. So much so that the intuition apparently offered by watching animals usually does not apply. This is extremely true for swarm robotics, inspired by ants, termites, etc. Swarm cri…
No post body was provided.
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#173This is an improvement within the current paradigm of "big ag", but IMHO tech is opening the possibility of a completely different way of doing things. For example, this comment which is below the linked video imagines a robot-maintained food forest, I think it's on point because I, too, believe that the future is swarms of small robots rather than a few big tractors: > Imagine, a few years down the line, applying th…
Watching that video made me joyful. I was an agronomist in the early nineties walking soybean fields twelve hours a day mapping weeds and then going back to the office making what's called postemerge chemical recommendations to get most of the weeds that I had observed. During those hot days having then written software for a hobby I thought there has to be a better way. Could a sprayer map weeds and apply chemicals…
The best parts of that job was when you stood still for a minute late in the season, completely oblivious to the stream of fire ants pouring into your boots
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#174This is an improvement within the current paradigm of "big ag", but IMHO tech is opening the possibility of a completely different way of doing things. For example, this comment which is below the linked video imagines a robot-maintained food forest, I think it's on point because I, too, believe that the future is swarms of small robots rather than a few big tractors: > Imagine, a few years down the line, applying th…
Yes, the current ways of doing intensive farming are hard on the land and ultimately very wasteful. If you look at the progress in pesticide free organic farming and indoor/vertical farming, what they have in common is that they leverage a more data driven approach where you simply don't need to pre-emptively correct problems if you can manage the environment in which you grow plants better. Avoiding the conditions that cause pests and weeds to get out control is much more efficient than dealing with them after things get out of control.
Basically, intensive agriculture is compensating for its destructive nature by just brutally suppressing any "undesirable" growth. In nature, pests target the weaker plants. Basically, you stress out plants by mismanaging them and they are fair game for a wide range of fungi, insects, etc. E.g. under or over watering them, depleting the soil, etc. all stress plants out. If you have unhealthy soil, it's hard to have healthy plants growing in it.
Intensive agriculture starts with disrupting the soil (by plowing it). This causes the soil to degrade over time and releases captured carbon into the atmosphere. The natural response is for aggressive weeds to start growing in disrupted soil. To "fix" this, farmers use a mix of pesticides and fertilizers. The pesticides kill a lot more than just the pests and weeds and then further degrades the soil and the bio diversity in and on it. And finally the fertilizer is just bleeding out of the land straight into the ground water and surrounding areas. It works but it is resource intensive. You need lots of water, chemicals, energy, etc to grow a single crop at the cost of literally anything else. Basically modern intensive farming grows mono cultures on top of artificially created deserts.
Organic farming avoids doing that. Try not to disrupt the soil. Kill off (and compost) weaker plants rather than trying to rescue them. Use nature to keep pests and weeds in check. Etc. It works but it is more labor intensive. You need people to look after things. You get healthier and tastier produce (cooks love organically grown stuff for this reason). However, automating that labor makes it more scalable. That's the opportunity here.
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the future is swarms of small robots A key problem with small autonomous robots is their energy supply and mass. Batteries have low energy density. Actuators have bad power to weight ratios too. Living things are enormously more efficient. So much so that the intuition apparently offered by watching animals usually does not apply. This is extremely true for swarm robotics, inspired by ants, termites, etc. Swarm cri…
what if we make them bigger than insects but still relatively small? just an arm on a track. heck, we can put the energy in the track too. boom, no battery.
There are some interesting things being done with pivot spans. Hummingbird runs nozzles back and forth on rails suspended from each pivot span. But they’re difficult to keep running.
Ag is hard. It’s dusty. The weather can be brutal. Stuff gets left out year round. The turnover is high. Schedules are dynamic and unforgiving (when the weather turns, you have to adapt your whole operation). There’s not a lot of highly technical staff to maintain things; bailing wire and bandaids is a real thing. The tradition of “hacking things” to keep them working comes from farmers.
The more complicated your machinery, the more your MTBF product goes up. So complicated units don’t scale well.
If a single sprinkler on a pivot fails or misbehaves, there’s nearly 400 of them and there’s some overlap. If your “robot” stalls out with some grit or a power supply issue or a bricked update, or leaky hydraulics, you just lost 1/10 of your pivot. Pray it happens on an inner span, rather than an outer one.
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#176The video paid a nice compliment to the “modern farmers.” It’s the right thing to say in the video.
But I’ve worked with tech in ag for 10+ years now. There are some motivated/excited early adopters. But there is still a lot of resistance. It generally feels 10-20 years behind. I’ve worked quite a bit with the very company mentioned in the video. Like any big company, it’s made up of all kinds. I’ll leave it at that.
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#177wouldn't it be easier/cheaper to just enclose the whole field in a giant greenhouse with a 100% controllable environment? I mean, I hear many crops are lost every year to things like floods from rainstorms that require pricey insurance coverage, the idea of having a guaranteed crop every year with no unauthorized organisms and perfect lighting and watering and nutrition seems like it would eventually more than make up for the initial construction cost of a giant greenhouse
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
Watching that video made me joyful. I was an agronomist in the early nineties walking soybean fields twelve hours a day mapping weeds and then going back to the office making what's called postemerge chemical recommendations to get most of the weeds that I had observed. During those hot days having then written software for a hobby I thought there has to be a better way. Could a sprayer map weeds and apply chemicals…
The best parts of that job was when you stood still for a minute late in the season, completely oblivious to the stream of fire ants pouring into your boots
In my case the hornets nest I stepped on while admiring our huge 250+ year-old walnut tree
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#179It still uses some "95% less" chemicals to kill plants. Why not laser, some pull-from-ground mechanism or scissors to get rid of unwanted plants?
Spray is cheaper, and when you can precisely target the weeds you can use less harmful chemicals, such as acetic acid or even hot water.
Re: Robot treats 500k plants per hour with 95% less chemicals [video]
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the future is swarms of small robots A key problem with small autonomous robots is their energy supply and mass. Batteries have low energy density. Actuators have bad power to weight ratios too. Living things are enormously more efficient. So much so that the intuition apparently offered by watching animals usually does not apply. This is extremely true for swarm robotics, inspired by ants, termites, etc. Swarm cri…
Yeah, instead of a swarm you could have one gigantic arm that can reach anywhere.
This could simultaneously absolve the need for autonomous vehicles, because whenever you need to go somewhere, you could just make the giant arm put you there.