Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The crash of the global flower trade

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 137 posts

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#101

Post by adrianN »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #4
Mengkudulangsat wrote: post #3

Cut flower export sounds like climate travesty; they are not essential, they are fragile (requiring energy-intensive cold chain logistics and air-freight) and after all that effort... they have a shelf-life of a week. If there is an industry that should be strictly localized, it's this one.

The argument I regularly hear is that there would be more energy spent heating local greenhouses than flying the flowers.

If energy was sufficiently expensive, we would just build greenhouses like so: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2015/12/reinventing-the-gree...

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#102

Post by adrianN »

sojournerc wrote: post #97
kumarvvr wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be true if our carbon footprint is minimal, but that is not the case. Until society self adjusts, to minimize the total carbon emissions per capita to a sustainable level, we might have to do with only essentials.

Who determines what the essentials are?

You price in the pollution and let the market decide.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#103

Post by wil421 »

jhallenworld wrote: post #86
mariushn wrote: post #68

Meanwhile in South Africa there are food issues... Why not plant vegetables instead of flowers? Also to note: workers get $70/mo, while all other middle-men involved get more.

I can tell you that in the US, decorative plants are so much higher a cash crop than food that it would not be worthwhile. Think of tobacco or marijuana vs. tomatoes... On the other hand, some greenhouse businesses I know that do grow some food can be classified as essential businesses and stay open. Actually there is an interesting optimization problem here. You are a greenhouse grower with a certain number of acres…

They already use software. I called a pecan orchard in the southern part of my state. When I asked when they would be ready to harvest they gave me a specific date. When questioned she said they take measurements of the nuts, a few other inputs, and their software gives them an ideal harvest date. They roasted the nuts themselves so they could give you a very accurate ship date early in the season.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#104

Post by mns »

lm28469 wrote: post #44
op03 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree about not essential. If we go there, sooner or later, someone will show up and say Music is not essential, and why can't everyone dress like Zuck etc. But I do agree about local. I mean who doesn't want to walk by something like this everyday - https://scontent-yyz1-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t50.2886-16/93565...

> someone will show up and say Music is not essential Depends on your definition of essential, I'd argue 100% of the world population would survive just fine without music or flowers. Food is essential, water is essential, medicine is essential, shelter is essential. Some tulips imported for 2000km away aren't. I mean, do we really have to debate this ? If we go there, sooner or later, someone will show up and say Ke…

Up until someone decides that food is also not essential for the majority of the population and we will just need to drink some sort of universal soy and lentil based smoothie. :)

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#105

Post by netsharc »

kzrdude wrote: post #69

It's easier to make stories about businesses than people, but I really think we need more people stories now. Rather than the flower trade having a downturn, what about all the people that planned weddings? A delayed wedding is apparently hardly a disaster, but what does it mean if nobody can get married for a half a year, what happens?

Huh? This story talks a lot of the people affected by this crash, from delayed weddings to Kenyan workers which will probably go hungry...

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#106

Post by netsharc »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #4
Mengkudulangsat wrote: post #3

Cut flower export sounds like climate travesty; they are not essential, they are fragile (requiring energy-intensive cold chain logistics and air-freight) and after all that effort... they have a shelf-life of a week. If there is an industry that should be strictly localized, it's this one.

The argument I regularly hear is that there would be more energy spent heating local greenhouses than flying the flowers.

It seems employing Western Europeans to plant and pick flowers in Western Europe would mean expensive flowers, and they've apparently calculated it's cheaper to let Kenyans plant, pick, ship the flowers to big Boeings, for pilots to burn fuel flying the Boeings to the Netherlands, and for the flowers to be distributed around W. Europe (and apparently USA) that way.

It' the same with people screaming why their country doesn't have their own PPE manufacturers; because in non-crisis times, the hospitals would buy from the lowest bidder, and those would be manufacturers with cheap developing country labor..

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#108

Post by Scapeghost »

9nGQluzmnq3M wrote: post #82
Scapeghost wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice if you remembered civility before making all your passive-aggressive jabs in the comments here, like calling someone "incel" for, what, saying that destroying flowers might be wrong? ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22943627 ) What makes you so angry about arguing against destruction and waste?

Your comment here is far more uncivil and aggressive than the one you're replying to.

easytiger has multiple comments here attacking the same parent(s):

https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=easytiger

You may need to enable your "showdead" option to see some of them. I'm not sure how I've said anything more uncivil and aggressive than calling people "incels", lingo that is more suited for Reddit and 4chan than HN.

I'm just baffled at how some people get so angry at someone for saying maybe we shouldn't be killing something.

Re: The crash of the global flower trade

#110

Post by easytiger »

Scapeghost wrote: post #108
9nGQluzmnq3M wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment here is far more uncivil and aggressive than the one you're replying to.

easytiger has multiple comments here attacking the same parent(s): https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=easytiger You may need to enable your "showdead" option to see some of them. I'm not sure how I've said anything more uncivil and aggressive than calling people "incels", lingo that is more suited for Reddit and 4chan than HN. I'm just baffled at how some people get so angry at someone for saying maybe we shouldn't…

That's not what they said and I was not aware I was replying to the same person, if indeed I was.

People going around and reductively deciding to morally posit that people who like flowers are morally repugnant should be assuredly told their opinion doesn't matter.

They called displaying cut flowers a

> bizarre and grotesque custom

And then went on to compare it with human slavery.

If you don't think that's ridiculous on a whole number of levels (some of which levels speak to the psychology of the person), you need to take a long hard look at yourself.

Post reply on HN