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

Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

crimepaysbutbotanydoesnt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 158 posts

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#121

Post by lazide »

bix6 wrote: post #100
lazide wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noble savage much? They had war, rapes, atrocities, tragedies, plagues, shittiness, famines, etc. too you know. At least from what we’ve been able to gather after they mostly got wiped out. It is no picnic living in a preindustrial society.

It’s no picnic right now either. Massive inequality while the world prepares to wipe us all away. I’m aware of the stats about xyz improving over time. But if we let the earth fall apart, as is the trend, it’s all for naught.

Do you think pre-industrial civilizations were super equal, or didn’t have ‘world trying to wipe us away’ issues?

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#122

Post by progval »

notepad0x90 wrote: post #71

Wouldn't a hydroponic setup help the author with this? Dumb question, but is it difficult to setup a temperature and humidity controlled box or room where you could stow away the plants at night? A possibly dumber question, why do hydroponics always seem to involve indoor/UV lighting? Why are there no container-sized setups that you can place outdoors, but the climate and sun-light is controlled, and it's all powered…

> why do hydroponics always seem to involve indoor/UV lighting?

Hydroponics and artificial lighting increase density (no/less volume wasted by dirt, and can stack plant beds on top of each other). UV lighting is more power-efficient artificial lighting, so it's the next logical step.

And if you grow plants indoor somewhat densely, they'll leave your apartment in constant semi-darkness if you rely on sunlight. I have this issue with my basil and cherry tomatoes, for example.

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#123

Post by myvoiceismypass »

ASinclair wrote: post #40
miquong wrote: post #3

The author has a highly amusing, off-beat Instagram feed: https://www.instagram.com/crime_pays_but_botany_doesnt

He also has a YouTube channel. I first saw him speak at SF Nerd Nite which is a speaker series in San Francisco. He’s very entertaining and basically a self taught botanist.

For those in the Bay Area he has a pretty hilarious video of him shopping at Berkeley Bowl too, shredding junk like the homeopathic bs but praising their produce selection. Bonus video of him analyzing the sad trees in the Emeryville Target parking lot.

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#124

Post by aspenmayer »

lazide wrote: post #90
oorza wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but you could do enough of it in secret with Elon Musk resources to prove that it's both planetarily viable and doesn't cause catastrophes by existing and then lend your political weight to having it scaled up globally. By the time the public heard about it, it would already be a done deal. I think you could prove it out at a scale that people could measure on planetary CO2 sensors for a couple dozen billion doll…

Mind doing some math and showing your work?

> > No, but you could do enough of it in secret with Elon Musk resources to prove that it's both planetarily viable and doesn't cause catastrophes by existing and then lend your political weight to having it scaled up globally. By the time the public heard about it, it would already be a done deal.

> Mind doing some math and showing your work?

I don’t see how anyone could spend tens or hundreds of billions of dollars in secret, so I’m not sure how important it is to show their work. I found the premise a bit absurd.

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#125

Post by beachy »

lazide wrote: post #120
beachy wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for whatever reason the green movement has opposed the solution for decades. Even shutting down nuclear to use more coal. This is an amusing and antique take on things. Anti-nuclear protests were frequently in the news in the 70s and 80s. As a result, some people with views set in stone in their youth believe that environmentalists are still predominately anti-nuclear. In a strange twist of fate, this mindset is ac…

If that actually happens (and isn’t a giant scam!), along with the crash in global trade cutting emissions there, it would be the most hilarious thing ever. Nixon going to China level.

Exactly. Runaway capitalism is the fuel of our climate emergency. Boats and planes delivering container loads of plastic shit around the world. People flying to Europe for the weekend.

The best fix at this time, since we humans have shown ourselves to be collectively incapable of doing the right things, would be to push a stick into the spokes and bring the whole system crashing down.

Guess who seems to be doing just that (though for all the wrong reasons). If the rabid US leadership manages to crash the global economy, that could be the single biggest reduction in emissions in history.

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#126

Post by bix6 »

lazide wrote: post #121
bix6 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s no picnic right now either. Massive inequality while the world prepares to wipe us all away. I’m aware of the stats about xyz improving over time. But if we let the earth fall apart, as is the trend, it’s all for naught.

Do you think pre-industrial civilizations were super equal, or didn’t have ‘world trying to wipe us away’ issues?

Pre ag it was hard to store wealth or accumulate power so hunter gatherers may have been the most egalitarian setup in our history.

Sure it’s always been a battle but they weren’t speedrunning GHG into the atmosphere.

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#127

Post by lazide »

aspenmayer wrote: post #124
lazide wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mind doing some math and showing your work?

> > No, but you could do enough of it in secret with Elon Musk resources to prove that it's both planetarily viable and doesn't cause catastrophes by existing and then lend your political weight to having it scaled up globally. By the time the public heard about it, it would already be a done deal. > Mind doing some math and showing your work? I don’t see how anyone could spend tens or hundreds of billions of dollars…

Hell, I just want to see the math on how much they think it would cost.

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#128

Post by bix6 »

mythrwy wrote: post #102
bix6 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t tempt me with mango! Where’d you learn the techniques?

Trial and error mostly although I have a degree in agronomy and worked in horticulture for a long time.

I’m on the right path then. I threw a bunch of seeds in this year and only the strong survived :p

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#129

Post by manoDev »

cityofdelusion wrote: post #58
manoDev wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Horse and buggy”. How dramatic. If at least the US got in line with the rest of the world, we would be half-way there. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita The problem is not the 8 billion people, is the handful that have an disproportionate impact.

Disingenuous. Here is the correct chart to link if you want to assert emissions by country: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-...

This graph isn’t telling the history you think it does…

China’s population is 4x times the US, and still, total emissions are a little over 2x — and that’s ignoring the outsized impact from exported goods.

Re: Why you can’t grow cool-climate plants in hot climates

#130

Post by lumost »

tfourb wrote: post #89
lumost wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the proposed mechanism for implementing a cut back? A global population with 8 billion people and 1950s carbon emissions implies an average living standard somewhere in the realm of the 1900s. Are you volunteering to move back to the horse and buggy? Bear in mind that the industrialized world of 1950 was only inhabited by a small portion of the global population at most a billion people. The only path forward…

CO2 emissions are not the driving force behind economic development. Energy is. And energy generation has been decoupled from CO2 emissions in almost every major economy, including China. Heck, in many countries economic growth has been decoupled even from energy use, with economies growing while energy use shrinks. And while technological innovation is always nice, we always possess all the technology we need to get…

While earnest, I’ve heard this claim for 30 years - that it’s simple political will. The reality is that until very recently there were only two economically viable carbon neutral energy sources. We now have four, however there are real unsolved problems with scaling three of those solutions. The only technology which can reliably solve the crises brings along its own set of externalities.

It does few favors to anyone to underestimate the scale of the problem facing the world. There is no set of political body in the world with the capability to freeze consumption and lock billions of people into poverty.

Post reply on HN