‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food • Hacker News Board

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#191

Post by markvdb » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:25 PM UTC

q1w2 wrote: post #165

markvdb wrote: post #70

Food prices rising means hunger means social unrest. The developed world is not entirely out of the woods. With low natural gas prices and heavily subsidised food, the poor of the US should hopefully come out relatively unharmed. It's going to be worse in the EU and its periphery: - High dependence on Russian natural gas. - Lots of fertiliser depends on Belarussian potash here. - The natural gas crisis is halting lot…

We over-produce a lot of food in the west. I think there's very little risk of hunger.

It's not about there not being food. It's about people being too poor to buy it, many of them in the eastern EU.

Some anecdotal evidence that might sound extreme, but actually isn't.

I know an old lady over 80 from Latvia. She worked all her life as a university trained economist. Like almost all people her age, her savings were eaten by the socio-economic chaos of the '90s. She has a 10% more expensive?

Reality is much bleaker than that for the majority of Latvian pensioners. Not all have a "high" pension of almost 400€. Not all are in good health. Not all have financial support from younger generations. Some of them are going to go hungry.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#192

Post by trynumber9 » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:25 PM UTC

LatteLazy wrote: post #179

The problem with farms is they are small businesses. But instead of having entrepreneurs or managers, or some other competent people, they have farmers in charge. And farmers absolutely refuse to do things like accounts or business plans or learning about farming.

Are you getting your knowledge from stereotypes? I know farmers from my time in a rural midwestern high school and I keep in touch with some. They plan extensively and know more about accounting than I do. Some have agricultural or business degrees too. People generally prefer to make more money for their effort and will take steps in the direction.

Sure there are the backward, resistant type of farmers too. But they're not the majority because such farms are much more prone to failure. It doesn't matter if the stereotype is that farmers are all backwards, they adapt to economic pressures regardless.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#193

Post by Desertfoxatx » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:30 PM UTC

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #168

Desertfoxatx wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The midwest has great soil because billions of organisms died millions of years ago in a shallow sea that covered most of the central united states today.

I thought the soil was great because of the Yellowstone Caldera Supervolcano dropping huge amounts of volcanic ash every 650,000 years. How long has it been? Oh, right around 650,000 years..........

You aren't wrong. All the life sustaining minerals/elements we have in the earths lithosphere are being renewed by volcanism. It is why the plant life was able to exist in the first place.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#194

Post by cjbgkagh » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:33 PM UTC

dqv wrote: post #181

cjbgkagh wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, and clearly that doesn’t mesh with bioreactor food which typically isn’t enjoyable to eat. I’m saying the science on the health relationship with food isn’t great and I don’t trust it. Especially in the ‘healthy at any size’ era we now live in. I eat meat to help cover gaps in understanding, and by careful measurement I can tell that I’m healthier when I eat it, or specifically less healthy when I don’t. If the s…

>Especially in the ‘healthy at any size’ era we now live in I'm not sure this has anything to do with science. It's turned into a religion, but is there evidence to suggest it is affecting the science of health? >I eat meat to help cover gaps in understanding, and by careful measurement I can tell that I’m healthier when I eat it, or specifically less healthy when I don’t. What measurements are those? Anecdotally, ea…

I’ve always been distrustful of food science, ever since the food pyramid (grain suppliers) was introduced to me as a child, and the quadrant of tastes (funded by umami suppliers in the condiment wars). More recently the CSIRO prostrated themselves you the lamb lobby. I picked the healthy at any size example as it’s the most obviously wrong and early death has to be the clearest indication of poor health. I’m not a fan of corn, I don’t even like the cows that I eat eating it.

I have a genetic disorder (one of the genetic anxiety disorders) that requires careful monitoring. I monitor strength, endurance, and a panel of blood work every 3 months. Everyday day I play a competitive ranked FPS game to see how my cognitive functions are going. Drops in ranks clearly correspond to changes in diet and behavior.

Yeah, yeast is a good bioreactor also Cyanobacteria. Promite is pretty good. Cyanobacteria taste like fish food. I’d like to see more options here.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#195

Post by xyzzyz » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:42 PM UTC

cesnja wrote: post #169

xyzzyz wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we evolved to consume prepared food, including meat. Our mouths, jaws, and digestive system have been coevolving for past few tens-to-hundreds of thousands of years with our diets and food preparation methods. Certainly, vegetables have not been a major source of calories for humans in many tens of thousands of years now (because they don’t have a lot of calories in them in the first place, but also because they…

Grains, legumes and root vegetables would disagree.

The word “vegetables” is typically understood to not include grains, and to not include all legumes.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#196

Post by ramblenode » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:42 PM UTC

flenserboy wrote: post #184

dqv wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>pushing everyone into eating cheap to grow grains There is more to plant-based food than grains. Seeds and legumes are full of nutrients. People can and do survive on way less meat.

Seeds and legumes are also filled with anti-nutrients. One has to be careful how much of these are consumed.

Eating in general does a lot of mechanical and chemical damage to the body that has to be repaired. Most foods seem to contain some portion of proteins that can be harmful (red meat is a WHO Group I carcinogen to gut tissue). Even fructose is damaging to the liver and triggers an immune reaction. Cooking pre-digests many problematics but some portion will remain. It's the role of the immune system to deactivate the damaging proteins so that the damage doesn't accumulate. Eating and digestion are a constant balance between sustenance and wear, and problems begin when the rate of wear outpaces the rate of repair.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#197

Post by dilap » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:43 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #143

dilap wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funnily enough, there used to be about 60 million wild buffalo roaming north america. We killed them off & have devoted vast tracts of land to monocrop agriculture fueled by petrochemical fertilizers.

Those 60 million Bison lived ~15 years on average. Cattle on the other hand rarely make it past adulthood, so those 33 million cattle slaughtered every year requires significantly more food. That’s the core reason we are feeding cattle with farmed corn, you simply get more beef from the same land.

Sure, I'm shooting from the hip.

But I think the broader point is true -- there's nothing wrong/unsustainable/unnatural about having a bunch of ruminants running around. That's how it used to be!

What's unnatural, and, I think, unsustainable, is vast fields of intensively-grown monocrops, propped up by petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#198

Post by dqv » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:50 PM UTC

cjbgkagh wrote: post #194

dqv wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Especially in the ‘healthy at any size’ era we now live in I'm not sure this has anything to do with science. It's turned into a religion, but is there evidence to suggest it is affecting the science of health? >I eat meat to help cover gaps in understanding, and by careful measurement I can tell that I’m healthier when I eat it, or specifically less healthy when I don’t. What measurements are those? Anecdotally, ea…

I’ve always been distrustful of food science, ever since the food pyramid (grain suppliers) was introduced to me as a child, and the quadrant of tastes (funded by umami suppliers in the condiment wars). More recently the CSIRO prostrated themselves you the lamb lobby. I picked the healthy at any size example as it’s the most obviously wrong and early death has to be the clearest indication of poor health. I’m not a f…

What changes in blood work did you notice after not eating meat? And how long did you go without it?

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#199

Post by Retric » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:51 PM UTC

dilap wrote: post #197

Retric wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those 60 million Bison lived ~15 years on average. Cattle on the other hand rarely make it past adulthood, so those 33 million cattle slaughtered every year requires significantly more food. That’s the core reason we are feeding cattle with farmed corn, you simply get more beef from the same land.

Sure, I'm shooting from the hip. But I think the broader point is true -- there's nothing wrong/unsustainable/unnatural about having a bunch of ruminants running around. That's how it used to be! What's unnatural, and, I think, unsustainable, is vast fields of intensively-grown monocrops, propped up by petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides.

Having ruminants running around is very stable, but if we are then harvesting them for meat you start depriving that ecosystem of various nutrients. It’s significantly more stable, but still not “sustainable” indefinitely. On the other hand if we aren’t harvesting them it’s arguably kind of pointless.

Re: ‘Farms are failing’ as fertilizer prices drive up cost of food

#200

Post by dqv » Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 7:56 PM UTC

flenserboy wrote: post #183

dqv wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great point. I can get a can of black beans for $0.50 (and dried black beans for even cheaper). I can get a chicken breast for ~$2. The black beans still net 98g of protein. But I also get an additional 500 calories more than the chicken beast. And that's with the subsidies for poultry. I'm also going to pre-empt the "not a complete protein source" argument with the fact that we're talking about a healthy di…

Check the DIAAS numbers and you might change your mind.

I think it would have to be a lot more drastic to change my mind.