Exciting ! There's probably a lot of further research to do (and I have no insight in this). However, your ideas are beautifull. I love the concept of bringing agricultur inside the town and encouraging urban citizen to become farmers, giving consumers the great opportunity to buy local produced food and, maybe, to invest in small local productions.
So much negative response to this. He is thinking and trying to make a change. What are you doing to be the change? Choose positive response to the world around you and strive for better in every thing you do. Let him make the change he can and you make the change you can and the next gen will move it one more step.
Interesting. However, I see the hydroponics system and I wonder about the start-up costs. Also, there is so much plastic being used. The computerized system would probably cost a lot of money. Also, energy costs would probably be through the roof in order to create a Mediterranean environment indoors during a Beijing winter. How will you overcome all of this? I laud the idea but these must be taken into consideration and they are not presented in this talk. How will the "average" person be able to undertake such an urban farming endeavor. I'd be interested in know this.
While what you've said is true, however new ideas at the start are expensive and not feasible. Think about Solar electricity. It used to be really expensive but now so many people can afford it. Im sure in 10-20 years a middle classed person may be able to use these as this might just help the earth live
Good, not original but you've achieved some good efficiencies on the operational side it seems. Like all other growlight/hydroponic systems yours is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels for its hardware procurement, and obviously requires electricity. It would also be interesting to know what fertiliser you were using and how it is procured. Is the hardware easily repairable and made from parts that are easily manufactured locally, from recycled materials, in the diverse famine/poverty-stricken areas you are hoping to help? I would like to suggest thinking about the fact that plants grow without high-tech help. Natural systems have organisms that do the jobs your technology does, and they are self-replicating, self-powered, self-organising and recycle their raw materials with 100% efficiency. No farming operation has ever reached the biomass productivity of a natural system - such as a forest or an ocean food-web, yet they do not need irrigation, pest control, fertiliser application or management of any kind. Humans can create highly-productive food forests that require little effort to maintain, by working with the natural systems rather than trying to fight them (i.e. conventional agriculture) or mimic them using fossil-fuel based technology (your approach). One of the best examples is the forest agriculture of the Papua New Guinea highlands, which has been practiced for tens of thousands of years without any need for imported fertiliser. They are totally integrated as a natural part of their ecosystem, and have modified their ecosystem to be the most productive it can be for their needs. If we combine all the examples of successful models of sustainable agriculture like the one described in PNG, with the scientific method and appropriate technology, we have Permaculture. This philosophy has been applied to successfully turn land that has been destroyed by unsustainable human agriculture (such as the Loess Plateau in China, and the entire middle east) back into productive food forests. Land to grow food on is not in short supply, it is just that we have destroyed most areas of arable land by using terrible farming techniques, which only got ten times worse when we initiated the Green Revolution. Luckily we have lots of evidence now that this productivity can all be regenerated. Like all the major crises we are facing, the solutions already exist, it is education and political will that is lacking. If you're interested here's a couple of starters. In my research it seems clear that the key understanding is the function of the soil food web. Truly sustainable - or even better - *regenerative* food production is focussed on supporting the soil food web. If you do this you increase topsoil depth, increase carbon sequestration, increase nutrient density, *increase soil fertility*, lock up toxic residues, reduce water loss and eliminate erosion. Biochar is the key technology in this system. projects.worldbank.org/P003540/loess-plateau-watershed-rehabilitation-project?lang=en&tab=overview scholar.google.com/citations?user=Lcc1iSgAAAAJ&hl=en
It's really amazing to see your passion for this topic and I agree with you on most of what you said. I would however like to give you some food for thought on where I tend to disagree. You say that Permaculture is the combination of inherated knowledge of sustainable agricultural systems with the scientific method and appropriate technology. From being highly interested in Permaculture and going to University for sustainable agriculture I have arrived at the conclusion that Permaculture is the practical frontier of the regenerative agriculture movement and that Agroecology - especially the way Stephen Gliessmann definies it - is the scientific counterpart. In reading his textbook agroecology I was amazed to see that both of these fields rely on practically the same set of principles. I like to see Permaculture and Agroecology as a complementary duo in which Permaculture gives people a great new framework of looking at things ans gets people imvolved in action. This helps make a great cultural shift. Then Agroecology gets to follow up on those pioneers, figure out where they went right or wrong and what can be tweaked to archieve maximum benefits, so we can truly understand why exactly some things are working and others aren't. This I believe is necessary to also get the political institutions to change a lot of what they are preaching.Hope you found this helpfull and have a look at this :)
1) people like you are never happy with progress, unless it's PERFECT. This is a huge step forward, and if you use solar power, you do NOT need to rely on fossil fuels. 2) did you not listen to him: they are growing food in a parking lot in Beijing, in winter. You can NOT naturally grow food in that environment. The entire world is not the lush, temperate environment of Paupa New Guinna! Seriously?? THAT is the example that you choose to compare to? This is meant for deserts, harsh tundra climates, large cities with no nearby farmland.
Just another ex-banker with a guilty conscious looking to solve his own financial greed though the exploitation of the less fortunate around the world and at home with an overly elaborate system that can be easily achieved with a more simple set up and running costs ... SHAME ON YOU !!! :-/
You are absolutely brilliant.
Exciting ! There's probably a lot of further research to do (and I have no insight in this). However, your ideas are beautifull. I love the concept of bringing agricultur inside the town and encouraging urban citizen to become farmers, giving consumers the great opportunity to buy local produced food and, maybe, to invest in small local productions.
Enlighten
So much negative response to this. He is thinking and trying to make a change. What are you doing to be the change? Choose positive response to the world around you and strive for better in every thing you do. Let him make the change he can and you make the change you can and the next gen will move it one more step.
Awesome Stuart New Age Farming by EDN.
Interesting. However, I see the hydroponics system and I wonder about the start-up costs. Also, there is so much plastic being used. The computerized system would probably cost a lot of money. Also, energy costs would probably be through the roof in order to create a Mediterranean environment indoors during a Beijing winter. How will you overcome all of this? I laud the idea but these must be taken into consideration and they are not presented in this talk. How will the "average" person be able to undertake such an urban farming endeavor. I'd be interested in know this.
While what you've said is true, however new ideas at the start are expensive and not feasible. Think about Solar electricity. It used to be really expensive but now so many people can afford it. Im sure in 10-20 years a middle classed person may be able to use these as this might just help the earth live
Good, not original but you've achieved some good efficiencies on the operational side it seems. Like all other growlight/hydroponic systems yours is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels for its hardware procurement, and obviously requires electricity. It would also be interesting to know what fertiliser you were using and how it is procured. Is the hardware easily repairable and made from parts that are easily manufactured locally, from recycled materials, in the diverse famine/poverty-stricken areas you are hoping to help?
I would like to suggest thinking about the fact that plants grow without high-tech help. Natural systems have organisms that do the jobs your technology does, and they are self-replicating, self-powered, self-organising and recycle their raw materials with 100% efficiency. No farming operation has ever reached the biomass productivity of a natural system - such as a forest or an ocean food-web, yet they do not need irrigation, pest control, fertiliser application or management of any kind. Humans can create highly-productive food forests that require little effort to maintain, by working with the natural systems rather than trying to fight them (i.e. conventional agriculture) or mimic them using fossil-fuel based technology (your approach). One of the best examples is the forest agriculture of the Papua New Guinea highlands, which has been practiced for tens of thousands of years without any need for imported fertiliser. They are totally integrated as a natural part of their ecosystem, and have modified their ecosystem to be the most productive it can be for their needs.
If we combine all the examples of successful models of sustainable agriculture like the one described in PNG, with the scientific method and appropriate technology, we have Permaculture. This philosophy has been applied to successfully turn land that has been destroyed by unsustainable human agriculture (such as the Loess Plateau in China, and the entire middle east) back into productive food forests. Land to grow food on is not in short supply, it is just that we have destroyed most areas of arable land by using terrible farming techniques, which only got ten times worse when we initiated the Green Revolution. Luckily we have lots of evidence now that this productivity can all be regenerated. Like all the major crises we are facing, the solutions already exist, it is education and political will that is lacking.
If you're interested here's a couple of starters. In my research it seems clear that the key understanding is the function of the soil food web. Truly sustainable - or even better - *regenerative* food production is focussed on supporting the soil food web. If you do this you increase topsoil depth, increase carbon sequestration, increase nutrient density, *increase soil fertility*, lock up toxic residues, reduce water loss and eliminate erosion. Biochar is the key technology in this system.
projects.worldbank.org/P003540/loess-plateau-watershed-rehabilitation-project?lang=en&tab=overview
scholar.google.com/citations?user=Lcc1iSgAAAAJ&hl=en
It's really amazing to see your passion for this topic and I agree with you on most of what you said.
I would however like to give you some food for thought on where I tend to disagree. You say that Permaculture is the combination of inherated knowledge of sustainable agricultural systems with the scientific method and appropriate technology. From being highly interested in Permaculture and going to University for sustainable agriculture I have arrived at the conclusion that Permaculture is the practical frontier of the regenerative agriculture movement and that Agroecology - especially the way Stephen Gliessmann definies it - is the scientific counterpart. In reading his textbook agroecology I was amazed to see that both of these fields rely on practically the same set of principles. I like to see Permaculture and Agroecology as a complementary duo in which Permaculture gives people a great new framework of looking at things ans gets people imvolved in action. This helps make a great cultural shift. Then Agroecology gets to follow up on those pioneers, figure out where they went right or wrong and what can be tweaked to archieve maximum benefits, so we can truly understand why exactly some things are working and others aren't. This I believe is necessary to also get the political institutions to change a lot of what they are preaching.Hope you found this helpfull and have a look at this :)
TheJamesRedwood i
1) people like you are never happy with progress, unless it's PERFECT. This is a huge step forward, and if you use solar power, you do NOT need to rely on fossil fuels. 2) did you not listen to him: they are growing food in a parking lot in Beijing, in winter. You can NOT naturally grow food in that environment. The entire world is not the lush, temperate environment of Paupa New Guinna! Seriously?? THAT is the example that you choose to compare to? This is meant for deserts, harsh tundra climates, large cities with no nearby farmland.
That is not a farm it is a high tech factory.
Interstellar Space Agriculture
investment banker saw these little poor indian kids.... "and then we were thinking of producing food on the mars" LOL
I have my permit, I don't think driving a car is that easy.
You want to stick a metal box in the middle of the desert and grow food in it? You can grow food in a 130 degree hotbox?
Most likely, the box has a built-in temperature system that can control the temperature.
Sorry, but it still cost less to get my food from the maga big farmers. I can't afford this technology yet.
Ntnher maga??
Weird I think my kid sister got on my TH-cam... LoL
Transparent food? eww
Just another ex-banker with a guilty conscious looking to solve his own financial greed though the exploitation of the less fortunate around the world and at home with an overly elaborate system that can be easily achieved with a more simple set up and running costs ... SHAME ON YOU !!! :-/
And how helpful was your comment?