Tuesday, August 29, 2017
Neon Leon: Secret Weapon Revealed on Farms
Neon Leon: Secret Weapon Revealed on Farms: "The simple hearth of the small farm is the true center of the Universe" --Masnobu Fukuoka 1913 – 2008) Fukuoka was a Japanes...
Secret Weapon Revealed on Farms
"The simple hearth of the small farm is the true center of the Universe" --Masnobu Fukuoka 1913 – 2008)
Fukuoka was a Japanese farmer and philosopher celebrated for his natural farming and re-vegetation of desertified lands. He was a proponent of methods traditional to many indigenous cultures from which he created a particular method of farming, which he called
"Do nothing farming."
I must confess that much of my postings in the past few months have been rather somber affairs, especially those centered around filling our bellies and quenching our thirst. I noted the decades of heated arguments about our food supply (organic versus conventional, the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), the proliferation of "food deserts" and the massive use of processed foods.
Further, I revealed the huge, often successful, efforts employed in the last 20 years to feed a population forecast to be nine billion by 2030. However, I also noted that 14 percent of the present world's population faces starvation on any given day.
Other posts discussed how our thirsty world is rapidly running out of fresh water sources amidst drought conditions from California to Africa. My report(s) also noted that scientists are in near total agreement that the world is warming fast enough to melt glacial ice, change animal migrations and create water wars.
Hopefully, that gloomy outlook will be brightened a bit in this post about Agritech (aka Agriechology) which is the result of a marriage of mankind's oldest business (farming) to it's newest (hi tech). The partnership has created an ever increasing number of well funded, urban farming programs designed to change how the world eats while dramatically reducing water usage.
In a real sense, food is becoming a basic part of the long predicted Internet of Everything (IoE), the networked connection of people, data and process, which also includes the highly touted Internet of Things (IoT), defined by Wikipedia as "The network of physical devices, vehicles, buildings and other items-embedded with electronics, software, sensors, actuators, and network connectivity that enable these objects to collect and exchange data."
A report by Boston Consulting Group (published in Manufacturing Close-Up Magazine on January 26, 2017) said "Grow Pod Solutions, a developer of technology-enabled automated indoor farms, said that investments by companies and venture capitalists in agricultural technology reached a record $25 billion globally in 2015."
Farmers and ranchers have long embraced technology, despite a perception from those outside of agriculture who don't always see this industry as being very tech savvy. Automation and robotics have evolved and continue to evolve on the ground worldwide. The use of drones and elaborate harvesting machines (some driven autonomously) are common now. Relying solely on rainfall has become a thing of the past, with the advent of sophisticated macro irrigation systems (e.g. movable central pivot machines spraying acres at a time) as well as micro irrigation (using sensors for precision drip and low flow systems). Valuable but thirsty crops like pistachios, walnuts and grapes, are at the leading edge of this type of precision agriculture, known as “smart farming”.
But it is not only fruit and nut farmers who benefit from being precise. Row crops, such as the corn and soybeans that cover vast areas of the American prairie, are setting record harvests due to the use of advanced technology. Everything from seed to harvest is computer-controlled; soil conditions are monitored continually.
The Economist magazine report , published on Sept. 6, 2016, noted that "Farms, then, are becoming more like factories... and thanks to better understanding of DNA, the plants and animals raised on a farm are also tightly controlled. ... “genome editing”, makes it possible to change a crop or stock animal’s genome down to the level of a single genetic “letter”. This technology, it is hoped, will be more acceptable to consumers than the shifting of whole genes between species [GMOs] ... because it simply imitates the process of mutation on which crop breeding has always depended, but in a far more controllable way."
So conventional farming has evolved in many positive ways. However, more recently, new technologies have been adapted to indoor farming, which often utilizes aquaculture (hydroponics), applied analytics and big data as well as supply chain and logistics software for innovative food production.
These "smart farms" include massive, high-tech greenhouses where vegetables and flowers are grown in various types of soil and are enclosed with glass or various types of plastic. Other urban farms grow foods vertically in shipping containers, large warehouses and tall buildings. The term “vertical farming” refers to a method of growing crops, usually without soil or natural light, in beds stacked vertically inside a controlled-environment building.
The urban farms listed below share some characteristics, such as recyclable, plastic "clam shell" packaging, proximity to large cities and products that sell for prices similar to organics found in upscale markets and farmers markets every summer. Of course, GMOs, herbicides, pesticides and synthetic fertilizers are universally forbidden. (It also appears to this reporter that every human being involved in urban farming is about 25 years old, wears casually hip, plaid shirts and is directly hooked up to every conceivable digital device and social media source available on the planet.)
Vertical farms use LED lighting; greenhouse growers use natural light. Both have a strictly controlled environment and both profess to save water -- Vertical systems profess to save about 95 percent by continual recycling. Greenhouses generally save more water than outside farming, but the percentage varies enormously depending on site, crops, and degree of evaporation. Here is a short list of some of the more prominent players:
The Bowery (Manhattan, NY) Vertical growing of Kale, lettuce (red, green and Romaine), Arugula and Basil. Pricing is similar to organics, at $3.99 for a 5-ounce container. Uses purified water only. Markets to 3 markets and 2 restaurants.
Bright Farms (Greenhouses in Bucks County, PA, Culpeper, VA, and Rochelle, IL.) Hydroponic greenhouses on store rooftops, parking garages, and empty lots. Products: spring mix, spinach, Kale, Romaine, Arugula (all baby types), spinach blend, Asian greens, basil, and tomatoes (cocktail, minis, tomatoes on the vine) Sold at dozens of supermarkets and Walmart. Grocers are guaranteed that prices will never exceed average inflation. Price sampling not available on line. Also sells a wide range of indoor farming equipment for indoor vertical farms as well as greenhouses along with smaller systems for homes and business development tools – most of which are under the trademark “ZipGrow.”
Square Roots (Brooklyn, NY) Vertical grow of 40 varieties of greens and herbs in shipping containers. Sold by subscription or delivered in 5 oz clam shell packs. (1 per week--$7, 3 per week--$15, 7 per week--$35). Also sold to restaurants, specialty markets, offices, gyms and fitness centers.
Aero Farms (Newark, NJ) Vertical grow of baby type super greens, arugula, Spring mix, Kale, watercress in 4.5 oz clam shells which cost about $3.99 each. Uses unique, patented water misting system. Sells technology and system components to start-ups. Also sells 2 million pounds of greens to numerous restaurants, grocery stores and the dining rooms at the Times, Goldman Sachs, and several other corporate accounts in New York. The AeroFarms clam shell package appears to be the same size as its competition’s but it holds slightly less—4.5 ounces instead of five. It is priced at the highest end, at $3.99. The company plans to have its greens on the shelves soon at Whole Foods stores and Kings, also in the local area.
Gotham Greens (4 facilities in New York, Chicago) Urban roof top greenhouses comprising 170,000 square feet. 9 kinds of lettuce, Kale, Basil, Bok Choy, two offerings of cherry, cocktail and grape tomatoes. Prices not available on line (without making an order). 100% clean energy powered, climate-controlled. Sells to multiple retail, restaurant, and institutional customers.
Plenty (San Francisco, CA) Newest Vertical grow outfit with plans to compete with the existing supply of greens from conventional California farms. The company’s first crops are described as "anything except tree fruit and root vegetables". Promises to sell its veggies at costs that are competitive with typical prices for organic vegetables. Undisclosed supermarkets and available online in the San Francisco area next year.
UPDATE: In June 2017. Plenty has acquired Bright Farms in an effort to reach “field-scale” which I assume means production that meets conventional farming levels. Mergers like this are bound to occur just like other highly competitive business endeavors.
Freight Farms (Boston, MA) A complete vertical, hydroponic farming system built inside a shipping container. Capable of growing a variety of lettuces, herbs and greens. Pre-built system with all necessary components for year-round commercial food production. Built entirely inside a 40’ x 8’ x 9.5’ shipping container. Functions in any geographic location. Delivered cost is a whopping $85,000 (prices vary internationally). Average costs are about $13,000 per year (including electricity, water and growing supplies).
Many other countries are involved in this new frontier, but no one does it better than Holland. The current issue of National Geographic magazine has an article called "A tiny country feeds the world". The members only website has not posted the new issue as Neon Leon went to press, but here's a brief rundown: There is a beautiful photo of a sea of greenhouses as far as the eye can see surrounding one farmer's home that is a jaw dropping window of why the Dutch have become the leader if agricultural innovation.
A flyover at night shows huge, surrealistic clusters of something akin to endless, square, corn rows of glowing gold light.
Check this out from their national website: "The agri-food sector is one of the major drivers of the Dutch economy with a contribution of...60 billion dollars...to Dutch GDP which provides work and income for more than 660,000 people."..."the Netherlands is the world’s second largest exporter of agri-food products, after the USA [which is 237 times bigger]. A big portion of that agriculture effort is due to 4,000 greenhouse enterprises that operate over 23,000 acres of greenhouses and employ some 150,000 workers, producing almost 9 billion dollars of vegetables, fruit, plants, and flowers, some 80% of which is exported."
Other statistics: (1) For decades, Holland has continually invested in the renewal of agricultural production chains. (2) It is the home of several world-renowned agri-food multinationals. (3) It employs about 4% of the Dutch labor force but produces large surpluses for the food-processing industry and accounts for 21 percent of the total exports. (4) Recent official Ministry of Agriculture numbers: Produces one quarter of all of the world's exported tomatoes, and the trade of one-third of the world's exports of chilis, tomatoes and cucumbers goes through the country. (5) Exports two-thirds of the world's total of fresh-cut plants, flowers and bulbs. (6) "The Netherlands is a hotbed of agri-food R&D, due largely to the ... knowledge base at at universities, research institutes and industrial R&D centers. (7) The government strongly supports...initiatives in public-private partnerships [and] innovation programs...".(8) Finally, "Dutch greenhouses are built all over the world...[with] ...site supervision [by] an experienced Dutch greenhouse builder."
The United Nations is convinced the future of food should be in the hands of agroecoly and small farmers. The UN meeting on sustainable development in July this year listed of lofty goals such as ending poverty and hunger everywhere, saving the oceans, etc.
We shall see how successful they are, but it is perhaps more constructive to see what was said in 2014. The Ecologist News chronicled a clear and severe warning by United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Prof Hilal Elver, to wit: "Food policies which do not address the root causes of world hunger would be bound to fail." She declared that "One billion people globally are hungry, and [and urged] governments to support a transition to agricultural democracy...which would empower rural small farmers." She emphasized that "Modern agriculture...is more resource intensive, fossil fuel dependent...and based on massive production. This policy has to change...resource scarcity, increased population, decreasing land availability and accessibility, emerging water scarcity, and soil degradation require us to re-think how best to use our resources for future generations."
She also warned the Amsterdam audience that "There is a geographical and distributional imbalance in who is consuming and producing...In the crowded and hot world of tomorrow, the challenge of how to protect the vulnerable is heightened. That entails recognizing women's role in food production...as women are the world's major food providers. It also means recognizing small farmers, who are also the most vulnerable, and the most hungry. Across Europe, the US and the developing world, small farms face shrinking numbers. So if we deal with small farmers we solve hunger and we also deal with food production."
As reported in earlier posts, Industrial agriculture receives 80% of subsidies and 90% of research funds. I also noted that some 70% of food consumed...is created by small farmers. Elver expands on the subject thusly: "This is critical for future agricultural policies. Currently, most subsidies go to large agribusiness. This must change. Governments must support small farmers. As rural people are migrating increasingly to cities, this is generating huge problems. If these trends continue, by 2050, 75% of the entire human population will live in urban areas. We must reverse these trends by providing new possibilities and incentives to small farmers, especially for young people in rural areas."
But others disagree. Following her speech, Marcel Beukeboom, a Dutch civil servant specializing in food and nutrition, said "While I agree that we must do more to empower small farmers, the fact is that the big monocultural farms are simply not going to disappear. We have to therefore find ways to make the practices of industrial agribusiness more effective, and this means working in partnership with the private sector, small and large."
For this reporter, urban farming has a long way to go before they can make a major dent in the food supply. Virtually all of the American vertical grow companies outlined earlier produce leafy greens only, which are too pricey for most folks other than Whole Foods devotees. Their considerable output thus far still couldn’t come close to feeding, say, the entire city of New York, let alone the United States. And the average American craves a considerable amount of meat, dairy and root crops like corn, cauliflower, beets, etc. Commercial vertical farms are spendy operations because of their use of mountains of LED lighting, and they must be close to big cities. Urban greenhouses have more potential value because they can be part of existing buildings that have other uses. And those greenhouses on rich soil can grow root vegetables out of season; witness the success of the Dutch.
In reality, the major challenges that our global agricultural system faces cannot be solved by urban farms alone. As the effects of climate change set in, farmers’ growing and harvesting seasons may change dramatically, and the amount of food produced yearly becomes more of a crap shoot. America’s food system is currently set up so that farms dedicated to specific foods — whether it be avocados, strawberries, or beef — are typically concentrated in a single location. So when different parts of the world are battling their own blizzards, droughts, or floods, Americans would most likely experience frequent and significant shortages of specific goods. We all like to eat such things as blueberries and melons in the dead of winter, but this heavy dependence of imports from afar
reveals a system that is ultimately frail and not very capable of responding if something were to happen to it.
The secret weapon teaser refers to the human brain; a gift from the Good Lord which enables us to figure out all manner of problems faced by humans for centuries, including how to grow food better and conserve water.
Fukuoka was a Japanese farmer and philosopher celebrated for his natural farming and re-vegetation of desertified lands. He was a proponent of methods traditional to many indigenous cultures from which he created a particular method of farming, which he called
"Do nothing farming."
I must confess that much of my postings in the past few months have been rather somber affairs, especially those centered around filling our bellies and quenching our thirst. I noted the decades of heated arguments about our food supply (organic versus conventional, the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), the proliferation of "food deserts" and the massive use of processed foods.
Further, I revealed the huge, often successful, efforts employed in the last 20 years to feed a population forecast to be nine billion by 2030. However, I also noted that 14 percent of the present world's population faces starvation on any given day.
Other posts discussed how our thirsty world is rapidly running out of fresh water sources amidst drought conditions from California to Africa. My report(s) also noted that scientists are in near total agreement that the world is warming fast enough to melt glacial ice, change animal migrations and create water wars.
Hopefully, that gloomy outlook will be brightened a bit in this post about Agritech (aka Agriechology) which is the result of a marriage of mankind's oldest business (farming) to it's newest (hi tech). The partnership has created an ever increasing number of well funded, urban farming programs designed to change how the world eats while dramatically reducing water usage.
In a real sense, food is becoming a basic part of the long predicted Internet of Everything (IoE), the networked connection of people, data and process, which also includes the highly touted Internet of Things (IoT), defined by Wikipedia as "The network of physical devices, vehicles, buildings and other items-embedded with electronics, software, sensors, actuators, and network connectivity that enable these objects to collect and exchange data."
A report by Boston Consulting Group (published in Manufacturing Close-Up Magazine on January 26, 2017) said "Grow Pod Solutions, a developer of technology-enabled automated indoor farms, said that investments by companies and venture capitalists in agricultural technology reached a record $25 billion globally in 2015."
Farmers and ranchers have long embraced technology, despite a perception from those outside of agriculture who don't always see this industry as being very tech savvy. Automation and robotics have evolved and continue to evolve on the ground worldwide. The use of drones and elaborate harvesting machines (some driven autonomously) are common now. Relying solely on rainfall has become a thing of the past, with the advent of sophisticated macro irrigation systems (e.g. movable central pivot machines spraying acres at a time) as well as micro irrigation (using sensors for precision drip and low flow systems). Valuable but thirsty crops like pistachios, walnuts and grapes, are at the leading edge of this type of precision agriculture, known as “smart farming”.
But it is not only fruit and nut farmers who benefit from being precise. Row crops, such as the corn and soybeans that cover vast areas of the American prairie, are setting record harvests due to the use of advanced technology. Everything from seed to harvest is computer-controlled; soil conditions are monitored continually.
The Economist magazine report , published on Sept. 6, 2016, noted that "Farms, then, are becoming more like factories... and thanks to better understanding of DNA, the plants and animals raised on a farm are also tightly controlled. ... “genome editing”, makes it possible to change a crop or stock animal’s genome down to the level of a single genetic “letter”. This technology, it is hoped, will be more acceptable to consumers than the shifting of whole genes between species [GMOs] ... because it simply imitates the process of mutation on which crop breeding has always depended, but in a far more controllable way."
So conventional farming has evolved in many positive ways. However, more recently, new technologies have been adapted to indoor farming, which often utilizes aquaculture (hydroponics), applied analytics and big data as well as supply chain and logistics software for innovative food production.
These "smart farms" include massive, high-tech greenhouses where vegetables and flowers are grown in various types of soil and are enclosed with glass or various types of plastic. Other urban farms grow foods vertically in shipping containers, large warehouses and tall buildings. The term “vertical farming” refers to a method of growing crops, usually without soil or natural light, in beds stacked vertically inside a controlled-environment building.
The urban farms listed below share some characteristics, such as recyclable, plastic "clam shell" packaging, proximity to large cities and products that sell for prices similar to organics found in upscale markets and farmers markets every summer. Of course, GMOs, herbicides, pesticides and synthetic fertilizers are universally forbidden. (It also appears to this reporter that every human being involved in urban farming is about 25 years old, wears casually hip, plaid shirts and is directly hooked up to every conceivable digital device and social media source available on the planet.)
Vertical farms use LED lighting; greenhouse growers use natural light. Both have a strictly controlled environment and both profess to save water -- Vertical systems profess to save about 95 percent by continual recycling. Greenhouses generally save more water than outside farming, but the percentage varies enormously depending on site, crops, and degree of evaporation. Here is a short list of some of the more prominent players:
The Bowery (Manhattan, NY) Vertical growing of Kale, lettuce (red, green and Romaine), Arugula and Basil. Pricing is similar to organics, at $3.99 for a 5-ounce container. Uses purified water only. Markets to 3 markets and 2 restaurants.
Bright Farms (Greenhouses in Bucks County, PA, Culpeper, VA, and Rochelle, IL.) Hydroponic greenhouses on store rooftops, parking garages, and empty lots. Products: spring mix, spinach, Kale, Romaine, Arugula (all baby types), spinach blend, Asian greens, basil, and tomatoes (cocktail, minis, tomatoes on the vine) Sold at dozens of supermarkets and Walmart. Grocers are guaranteed that prices will never exceed average inflation. Price sampling not available on line. Also sells a wide range of indoor farming equipment for indoor vertical farms as well as greenhouses along with smaller systems for homes and business development tools – most of which are under the trademark “ZipGrow.”
Square Roots (Brooklyn, NY) Vertical grow of 40 varieties of greens and herbs in shipping containers. Sold by subscription or delivered in 5 oz clam shell packs. (1 per week--$7, 3 per week--$15, 7 per week--$35). Also sold to restaurants, specialty markets, offices, gyms and fitness centers.
Aero Farms (Newark, NJ) Vertical grow of baby type super greens, arugula, Spring mix, Kale, watercress in 4.5 oz clam shells which cost about $3.99 each. Uses unique, patented water misting system. Sells technology and system components to start-ups. Also sells 2 million pounds of greens to numerous restaurants, grocery stores and the dining rooms at the Times, Goldman Sachs, and several other corporate accounts in New York. The AeroFarms clam shell package appears to be the same size as its competition’s but it holds slightly less—4.5 ounces instead of five. It is priced at the highest end, at $3.99. The company plans to have its greens on the shelves soon at Whole Foods stores and Kings, also in the local area.
Gotham Greens (4 facilities in New York, Chicago) Urban roof top greenhouses comprising 170,000 square feet. 9 kinds of lettuce, Kale, Basil, Bok Choy, two offerings of cherry, cocktail and grape tomatoes. Prices not available on line (without making an order). 100% clean energy powered, climate-controlled. Sells to multiple retail, restaurant, and institutional customers.
Plenty (San Francisco, CA) Newest Vertical grow outfit with plans to compete with the existing supply of greens from conventional California farms. The company’s first crops are described as "anything except tree fruit and root vegetables". Promises to sell its veggies at costs that are competitive with typical prices for organic vegetables. Undisclosed supermarkets and available online in the San Francisco area next year.
UPDATE: In June 2017. Plenty has acquired Bright Farms in an effort to reach “field-scale” which I assume means production that meets conventional farming levels. Mergers like this are bound to occur just like other highly competitive business endeavors.
Freight Farms (Boston, MA) A complete vertical, hydroponic farming system built inside a shipping container. Capable of growing a variety of lettuces, herbs and greens. Pre-built system with all necessary components for year-round commercial food production. Built entirely inside a 40’ x 8’ x 9.5’ shipping container. Functions in any geographic location. Delivered cost is a whopping $85,000 (prices vary internationally). Average costs are about $13,000 per year (including electricity, water and growing supplies).
Many other countries are involved in this new frontier, but no one does it better than Holland. The current issue of National Geographic magazine has an article called "A tiny country feeds the world". The members only website has not posted the new issue as Neon Leon went to press, but here's a brief rundown: There is a beautiful photo of a sea of greenhouses as far as the eye can see surrounding one farmer's home that is a jaw dropping window of why the Dutch have become the leader if agricultural innovation.
A flyover at night shows huge, surrealistic clusters of something akin to endless, square, corn rows of glowing gold light.
Check this out from their national website: "The agri-food sector is one of the major drivers of the Dutch economy with a contribution of...60 billion dollars...to Dutch GDP which provides work and income for more than 660,000 people."..."the Netherlands is the world’s second largest exporter of agri-food products, after the USA [which is 237 times bigger]. A big portion of that agriculture effort is due to 4,000 greenhouse enterprises that operate over 23,000 acres of greenhouses and employ some 150,000 workers, producing almost 9 billion dollars of vegetables, fruit, plants, and flowers, some 80% of which is exported."
Other statistics: (1) For decades, Holland has continually invested in the renewal of agricultural production chains. (2) It is the home of several world-renowned agri-food multinationals. (3) It employs about 4% of the Dutch labor force but produces large surpluses for the food-processing industry and accounts for 21 percent of the total exports. (4) Recent official Ministry of Agriculture numbers: Produces one quarter of all of the world's exported tomatoes, and the trade of one-third of the world's exports of chilis, tomatoes and cucumbers goes through the country. (5) Exports two-thirds of the world's total of fresh-cut plants, flowers and bulbs. (6) "The Netherlands is a hotbed of agri-food R&D, due largely to the ... knowledge base at at universities, research institutes and industrial R&D centers. (7) The government strongly supports...initiatives in public-private partnerships [and] innovation programs...".(8) Finally, "Dutch greenhouses are built all over the world...[with] ...site supervision [by] an experienced Dutch greenhouse builder."
The United Nations is convinced the future of food should be in the hands of agroecoly and small farmers. The UN meeting on sustainable development in July this year listed of lofty goals such as ending poverty and hunger everywhere, saving the oceans, etc.
We shall see how successful they are, but it is perhaps more constructive to see what was said in 2014. The Ecologist News chronicled a clear and severe warning by United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Prof Hilal Elver, to wit: "Food policies which do not address the root causes of world hunger would be bound to fail." She declared that "One billion people globally are hungry, and [and urged] governments to support a transition to agricultural democracy...which would empower rural small farmers." She emphasized that "Modern agriculture...is more resource intensive, fossil fuel dependent...and based on massive production. This policy has to change...resource scarcity, increased population, decreasing land availability and accessibility, emerging water scarcity, and soil degradation require us to re-think how best to use our resources for future generations."
She also warned the Amsterdam audience that "There is a geographical and distributional imbalance in who is consuming and producing...In the crowded and hot world of tomorrow, the challenge of how to protect the vulnerable is heightened. That entails recognizing women's role in food production...as women are the world's major food providers. It also means recognizing small farmers, who are also the most vulnerable, and the most hungry. Across Europe, the US and the developing world, small farms face shrinking numbers. So if we deal with small farmers we solve hunger and we also deal with food production."
As reported in earlier posts, Industrial agriculture receives 80% of subsidies and 90% of research funds. I also noted that some 70% of food consumed...is created by small farmers. Elver expands on the subject thusly: "This is critical for future agricultural policies. Currently, most subsidies go to large agribusiness. This must change. Governments must support small farmers. As rural people are migrating increasingly to cities, this is generating huge problems. If these trends continue, by 2050, 75% of the entire human population will live in urban areas. We must reverse these trends by providing new possibilities and incentives to small farmers, especially for young people in rural areas."
But others disagree. Following her speech, Marcel Beukeboom, a Dutch civil servant specializing in food and nutrition, said "While I agree that we must do more to empower small farmers, the fact is that the big monocultural farms are simply not going to disappear. We have to therefore find ways to make the practices of industrial agribusiness more effective, and this means working in partnership with the private sector, small and large."
For this reporter, urban farming has a long way to go before they can make a major dent in the food supply. Virtually all of the American vertical grow companies outlined earlier produce leafy greens only, which are too pricey for most folks other than Whole Foods devotees. Their considerable output thus far still couldn’t come close to feeding, say, the entire city of New York, let alone the United States. And the average American craves a considerable amount of meat, dairy and root crops like corn, cauliflower, beets, etc. Commercial vertical farms are spendy operations because of their use of mountains of LED lighting, and they must be close to big cities. Urban greenhouses have more potential value because they can be part of existing buildings that have other uses. And those greenhouses on rich soil can grow root vegetables out of season; witness the success of the Dutch.
In reality, the major challenges that our global agricultural system faces cannot be solved by urban farms alone. As the effects of climate change set in, farmers’ growing and harvesting seasons may change dramatically, and the amount of food produced yearly becomes more of a crap shoot. America’s food system is currently set up so that farms dedicated to specific foods — whether it be avocados, strawberries, or beef — are typically concentrated in a single location. So when different parts of the world are battling their own blizzards, droughts, or floods, Americans would most likely experience frequent and significant shortages of specific goods. We all like to eat such things as blueberries and melons in the dead of winter, but this heavy dependence of imports from afar
reveals a system that is ultimately frail and not very capable of responding if something were to happen to it.
The secret weapon teaser refers to the human brain; a gift from the Good Lord which enables us to figure out all manner of problems faced by humans for centuries, including how to grow food better and conserve water.
Sunday, August 13, 2017
Neon Leon: The Great Food Fight--Round Two
Neon Leon: The Great Food Fight--Round Two: "Many of the genetically modified foods will be safe, I'm sure. Will most of them be safe? Nobody knows." Jeremy Rifkin (...
The Great Food Fight--Round Two
"Many of the genetically modified foods will be safe, I'm sure. Will most of them be safe? Nobody knows." Jeremy Rifkin (born 1/26/45)
Rifkin (an American economic and social theorist, writer, public speaker and activist) has published 20 books about the impact of technological changes on the economy, society, and the environment. He is no stranger to argument, but this quote puts him in the middle of the raging debate about the value, safety and labeling of GMOs (also known as Genetic Engineering [GE] or Genetic Modification [GM]). Critics often call it Frankenfood.
People generally agree with Wikipedia's definition of a genetically modified organism as "any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques." Modern technology now makes it possible to alter genetic material to create novel traits in plants, animals, bacteria and fungi. This technology has so far primarily been used in crops to increase insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, and in micro-organisms to produce enzymes. But from that point of agreement, the discussions have gone South. There are those who truly hate the presence of GMOs in our food versus those who see them as an absolute necessity to insure there is enough food available for a hungry world.
A little background here: According to the UN's World Health Organization, just ten countries account for almost all – 98% of – the GM acres around the world. The top three countries that cultivate GM crops – the US, Argentina and Brazil – account for over three quarters of global GM acres. GM crops are grown on approximately 3.7% of the world’s total agricultural land, by less than one percent of the world’s farmers.
How much GMOs are in American food? In my last post, I noted that the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has said that "Up to 70% of processed foods in the US now contain GMO ingredients." In 2014 the USDA reported GMO crops made up 94 percent of US soybean acreage, 93 percent of all corn planted, and 96 percent of all cotton. Let us not forget our sweet tooth either; the USDA says that 95 percent of sugar beets in the United States are now genetically engineered to be herbicide tolerant. I found no evidence that GMOs are used in sugar cane production.
Although the list is changing all the time, GMOs are currently labeled, extremely restricted, or banned in 64 countries, including the European Union (EU). The EU ban is full of contradictions, however. European Seed Magazine's 3/16 issue noted that "About 70 GMO products are currently authorized for import into the EU, of which 19 were approved in 2015 alone."
In my last post, I examined the GMO labeling law (PL 114-216) signed by Obama last year (food companies will have to reveal products with GMO ingredients, but they won't have to print it on the package label. Instead, shoppers would have to scan a QR code with their smartphones for more information. The final seven page version of the bill is available HERE. However, the USDA has missed the deadline twice for an agreement of the final wording of the new law, and as Neon Leon went to press, they are still asking for more time.
Perhaps the most succinct analysis of the time consuming complexity involved was provided nine days ago by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI), (who cosponsored the 2015 H.R. 913 bill to require that food which contain genetically engineered ingredients be labeled accordingly), when she told the told the Maui Now newspaper "Nine out of ten Americans consistently report they want the right to know if their food is produced with genetic engineering ... As the USDA works to establish a mandatory, national disclosure standard for GMO foods, we write to express our strong belief that USDA needs to meet consumer expectations, be consistent with international standards and be inclusive of all Americans – including consumers without smartphones, rural residents and the elderly. We expect USDA’s mandatory GMO disclosure standard to apply to all GMO foods, including foods which contain ingredients like highly refined sugars and oils, as well as foods produced with new genetic engineering techniques.”
I fear I am getting too deep into the weeds here, so I will end this part of my post by providing an admittedly short list of the pro and con factions in the GMO arena.
PRO
National Academy of Science click here.
107 Nobel laureates click here
American Association for the Advancement of Science here
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine here
World Health Organization click here
American Medical Association click here
For an enhanced world view, The Genetic Literacy Project has the ultimate list
of some 235 pro-GMO organizations and independent scientists.
CON
Center for Food Safety click here GMO Awareness click here
Non-GMO Project click here Just Label It click here
Organic Consumers here And the Greenpeace organization, known worldwide for their activism in promoting what they call " a greener, healthier world...", has became the go to source for international anti-GMO sites is right here.
Check this out: That 2013 Rutgers University's research (which remains consistent with recent polling) revealed that "Only about a quarter (26%) of Americans realize that current regulations do not require GM products to be labeled. ...when asked directly whether GM foods should be required to be labeled, 73% said yes.
Despite the abundance of products with GM ingredients, ...the results suggest most consumers are unaware of them. The study found that 43 percent are aware that such products [are sold] in supermarkets... but only 26% believe that they have ever eaten any food containing GM ingredients. Knowledge and awareness of GM foods is low, and so, perhaps not surprisingly, very few people volunteer that they are interested in GM food labeling information."
Both sides of this fight are very passionate, and it safe to assume it will not be settled anytime soon. For this writer, I find a welcome common ground provided by Pope Francis, as he weighed in on the subject in July, 2015. The Catholic leader has made it clear that he’s against this kind of agricultural meddling before, but that July statement also included this: “It is difficult to make a general judgment about genetic modification, whether vegetable, animal, medical or agricultural, since these vary greatly among themselves and call for specific considerations. The risks involved are not always due to the techniques used, but rather to their improper or excessive application.”
editor's note--the next posting will shine a light on the bright future of our food supply due to new agrotech methods, small farmers, and successful sustainability approaches worldwide.
Rifkin (an American economic and social theorist, writer, public speaker and activist) has published 20 books about the impact of technological changes on the economy, society, and the environment. He is no stranger to argument, but this quote puts him in the middle of the raging debate about the value, safety and labeling of GMOs (also known as Genetic Engineering [GE] or Genetic Modification [GM]). Critics often call it Frankenfood.
People generally agree with Wikipedia's definition of a genetically modified organism as "any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques." Modern technology now makes it possible to alter genetic material to create novel traits in plants, animals, bacteria and fungi. This technology has so far primarily been used in crops to increase insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, and in micro-organisms to produce enzymes. But from that point of agreement, the discussions have gone South. There are those who truly hate the presence of GMOs in our food versus those who see them as an absolute necessity to insure there is enough food available for a hungry world.
A little background here: According to the UN's World Health Organization, just ten countries account for almost all – 98% of – the GM acres around the world. The top three countries that cultivate GM crops – the US, Argentina and Brazil – account for over three quarters of global GM acres. GM crops are grown on approximately 3.7% of the world’s total agricultural land, by less than one percent of the world’s farmers.
How much GMOs are in American food? In my last post, I noted that the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has said that "Up to 70% of processed foods in the US now contain GMO ingredients." In 2014 the USDA reported GMO crops made up 94 percent of US soybean acreage, 93 percent of all corn planted, and 96 percent of all cotton. Let us not forget our sweet tooth either; the USDA says that 95 percent of sugar beets in the United States are now genetically engineered to be herbicide tolerant. I found no evidence that GMOs are used in sugar cane production.
Although the list is changing all the time, GMOs are currently labeled, extremely restricted, or banned in 64 countries, including the European Union (EU). The EU ban is full of contradictions, however. European Seed Magazine's 3/16 issue noted that "About 70 GMO products are currently authorized for import into the EU, of which 19 were approved in 2015 alone."
In my last post, I examined the GMO labeling law (PL 114-216) signed by Obama last year (food companies will have to reveal products with GMO ingredients, but they won't have to print it on the package label. Instead, shoppers would have to scan a QR code with their smartphones for more information. The final seven page version of the bill is available HERE. However, the USDA has missed the deadline twice for an agreement of the final wording of the new law, and as Neon Leon went to press, they are still asking for more time.
Perhaps the most succinct analysis of the time consuming complexity involved was provided nine days ago by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI), (who cosponsored the 2015 H.R. 913 bill to require that food which contain genetically engineered ingredients be labeled accordingly), when she told the told the Maui Now newspaper "Nine out of ten Americans consistently report they want the right to know if their food is produced with genetic engineering ... As the USDA works to establish a mandatory, national disclosure standard for GMO foods, we write to express our strong belief that USDA needs to meet consumer expectations, be consistent with international standards and be inclusive of all Americans – including consumers without smartphones, rural residents and the elderly. We expect USDA’s mandatory GMO disclosure standard to apply to all GMO foods, including foods which contain ingredients like highly refined sugars and oils, as well as foods produced with new genetic engineering techniques.”
I fear I am getting too deep into the weeds here, so I will end this part of my post by providing an admittedly short list of the pro and con factions in the GMO arena.
PRO
National Academy of Science click here.
107 Nobel laureates click here
American Association for the Advancement of Science here
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine here
World Health Organization click here
American Medical Association click here
For an enhanced world view, The Genetic Literacy Project has the ultimate list
of some 235 pro-GMO organizations and independent scientists.
CON
Center for Food Safety click here GMO Awareness click here
Non-GMO Project click here Just Label It click here
Organic Consumers here And the Greenpeace organization, known worldwide for their activism in promoting what they call " a greener, healthier world...", has became the go to source for international anti-GMO sites is right here.
Check this out: That 2013 Rutgers University's research (which remains consistent with recent polling) revealed that "Only about a quarter (26%) of Americans realize that current regulations do not require GM products to be labeled. ...when asked directly whether GM foods should be required to be labeled, 73% said yes.
Despite the abundance of products with GM ingredients, ...the results suggest most consumers are unaware of them. The study found that 43 percent are aware that such products [are sold] in supermarkets... but only 26% believe that they have ever eaten any food containing GM ingredients. Knowledge and awareness of GM foods is low, and so, perhaps not surprisingly, very few people volunteer that they are interested in GM food labeling information."
Both sides of this fight are very passionate, and it safe to assume it will not be settled anytime soon. For this writer, I find a welcome common ground provided by Pope Francis, as he weighed in on the subject in July, 2015. The Catholic leader has made it clear that he’s against this kind of agricultural meddling before, but that July statement also included this: “It is difficult to make a general judgment about genetic modification, whether vegetable, animal, medical or agricultural, since these vary greatly among themselves and call for specific considerations. The risks involved are not always due to the techniques used, but rather to their improper or excessive application.”
He observes that “in many places, following the introduction
of these crops, productive land is concentrated in the hands of a few owners,”
while others lose their farmland. That means “the most vulnerable…become
temporary laborers, and many rural workers end up moving to poverty-stricken
urban areas.”
Further, the pope writes: “The expansion of these crops has the effect of destroying the complex network of ecosystems, diminishing the diversity of production, and affecting regional economies, now and in the future.” In this, he appears to consider the technique(s) must be safe as well as equitable to everyone and whether it benefits humanity as a whole. Pope Francis noted wisely that "A technology severed from ethics will not easily be able to limit its own power.”
Further, the pope writes: “The expansion of these crops has the effect of destroying the complex network of ecosystems, diminishing the diversity of production, and affecting regional economies, now and in the future.” In this, he appears to consider the technique(s) must be safe as well as equitable to everyone and whether it benefits humanity as a whole. Pope Francis noted wisely that "A technology severed from ethics will not easily be able to limit its own power.”
I hope, dear readers, that you now know how serious the stakes are in this debate. The input of good science must merge with the good for humans as well as all the other creatures in our mutual web of life.
editor's note--the next posting will shine a light on the bright future of our food supply due to new agrotech methods, small farmers, and successful sustainability approaches worldwide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)