[rfdub]

Hope these "micro farmers" enjoy the good times while they last as their days are numbered. Sensors, automation and intelligent, intensive and most importantly organic, vertical farming is going to ultimately decimate the small producer farming industry. The thing is produce is a commodity, not a branded good, and people ultimately don't care what "label" is on their vegetables and won't pay a premium for a given label when they can get reasonable analogs for the same or a lesser price. Consumers just want quality produce at a reasonable price.

When technology driven high intensity automated farms are able to output yields orders of magnitude greater than these people digging in the dirt with hand-tools are able to output, at a commensurate if not substantially higher quality, they'll be able to undercut the prices of these "micro farmers" by significant amounts and all consumers will care about is that their organic heirloom greens taste just as good but cost half the price. Not the mention they'll do so with a substantially reduced environmental impact, requiring less water per unit of output and requiring substantially less space allowing formerly agricultural lands to be returned back to their natural state.

Small scale agriculture is a fantastic solution to the problem of disaffected young people who want to be farmers, but doesn't really offer any practical solutions for the rest of the world.

[Spooky23]

No way. I have some friends who've been operating a family farm since the 1600's in Upstate NY. They are doing great, and IMO the future looks brighter. The problem with what you describe is that there is too much complexity, too many middlemen, and too much reliance on the West Coast.

Without all of this nonsense, these folks are successfully growing greens through the winter in a harsh northern climate, using high tunnels and fans with simple timers and sensors. It's totally doable and scalable without wasting lots of money on equipment and tractors.

In terms of cost -- most of the cost gets piled on in the supply chain. I get milk delivered twice a week for a slight (15%) price premium compared to the grocery store. The farmer's gross is about 40% higher than what it would be if he were shipping to a co-op or commercial dairy. We do most seasonal vegetable shopping from non-organic, local farms and conservatively pay 75% less as compared to the stuff shipped in from California or Chile.

Small scale agriculture is going to be huge IMO as the ability the sustain the miracle in the desert in California and the costs of fertilizer rises.

[gloverkcn]

Are you really familiar with the industry?

I ask because in the steel industry the opposite happened. Minimills started by making limited easier to produce steel goods. They improved their process and mills to be able to offer more difficult types of products and could compete against the larger mills.

My assumption is that as the technology improves and gets cheaper, the ability for someone to enter the market will go down. Getting higher yields with less expense will lower the cost, and will allow smaller plots of land in/near the city to provide for a more local customer base.

People around the world have phones because the tech has become so cheap. If micro-farming tech continues in that same path, then around the world, micro-farms can be installed by local entrepreneurs at a much cheaper star-up cost with an higher yield. Though I suspect government regulations will play a more limiting role in a lot of countries.

As a side note one of the things I've always wondered is how cheap does crop production need to get before the food can just be given away. If it gets to where it costs $0.05 to produce a head of spinach on the city lot down the street, is there a point it's free.

[akiselev]

You can't compare value-add manufacturing to agriculture because former is demand-driven while the latter is supply-driven. If a mill has a customer, its ability to make money depends on expertise and equipment but a farmer can only sell what nature allows them to grow. Modern agriculture is a balancing act between the forces of nature and financing so if a farm's output one year is bad enough they are almost certainly doomed to bankruptcy within a few years unless they have a miraculous turnaround. The vast majority of farms take on debt every year for fertilizer, seasonal labor, maintenance, etc and if they have a bad year, the extra debt makes it much harder to make a profit the next year when they again take on even more debt for the growing season.

The rise of industrial farming can be attributed more to transportation than automation because it allowed corporations to form that could finance hundreds or thousands of farms across a region or continent. A disease or drought impacting the yield in one area no longer meant that those farms were doomed to bankruptcy because the profits from successful farms paid for natural volatility. In this sense, agricultural conglomerates are essentially insurance companies.

Automation and other technology would have to help farmers deal with the financially ruinous harvests to really help local farming become competitive.

[omegaworks]

>The rise of industrial farming can be attributed more to transportation than automation because it allowed corporations to form that could finance hundreds or thousands of farms across a region or continent.

Isn't the whole plot of The Grapes of Wrath about how the rise of industrial farming was due to the dust bowl disaster? Prior to that most citizens were small farmers, but with so many people intensively tilling grasslands a massive self-reinforcing dust storm formed and destroyed any ability to farm profitably at anything but a huge scale.

[hkt]

+1, insightful.

[eli_gottlieb]

>As a side note one of the things I've always wondered is how cheap does crop production need to get before the food can just be given away.

When marketing and selling the thing is more expensive than just giving it away while making money on something else.

[willholloway]

I have looked into this extensively and the promise of vertical farming is a big if, and It might take a breakthrough like fusion power to make it cost competitive with the methods these farmers are using.

The capital costs of the building and infrastructure and lights and most importantly the input costs of the power are going to have a very hard time beating what is essentially free energy from the sun, free land, free growing medium in the form of soil and virtually free water everywhere but in very dry climates.

These farmers also grow year round, even in places like Canada with very low tech solutions, which are basically plastic sheeting and metal tubes fashioned into low tunnels that cover the rows of crops.

When you factor in labor costs it might be hard to scale it over a certain size, but for a person that owns a half acre lot that came with their house and wants to farm instead of commuting into the city to a cubicle, that economy is going to be hard to beat.

[saycheese]

Aside from energy usage, there are other issues too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_farming#Problems

[CuriouslyC]

Automating picking of a many types of vegetables is a hard problem, and the human labor costs are extremely low. I'd be surprised if we develop anything that even approaches the cost efficiency of your average migrant farm worker in the next 30 years. We have millions of years of evolution as efficient foragers behind us.

Additionally, one thing that micro-scale farmers are doing is experimenting with new and different breeds of vegetable. Some are even breeding their own crosses. Some of these are substantially different in taste and texture, and most are visually appealing. You might not care about that, but to people who enjoy cooking, this is great, and worth paying for.

Small scale agriculture has a good future. People seem to be into the whole local thing, vegetables (and vegetarianism) are getting trendy, there is a huge surge of food culture. All good for the small boutique producer, who can offer higher quality and more exotic products.

[codingdave]

You are assuming that the markets and economy even play a role in small scale agriculture. Most people I know who do small scale do it for themselves only. The cost at the stores is irrelevant when you just step outside and grab free food.

Also, the cost of produce at your stores is more about the cost of transportation. The current cheap gas prices are due to fracking, which in turn produces wells which taper off far faster than traditional drilling. That will end, and prices will go back up. And food costs will increase. Just like they did back when gas was twice its current cost. Even in the past few years, there have been specific shortages in commercial ag, such as eggs last summer, when many commercial chicken farms had problems with disease, which is another cost factor. Large-scale ag means large-scale transportation and logistics and THAT is where costs come from, not the labor cost of digging up dirt.

That is also why the micro-ag folks can undercut prices despite higher labor costs (if they even hire out labor at all) -- they sell locally, and their transport costs are minimal. Often as simple as throwing produce in your truck and just delivering it across town, or to a local market.

And on the labor question, the next 4 years may change costs if Trump really does cut down on illegal aliens. Wherever you stand politically, they are the source of cheap agricultural labor in the USA.

All of this does not mean that tech won't change things in the future - it very well might. But that same tech will be available to small-scale ag, so there is no reason to assume that production gains will only apply to commercial farming. The disruption that could change the picture is cheap, renewable energy propelling self-driving trucks.

[akiselev]

What is your source for transportation costs in agriculture? According to the USDA, transportation accounts for less than 5% of what consumers pay for food in the united states [1]. The farm itself and labor account for 60% of the cost so even if transportation accounts for 25% of the cost of fresh produce (the USDA data is aggregated over restaurants and grocery stores), it still wouldn't make up for the cost of losing the economies of scale. Without a critical density of farmers producing the same crop in a region, many of the cost savings in automation and distribution are simply out of reach. Agriculture needs these savings more than most because of razor thin margins and natural volatility in yield.

I shop from local farmers in California all the time but they are rarely as inexpensive as SuperKing or Vons except when their produce is in season and they cut out all the grocery store middle men like the produce stands peppering the California freeways. I know that a lot of our best produce is exported because the farther they travel, the higher the profit even when accounting for transportation costs, so Id be surprised if transport is ever particularly significant. The cost of energy (electricity and fuel for equipment) is also higher than cost of transport so fuel costs will have an impact regardless of how far you move the end product.

[1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistic...

[codingdave]

Exactly which chart on that page you linked are you looking at?

I see nothing that matches the numbers you gave. The only one I see that even talks about farm costs vs. other costs shows the farms at just over 10%, not 60%. And this is 2016 data, not a historical comparison over years to see how the costs change as energy prices fluctuate.

[ska]

   You are assuming that the markets and economy even play a role in small scale agriculture.

Markets and economy play a role in nearly everything - they just aren't all the same markets, or the same effect. The mistake isn't thinking that there is a market effect, it is thinking that it is homogeneous.

[nl]

A lot less than you'd think. And we've known this since the 1970s

https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&h...

[ska]

Where can I buy these great tasting heirloom greens at half the price of which you speak?

I have no problem finding mediocre produce at a low price point, but quality produce at a reasonable price is often hard to find in major north american metros.

I'm open to the idea that technology will continue to change the landscape here, but I think you are underestimating the difficulties. I may be missing something here, but the successes I see touted in areas as you describe are things like the plethora of nitrogen bagged greens all over the continent these days from California. Certainly a commercial success and for access, but the produce itself is often pretty dismal and the process I understand is very specialized. Not a categorical win, then.

[Spooky23]

It's harder because our wacky economics make it more desirable to plant a subdivision that to farm. I'm fortunate to live in an area where prime agricultural land is relatively untouched and several prosperous farms are around.

[underbluewaters]

I just ate tomatoes last night that grew wild out in my yard that are better than any I've ever bought at a grocery store. That includes "local" and "organic". Produce in US grocery stores is shit.

[dogismycopilot]

"The thing is produce is a commodity, not a branded good, and people ultimately don't care what "label" is on their vegetables and won't pay a premium for a given label when they can get reasonable analogs for the same or a lesser price. Consumers just want quality produce at a reasonable price."

Have you ever been to a Whole Foods or Sprouts store?

[lintiness]

my wife buys organic milk, and it kills me. it doesn't matter how many studies of composition and pesticides etc i provide, the religion of organic rules.

[up_and_up]

Do you have a daughter? Any concerns re early puberty? http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/10/05/hidden-hormones-can...

All the excess hormones in some milks and meats can cause issues.

[lintiness]

i have a daughter (almost 4 yo). what did i just read?

[maxerickson]

Organic milk is usually hyperpasturized.

(I know someone who switched from organic to 'local' because of that)

[driverdan]

> ...and most importantly organic, vertical farming...

Why is "organic" even remotely important? It's a meaningless marketing term. Study after study proves there's little to no difference other than price.