[thiccly]

The condescending attitude is troubling me

"Rosenberg said that farmers usually apply fertilizer once, water the crop and hope it grows. AeroFarms, meanwhile, applies fertilizers many times, adjusting along the way to optimize plant growth"

Not true. Most farmers I grew up around follow the recommended fertilization guidelines provided by their local coop, it's not a one time and "hope it grows" thing.

“I’ve learned how ignorant we are about how to make plants grow.”

Who is we? People who use "we" like this always use it to assume and judge things they feel.

“A plant doesn’t necessarily need 10 hours of darkness,” said Rosenberg. “Maybe it needs 10 minutes.”

Yes it does if the plant is photoperiodic. Many are.

“When you can really play with those environmental factors and all these tools in a big data way in a farm the size of [a] building, it really becomes illuminating of how plants react in different ways.”

Indoor and greenhouse growers have already been doing this forever. Welcome to the club.

[bshipp]

After getting my masters in ag science and spending a decade working in hydroponics and field agriculture I am glad to see someone else identifying the hubris here.

Multiple times a month I have to endure a pitch or presentation from some upstart tech company assuming that all farmers are toothless hicks who just need to be shown the light. I've had hundreds of conversations with growers about every single one of the topics he thinks he's going to fix. The only people swayed by his arguments are those who know even less than he does.

[jelliclesfarm]

I have had the same experience and I have given up trying to explain the nuances of Ag to technical engineering type of people. I do really think they solve problems differently and it’s not always compatible with Ag solutions

[bshipp]

One situation that makes a great deal of sense on paper and is very difficult to effectively implement on commercial scales is aquaponics. In theory, being able to produce both fish and vegetables should be a good value proposition.

In reality, instead of trying to balance two biological systems (hydroponic plants and integrated pest management biocontrols) you now have to balance 4: plants, insects, fish, and algae/bacteria.

Suddenly the farmers potential for very costly cascade failures increases exponentially. If your algae dies, your plants die. If you fish die, your algae dies. If any of your solutions to dying fish/algae/insects impacts another biological system the whole farm collapses and you need to sterilize and start over.

And yet, so many of the people pitching this idea wonder why there is so little commercial interest in pursuing such an integrated system.

[jelliclesfarm]

Yes, you are right. Altho’ having said that, indoor/vertical/aqua/hydroponics systems must include the entire supply/value chain and be decentralized. Traditional models of economies of scale won’t operate here.

Aquaponics is an infinitely better system as it can be truly organic. It has to be tackled entirely differently..lots of AI/automation for constant monitoring and systems control.

Major expense in traditional Ag is labour. This can be optimized and minimized with indoor Ag.

As an outdoor farmer, the control of variable factors in indoor systems is appealing to me but I can also see how being risk averse is better. Small indoor farms are better than the broad acre mind set we have with outdoor Ag. Taking everything indoor except fruit and grains and fiber and spices etc is very attractive to me. But a new supply chain and control of markets has to be in place.

I am not even worried about energy long term as we would go nuclear at some point eventually. Impending climate change should require us be mindful of alternative Ag systems. I am particularly interested in saline agriculture. I think it would be useful research.