|
|
|
|
|
|
by belorn
1192 days ago
|
|
|
Cherry picking data and sources don't really convince anyone. What objective data can say is the averages from large industries. Those are useful, but also limited to those contexts. I think you also missed that I earlier said that small scale farming and hobbyists are not scalable. There is just not enough land to feed everyone using those farming techniques. A person raising a few chickens do not need to also have a corn farm to feed them. They can just let the chicken eat grass on the yard. Large scale factory farms however do not have enough yards outside the house to feed millions of chicken, so they need to use large scale farming of animal feed. Those two farming techniques are distinctly different. |
|
|
No data and no sources don't either.
> you also missed that I earlier said that small scale farming and hobbyists are not scalable
I may have, and I don't agree. Take those vast grazing areas and crop land for production of the animal feed and there would be plenty of land for both new forests and new small scale farms doing the farming the right way (fruits, vegetables, small fields with plenty of trees in between, ponds and a lot of biodiversity).
> Large scale factory farms
We don't really need those. We have them now, and it may look now like its the only thing that could support our civilization, but that's the big ag propaganda talking - there are many other systems of farming we could switch to.
It may look very different, but the effectivity may/would be many times higher than it's now - it would need new machinery and it's knowledge intensive, but it was proven it can be done (see syntropic agriculture, food forests, agroforestry, permaculture atc.).
Some changes are needed on political & economic level, but agriculture production is a major driver of the Earth system exceeding planetary boundaries, so there's that.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320356605_Agricultu...