|
|
|
|
|
by Turing_Machine
4098 days ago
|
|
" The notion that it's not a problem to scale up because we can just keep chopping down rainforests for lumber" You're clearly more interested in preaching that listening to what I say. Technology increases the yield from current land. By a lot. Thus reducing the need to "pave and plow" more of the planet. The United States, for instance, has considerably more forest now than it did at the beginning of the twentieth century. Where do you actually see slash-and-burn agriculture and similar wilderness-destroying methods of farming? Bingo: in the low-tech peasant farming operations that you and the other guy hold out as models. |
|
The point is we have industrial agriculture, pesticides, herbicides, and massive amounts of petrofertilizers and other chemicals already widely deployed to artificially increase crop yields providing the great majority of the food supply and we've farmed virtually all arable land already, and food security is still a problem. There will be billions more to feed before population peaks.
What I am saying is that neither modern industrial ag nor permaculture fantasy agriculture or organic farming can sustainably feed the earth's growing population. Population is the problem.