#farmer adoption of technology | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

jointhepartypod · 2 years ago

Text

Welcome to the World of Verda Stello! 🌱 🏴☠️

Campaign 3 of Join the Party is set in the world of Verda Stello, the great green ringed world. This fantastical land is filled with approximately human-sized plant and bug people (give or take some 2 foot tall fruits and giant vines) called the Greenfolk. The main source of life for Verda Stello is the Cascade, a massive waterfall that pours over the whole inner ring of the world.

Over time, the Cascade dried up, leaving all the Greenfolk scrambling for water. But the waterfall revealed the entire center of Verda Stello was a great salt sea, dotted with countless unknown islands, and a prophecy about an Infinite Lake that can save the world and a Salmon that grants your deepest desire.

This kicked off the Tide, a pirate era that has raged for 50 years. People are still searching for the lake and the salmon, and the Tide shows no sign of stopping now.

Find out more about Verda Stello and Campaign 3 here!

The Hothouse

Country’s Motto: Why Suffer When We Can Strive

Known for their ingenuity and extensive construction, the Hothouse is the technological hub of Verda Stello. Hothousers believe that finding the best way to do something is its own greatest reward (except for letting everyone know that you did it with a plaque or statue or signature). You might recognize Hothouse architecture with the incorporations of big windows or a solarium, amplifying the sun to do extra work for you. The ruler of the Hothouse is The Builder, someone who is recognized as the best and the smartest through a series of public and brutal competitions of mind and might.

The official Hothouse Flag was designed by the first Builder, Appleton the Original. The triangle represents the hothouse, as you might have guessed, but the doubled triangle is a symbol of so many values that Hothousers hold dear. Appleton was known for his patience and care when erecting and planning the major monuments of the Hothouse capital, so scholars and politicians say the doubled triangle meant, “measure twice, cut once.” But it can be interpreted as broadly as “quality over quantity” or “do it right the first time,” as double-paneling the triangle is stronger than many triangles in a line. What is most intriguing is the intersection of the symbolic hothouse and the sun itself, putting them in concert, or at least as two parts of the whole. The construct is not subservient to the sun. In fact, they are relatively the same, as a sibling or partner encouraging the other to be better than they could have been alone.

Open Fields

Country’s Motto: Reap What Is Sown

The people of Open Fields feel the deep connection between themselves and the ground, giving themselves strong perseverance and belief. This allows them to stare at the strangeness of existence in the face, such as how they can harvest produce and greens for sustenance even if it looks exactly like them. Open Field families show this devotion by naming themselves after virtues (in a Puritan sort of way) and both fervently praying and farming.

Unfortunately, there is no definitive account of how the Open Fields’ flag came to be. Many leaders have invoked various legends and parables, usually involving a poor potato farmer, resistance of temptation, and then divine inspiration. One version of the story says the pattern appeared in a bowl of mashed potatoes, when the butter and the mash was swirled together in the bowl. Another version supposes the farmer tried to harvest one of his crop but could not, and only through the collective strength of the entire farmer’s family and friends did they put the largest tuber ever recorded, with the design outlined in the eyes of the potato. The only record of the creation and adoption of the current design comes from the journal of a monk known as Saying-Thank-You-Meaningfully-For-an-Unexpected-Gift-No-Matter-What-It-Is. It seems that Saying’s closest friend at the monastery made woodcuts as a hobby, and created the sun-on-top, shovel-on-bottom image. That night, Saying wrote in their journal, “Saw an interesting image today. Must be the divine.” The colors–especially the deep red, unique in the flags of Verda Stello–and how it became the symbol of the entire country, remains unknown.

Kingdom of the Crags

Country’s Motto: We Cover All

The Crags is the most Game of Thrones out of all of the countries. They find strength in dealing with adversity and sacrificing comfort for something greater. They explore their land, find the great thing that it does, and work with it (whether obsidian from lava or a fruit that gives you the strength of 10 in a mountain or a glowing mushroom in a crevasse). Over time, many families have formed into houses and territories, which has then led to a revolving door of kings and queens as the houses vie for power. As the Craggish saying goes, “Everyone has their purpose, and the royals are dying.”

The modern version of the Crags flag (say that five times fast) was established over six hundred years ago, at the signing of the Brevi Pax. Short for “brevi pax pugnantibus,” or “short peace between combatants” in middle Folkish, it was supposed to be a document that finally codified the system of governance in the Crags and illustrated all rights for Craggish citizens regardless of ruler. At the time of its signing, it was just Pax Pugnantibus, but the Brevi was added after Queen Opaline V was slain by her three sisters only ten days after the document was signed.

Although the peace did not remain, the rights of citizens stayed, as well as a specific agreed-upon design for the Craggish flag, The purple emphasizes the strength of the ruling families, while the white V and the black background stands in for the hard landscape where the people make their homes. There’s an interesting optical trick too; the sprout is in the dead center, but the crag makes it seem lower; what appears worse to others is exactly where the Crags knows is best.

Many of the sigils of the houses in the Crags use inversions or additions of this flag to bolster their claims for royal legitimacy, but they do not risk changing too much as would alienate themselves from the existence of the state. They are not above the kingdom and the Rocky Seat, as there would be nothing to rule.

Overstalk

Country’s Motto: Carry Your Roots

The future lives in Overstalk, but it might linger as more of a dream than actually getting it done. Overstalk is the home of the philosophers, a quixotic solarpunkish country. This led to a vibrant merchant culture, so you buy what you need since we’re philosophizing over here. The beating heart of Overstalk is the Stacked City of Skyreach (think the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, but a whole city), where radical but sometimes dangerous ideas flourish and fester.

The historians of Overstalk delight in explaining the symbology of their flag to others, as the metaphor of each color and symbol were, if you will pardon the pun, dyed right into it when the Fourth Congress of the Representatives commissioned local textile artist Cablin Pogostemon to create it. On the left side, the yellow represents the warmth and energy of the sun (but modern philosophers would argue that the top band is ascribed to the mercantile success of the region). The cream is the color of a yellowing page of a book, representing study, while the gray is the smoke of incense, representing spiritualism. As the cream and the gray interest each other and the yellow, you cannot forget the mind for the spirit or vice versa, and they are both integral to day-to-day living (or for modern interpretation, business dealings). The right side is the vertical expansion of Overstalk, as high as the stars themselves.

This is the only flag in Verda Stello to use green, which some suppose signifies Overstalk’s high view of themselves as compared to the other countries.

Maybe Cablin knew this when they designed the flag, as it came with explicit instructions to never be hung up-and-down, with the stars at the top. It is considered a deep political insult to hang the flag in this way… but it has been accidentally turned during some particularly prickly international visits.

#ttrpg #actual play #actual play podcast #D&D #Dungeons and Dragons #DND #dnd homebrew #campaign 3 #hothouse #overstalk #the crags #open fields

545 notes · View notes

solarpunkbusiness · 3 months ago

Text

Innovative business models for small scale solar powered irrigation

If rolled out at scale, solar-powered irrigation systems hold huge potential. They work for smallholder farmers, who account for 80% of sub-Saharan Africa’s farms, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. But they also displace expensive and polluting diesel pumps and can, if managed correctly, contribute to efforts to manage scarce water resources well for the long term.

Chiefly, there is the issue of affordability. Farmers need to be able to pay the upfront cost of a solar-powered irrigation system and to pay for the duration of its use. When compared with the diesel-fueled irrigation pumps many farmers use today, the total lifetime cost of solar powered irrigation systems can be substantially lower. We estimate farmers can save 40% to 60% on irrigation costs.

As we see across the off-grid solar sector, adopting a pay-as-you-go (PAYG) approach – or, in our case, pay-as-you-grow – has the benefit of allowing farmers to pay for their systems over time, as their income increases due to better harvests.

Moving on from affordability, maintenance is the next key challenge, particularly in remote and rural areas where farms can be hard to reach and the availability of trained technicians is limited. By managing the lifecycle of pumps from design through manufacture, finance, installation, and maintenance, companies can work with farmers to ensure that pumps are able to continue to function in often challenging local conditions, season after season.

Internet-of-things (IoT)-enabled technology enables trained teams to monitor pump performance and conduct maintenance remotely. This is complemented by strategically located sales and service centers and a distributed team of field engineers able to rapidly respond to maintenance issues, expand local capacity and minimize downtime for farmers reliant on irrigation for successful harvests.

Again, solar-powered irrigation has an advantage over diesel pumps in that their fuel source is abundant and locally available. Fewer moving parts also make solar-powered irrigation systems less liable to break down than their diesel counterparts.

Source

#solarpunk #solarpunk business #solarpunk business models #solar punk #africa #farmers #solar power

25 notes · View notes

dailyanarchistposts · 6 months ago

Text

F.8.5 What about the lack of enclosures in the Americas?

The enclosure movement was but one part of a wide-reaching process of state intervention in creating capitalism. Moreover, it is just one way of creating the “land monopoly” which ensured the creation of a working class. The circumstances facing the ruling class in the Americas were distinctly different than in the Old World and so the “land monopoly” took a different form there. In the Americas, enclosures were unimportant as customary land rights did not really exist (at least once the Native Americans were eliminated by violence). Here the problem was that (after the original users of the land were eliminated) there were vast tracts of land available for people to use. Other forms of state intervention were similar to that applied under mercantilism in Europe (such as tariffs, government spending, use of unfree labour and state repression of workers and their organisations and so on). All had one aim, to enrich and power the masters and dispossess the actual producers of the means of life (land and means of production).

Unsurprisingly, due to the abundance of land, there was a movement towards independent farming in the early years of the American colonies and subsequent Republic and this pushed up the price of remaining labour on the market by reducing the supply. Capitalists found it difficult to find workers willing to work for them at wages low enough to provide them with sufficient profits. It was due to the difficulty in finding cheap enough labour that capitalists in America turned to slavery. All things being equal, wage labour is more productive than slavery but in early America all things were not equal. Having access to cheap (indeed, free) land meant that working people had a choice, and few desired to become wage slaves and so because of this, capitalists turned to slavery in the South and the “land monopoly” in the North.

This was because, in the words of Maurice Dobb, it “became clear to those who wished to reproduce capitalist relations of production in the new country that the foundation-stone of their endeavour must be the restriction of land-ownership to a minority and the exclusion of the majority from any share in [productive] property.” [Studies in Capitalist Development, pp. 221–2] As one radical historian puts it, ”[w]hen land is ‘free’ or ‘cheap’. as it was in different regions of the United States before the 1830s, there was no compulsion for farmers to introduce labour-saving technology. As a result, ‘independent household production’ … hindered the development of capitalism … [by] allowing large portions of the population to escape wage labour.” [Charlie Post, “The ‘Agricultural Revolution’ in the United States”, pp. 216–228, Science and Society, vol. 61, no. 2, p. 221]

It was precisely this option (i.e. of independent production) that had to be destroyed in order for capitalist industry to develop. The state had to violate the holy laws of “supply and demand” by controlling the access to land in order to ensure the normal workings of “supply and demand” in the labour market (i.e. that the bargaining position favoured employer over employee). Once this situation became the typical one (i.e., when the option of self-employment was effectively eliminated) a more (protectionist based) “laissez-faire” approach could be adopted, with state action used indirectly to favour the capitalists and landlords (and readily available to protect private property from the actions of the dispossessed).

So how was this transformation of land ownership achieved?

Instead of allowing settlers to appropriate their own farms as was often the case before the 1830s, the state stepped in once the army had cleared out (usually by genocide) the original users. Its first major role was to enforce legal rights of property on unused land. Land stolen from the Native Americans was sold at auction to the highest bidders, namely speculators, who then sold it on to farmers. This process started right “after the revolution, [when] huge sections of land were bought up by rich speculators” and their claims supported by the law. [Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, p. 125] Thus land which should have been free was sold to land-hungry farmers and the few enriched themselves at the expense of the many. Not only did this increase inequality within society, it also encouraged the development of wage labour — having to pay for land would have ensured that many immigrants remained on the East Coast until they had enough money. Thus a pool of people with little option but to sell their labour was increased due to state protection of unoccupied land. That the land usually ended up in the hands of farmers did not (could not) countermand the shift in class forces that this policy created.

This was also the essential role of the various “Homesteading Acts” and, in general, the “Federal land law in the 19th century provided for the sale of most of the public domain at public auction to the higher bidder … Actual settlers were forced to buy land from speculators, at prices considerably above the federal minimal price.” (which few people could afford anyway). [Charlie Post, Op. Cit., p. 222] This is confirmed by Howard Zinn who notes that 1862 Homestead Act “gave 160 acres of western land, unoccupied and publicly owned, to anyone who would cultivate it for five years … Few ordinary people had the $200 necessary to do this; speculators moved in and bought up much of the land. Homestead land added up to 50 million acres. But during the Civil War, over 100 million acres were given by Congress and the President to various railroads, free of charge.” [Op. Cit., p. 233] Little wonder the Individualist Anarchists supported an “occupancy and use” system of land ownership as a key way of stopping capitalist and landlord usury as well as the development of capitalism itself.

This change in the appropriation of land had significant effects on agriculture and the desirability of taking up farming for immigrants. As Post notes, ”[w]hen the social conditions for obtaining and maintaining possession of land change, as they did in the Midwest between 1830 and 1840, pursuing the goal of preserving [family ownership and control] .. . produced very different results. In order to pay growing mortgages, debts and taxes, family farmers were compelled to specialise production toward cash crops and to market more and more of their output.” [Op. Cit., p. 221–2]

So, in order to pay for land which was formerly free, farmers got themselves into debt and increasingly turned to the market to pay it off. Thus, the “Federal land system, by transforming land into a commodity and stimulating land speculation, made the Midwestern farmers dependent upon markets for the continual possession of their farms.” Once on the market, farmers had to invest in new machinery and this also got them into debt. In the face of a bad harvest or market glut, they could not repay their loans and their farms had to be sold to so do so. By 1880, 25% of all farms were rented by tenants, and the numbers kept rising. In addition, the “transformation of social property relations in northern agriculture set the stage for the ‘agricultural revolution’ of the 1840s and 1850s … [R]ising debts and taxes forced Midwestern family farmers to compete as commodity producers in order to maintain their land-holding … The transformation … was the central precondition for the development of industrial capitalism in the United States.” [Charlie Post, Op. Cit., p. 223 and p. 226]

It should be noted that feudal land owning was enforced in many areas of the colonies and the early Republic. Landlords had their holdings protected by the state and their demands for rent had the full backing of the state. This lead to numerous anti-rent conflicts. [Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, p. 84 and pp. 206–11] Such struggles helped end such arrangements, with landlords being “encouraged” to allow the farmers to buy the land which was rightfully theirs. The wealth appropriated from the farmers in the form of rent and the price of the land could then be invested in industry so transforming feudal relations on the land into capitalist relations in industry (and, eventually, back on the land when the farmers succumbed to the pressures of the capitalist market and debt forced them to sell).

This means that Murray Rothbard’s comment that “once the land was purchased by the settler, the injustice disappeared” is nonsense — the injustice was transmitted to other parts of society and this, the wider legacy of the original injustice, lived on and helped transform society towards capitalism. In addition, his comment about “the establishment in North America of a truly libertarian land system” would be one the Individualist Anarchists of the period would have seriously disagreed with! [The Ethics of Liberty, p. 73] Rothbard, at times, seems to be vaguely aware of the importance of land as the basis of freedom in early America. For example, he notes in passing that “the abundance of fertile virgin land in a vast territory enabled individualism to come to full flower in many areas.” [Conceived in Liberty, vol. 2, p. 186] Yet he did not ponder the transformation in social relationships which would result when that land was gone. In fact, he was blasé about it. “If latecomers are worse off,” he opined, “well then that is their proper assumption of risk in this free and uncertain world. There is no longer a vast frontier in the United States, and there is no point crying over the fact.” [The Ethics of Liberty, p. 240] Unsurprisingly we also find Murray Rothbard commenting that Native Americans “lived under a collectivistic regime that, for land allocation, was scarcely more just than the English governmental land grab.” [Conceived in Liberty, vol. 1, p. 187] That such a regime made for increased individual liberty and that it was precisely the independence from the landlord and bosses this produced which made enclosure and state land grabs such appealing prospects for the ruling class was lost on him.

Unlike capitalist economists, politicians and bosses at the time, Rothbard seemed unaware that this “vast frontier” (like the commons) was viewed as a major problem for maintaining labour discipline and appropriate state action was taken to reduce it by restricting free access to the land in order to ensure that workers were dependent on wage labour. Many early economists recognised this and advocated such action. Edward Wakefield was typical when he complained that “where land is cheap and all are free, where every one who so pleases can easily obtain a piece of land for himself, not only is labour dear, as respects the labourer’s share of the product, but the difficulty is to obtain combined labour at any price.” This resulted in a situation were few “can accumulate great masses of wealth” as workers “cease … to be labourers for hire; they … become independent landowners, if not competitors with their former masters in the labour market.” Unsurprisingly, Wakefield urged state action to reduce this option and ensure that labour become cheap as workers had little choice but to seek a master. One key way was for the state to seize the land and then sell it to the population. This would ensure that “no labourer would be able to procure land until he had worked for money” and this “would produce capital for the employment of more labourers.” [quoted by Marx, Op. Cit., , p. 935, p. 936 and p. 939] Which is precisely what did occur.

At the same time that it excluded the working class from virgin land, the state granted large tracts of land to the privileged classes: to land speculators, logging and mining companies, planters, railroads, and so on. In addition to seizing the land and distributing it in such a way as to benefit capitalist industry, the “government played its part in helping the bankers and hurting the farmers; it kept the amount of money — based in the gold supply — steady while the population rose, so there was less and less money in circulation. The farmer had to pay off his debts in dollars that were harder to get. The bankers, getting loans back, were getting dollars worth more than when they loaned them out — a kind of interest on top of interest. That was why so much of the talk of farmers’ movements in those days had to do with putting more money in circulation.” [Zinn, Op. Cit., p. 278] This was the case with the Individualist Anarchists at the same time, we must add.

Overall, therefore, state action ensured the transformation of America from a society of independent workers to a capitalist one. By creating and enforcing the “land monopoly” (of which state ownership of unoccupied land and its enforcement of landlord rights were the most important) the state ensured that the balance of class forces tipped in favour of the capitalist class. By removing the option of farming your own land, the US government created its own form of enclosure and the creation of a landless workforce with little option but to sell its liberty on the “free market”. They was nothing “natural” about it. Little wonder the Individualist Anarchist J.K. Ingalls attacked the “land monopoly” with the following words:

“The earth, with its vast resources of mineral wealth, its spontaneous productions and its fertile soil, the free gift of God and the common patrimony of mankind, has for long centuries been held in the grasp of one set of oppressors by right of conquest or right of discovery; and it is now held by another, through the right of purchase from them. All of man’s natural possessions … have been claimed as property; nor has man himself escaped the insatiate jaws of greed. The invasion of his rights and possessions has resulted … in clothing property with a power to accumulate an income.” [quoted by James Martin, Men Against the State, p. 142]

Marx, correctly, argued that “the capitalist mode of production and accumulation, and therefore capitalist private property, have for their fundamental condition the annihilation of that private property which rests on the labour of the individual himself; in other words, the expropriation of the worker.” [Capital, Vol. 1, p. 940] He noted that to achieve this, the state is used:

“How then can the anti-capitalistic cancer of the colonies be healed? . .. Let the Government set an artificial price on the virgin soil, a price independent of the law of supply and demand, a price that compels the immigrant to work a long time for wages before he can earn enough money to buy land, and turn himself into an independent farmer.” [Op. Cit., p. 938]

Moreover, tariffs were introduced with “the objective of manufacturing capitalists artificially” for the “system of protection was an artificial means of manufacturing manufacturers, or expropriating independent workers, of capitalising the national means of production and subsistence, and of forcibly cutting short the transition … to the modern mode of production,” to capitalism [Op. Cit., p. 932 and pp. 921–2]

So mercantilism, state aid in capitalist development, was also seen in the United States of America. As Edward Herman points out, the “level of government involvement in business in the United States from the late eighteenth century to the present has followed a U-shaped pattern: There was extensive government intervention in the pre-Civil War period (major subsidies, joint ventures with active government participation and direct government production), then a quasi-laissez faire period between the Civil War and the end of the nineteenth century [a period marked by “the aggressive use of tariff protection” and state supported railway construction, a key factor in capitalist expansion in the USA], followed by a gradual upswing of government intervention in the twentieth century, which accelerated after 1930.” [Corporate Control, Corporate Power, p. 162]

Such intervention ensured that income was transferred from workers to capitalists. Under state protection, America industrialised by forcing the consumer to enrich the capitalists and increase their capital stock. “According to one study, if the tariff had been removed in the 1830s ‘about half the industrial sector of New England would have been bankrupted’ … the tariff became a near-permanent political institution representing government assistance to manufacturing. It kept price levels from being driven down by foreign competition and thereby shifted the distribution of income in favour of owners of industrial property to the disadvantage of workers and customers.” This protection was essential, for the “end of the European wars in 1814 … reopened the United States to a flood of British imports that drove many American competitors out of business. Large portions of the newly expanded manufacturing base were wiped out, bringing a decade of near-stagnation.” Unsurprisingly, the “era of protectionism began in 1816, with northern agitation for higher tariffs.” [Richard B. Du Boff, Accumulation and Power, p. 56, p. 14 and p. 55] Combined with ready repression of the labour movement and government “homesteading” acts (see section F.8.5), tariffs were the American equivalent of mercantilism (which, after all, was above all else a policy of protectionism, i.e. the use of government to stimulate the growth of native industry). Only once America was at the top of the economic pile did it renounce state intervention (just as Britain did, we must note).

This is not to suggest that government aid was limited to tariffs. The state played a key role in the development of industry and manufacturing. As John Zerzan notes, the “role of the State is tellingly reflected by the fact that the ‘armoury system’ now rivals the older ‘American system of manufactures’ term as the more accurate to describe the new system of production methods” developed in the early 1800s. [Elements of Refusal, p. 100] By the middle of the nineteenth century “a distinctive ‘American system of manufactures’ had emerged . .. The lead in technological innovation [during the US Industrial Revolution] came in armaments where assured government orders justified high fixed-cost investments in special-pursue machinery and managerial personnel. Indeed, some of the pioneering effects occurred in government-owned armouries.” Other forms of state aid were used, for example the textile industry “still required tariffs to protect [it] from … British competition.” [William Lazonick, Competitive Advantage on the Shop Floor, p. 218 and p. 219] The government also “actively furthered this process [of ‘commercial revolution’] with public works in transportation and communication.” In addition to this “physical” aid, “state government provided critical help, with devices like the chartered corporation” [Richard B. Du Boff, Op. Cit., p. 15] As we noted in section B.2.5, there were changes in the legal system which favoured capitalist interests over the rest of society.

Nineteenth-century America also went in heavily for industrial planning — occasionally under that name but more often in the name of national defence. The military was the excuse for what is today termed rebuilding infrastructure, picking winners, promoting research, and co-ordinating industrial growth (as it still is, we should add). As Richard B. Du Boff points out, the “anti-state” backlash of the 1840s onwards in America was highly selective, as the general opinion was that ”[h]enceforth, if governments wished to subsidise private business operations, there would be no objection. But if public power were to be used to control business actions or if the public sector were to undertake economic initiatives on its own, it would run up against the determined opposition of private capital.” [Op. Cit., p. 26]

State intervention was not limited to simply reducing the amount of available land or enforcing a high tariff. “Given the independent spirit of workers in the colonies, capital understood that great profits required the use of unfree labour.” [Michael Perelman, The Invention of Capitalism, p. 246] It was also applied in the labour market as well. Most obviously, it enforced the property rights of slave owners (until the civil war, produced when the pro-free trade policies of the South clashed with the pro-tariff desires of the capitalist North). The evil and horrors of slavery are well documented, as is its key role in building capitalism in America and elsewhere so we will concentrate on other forms of obviously unfree labour. Convict labour in Australia, for example, played an important role in the early days of colonisation while in America indentured servants played a similar role.

Indentured service was a system whereby workers had to labour for a specific number of years usually in return for passage to America with the law requiring the return of runaway servants. In theory, of course, the person was only selling their labour. In practice, indentured servants were basically slaves and the courts enforced the laws that made it so. The treatment of servants was harsh and often as brutal as that inflicted on slaves. Half the servants died in the first two years and unsurprisingly, runaways were frequent. The courts realised this was a problem and started to demand that everyone have identification and travel papers.

It should also be noted that the practice of indentured servants also shows how state intervention in one country can impact on others. This is because people were willing to endure indentured service in the colonies because of how bad their situation was at home. Thus the effects of primitive accumulation in Britain impacted on the development of America as most indentured servants were recruited from the growing number of unemployed people in urban areas there. Dispossessed from their land and unable to find work in the cities, many became indentured servants in order to take passage to the Americas. In fact, between one half to two thirds of all immigrants to Colonial America arrived as indentured servants and, at times, three-quarters of the population of some colonies were under contracts of indenture. That this allowed the employing class to overcome their problems in hiring “help” should go without saying, as should its impact on American inequality and the ability of capitalists and landlords to enrich themselves on their servants labour and to invest it profitably.

As well as allowing unfree labour, the American state intervened to ensure that the freedom of wage workers was limited in similar ways as we indicated in section F.8.3. “The changes in social relations of production in artisan trades that took place in the thirty years after 1790,” notes one historian, “and the … trade unionism to which … it gave rise, both replicated in important respects the experience of workers in the artisan trades in Britain over a rather longer period … The juridical responses they provoked likewise reproduced English practice. Beginning in 1806, American courts consciously seized upon English common law precedent to combat journeymen’s associations.” Capitalists in this era tried to “secure profit … through the exercise of disciplinary power over their employees.” To achieve this “employers made a bid for legal aid” and it is here “that the key to law’s role in the process of creating an industrial economy in America lies.” As in the UK, the state invented laws and issues proclamations against workers’ combinations, calling them conspiracies and prosecuting them as such. Trade unionists argued that laws which declared unions as illegal combinations should be repealed as against the Constitution of the USA while “the specific cause of trademens protestations of their right to organise was, unsurprisingly, the willingness of local authorities to renew their resort to conspiracy indictments to countermand the growing power of the union movement.” Using criminal conspiracy to counter combinations among employees was commonplace, with the law viewing a “collective quitting of employment [as] a criminal interference” and combinations to raise the rate of labour “indictable at common law.” [Christopher L. Tomlins, Law, Labor, and Ideology in the Early American Republic, p. 113, p. 295, p. 159 and p. 213] By the end of the nineteenth century, state repression for conspiracy was replaced by state repression for acting like a trust while actual trusts were ignored and so laws, ostensibly passed (with the help of the unions themselves) to limit the power of capital, were turned against labour (this should be unsurprising as it was a capitalist state which passed them). [Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, p. 254]

Another key means to limit the freedom of workers was denying departing workers their wages for the part of the contract they had completed. This “underscored the judiciary’s tendency to articulate their approval” of the hierarchical master/servant relationship in terms of its “social utility: It was a necessary and desirable feature of the social organisation of work … that the employer’s authority be reinforced in this way.” Appeals courts held that “an employment contract was an entire contract, and therefore that no obligation to pay wages existed until the employee had completed the agreed term.” Law suits “by employers seeking damages for an employee’s departure prior to the expiry of an agreed term or for other forms of breach of contract constituted one form of legally sanctioned economic discipline of some importance in shaping the employment relations of the nineteenth century.” Thus the boss could fire the worker without paying their wages while if the worker left the boss he would expect a similar outcome. This was because the courts had decided that the “employer was entitled not only to receipt of the services contracted for in their entirety prior to payment but also to the obedience of the employee in the process of rendering them.” [Tomlins, Op. Cit., pp. 278–9, p. 274, p. 272 and pp. 279–80] The ability of workers to seek self-employment on the farm or workplace or even better conditions and wages were simply abolished by employers turning to the state.

So, in summary, the state could remedy the shortage of cheap wage labour by controlling access to the land, repressing trade unions as conspiracies or trusts and ensuring that workers had to obey their bosses for the full term of their contract (while the bosses could fire them at will). Combine this with the extensive use of tariffs, state funding of industry and infrastructure among many other forms of state aid to capitalists and we have a situation were capitalism was imposed on a pre-capitalist nation at the behest of the wealthy elite by the state, as was the case with all other countries.

17 notes · View notes

probablyasocialecologist · 11 months ago

Text

Looking ahead 20 years, many farmers will have to take land out of agriculture to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), 2014 legislation that has required counties to implement groundwater management plans throughout California. As a result of SGMA, AFT estimates 4 percent, or 212,000 acres, of cropland in the San Joaquin Valley alone could be permanently retired and 27 percent intermittently fallow. Conservation groups hope to see some of that land become part of corridors for native plants, waterways, and wildlife, but farmers are also looking to agrivoltaics opportunities.

Agrivoltaics may also help conserve water. “The shade that is created by the solar panels, in areas that receive more sun than plants need for their photosynthesis, reduces the heat stress on those crops, makes them healthier, and makes them require less water,” Abou Najm said. “Agrivoltaics is more than just a dual production of food and energy on the same plot of land—it maximizes the synergy between the two.”

Agrivoltaics stand to assist Central Valley farms in myriad ways, said Dahlquist-Willard. Larger farms that adopt agrivoltaics could potentially benefit smaller ones by alleviating pressure on regional groundwater. At the same time, farmers with less land are more likely to consider agrivoltaics than converting entirely to solar. “For a small farm—say 10, 20, 30 acres—if you convert your whole farm to solar, you’re quitting farming. Nobody does that when farming is their only source of income,” she said.

Abou Najm published a theoretical study looking at how to grow crops—including lettuce, basil, and strawberries—under solar panels in a way that maximized productivity. He found that the blue part of the light spectrum is best filtered out to produce solar energy, while the red spectrum can be optimized to grow food; this requires a specific type of panel that’s less common but available. His follow-up research involves expanding the types of crops and conducting field trials.

U.C. Davis is filling a necessary gap in California research, though many other studies have been conducted nationally and internationally documenting crop yields under panels. Scientists have found agrivoltaics can improve the efficiency of the panels, and increase water-use efficiency, soil moisture content, and crop yields. In one cherry tomato study, production doubled under the panels and water-use efficiency was 65 percent greater.

Researchers from California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo are also documenting the benefits of grazing under solar panels in California, supporting research worldwide. They are studying the benefits of sheep grazing on two solar installations, Gold Tree Farm and Topaz Solar Farm. There, they’ve found that the solar arrays can offer synergistic benefits for the sheep and the grasslands. Compared with pastures outside the solar panels, the shaded grasses have higher water content, greater nitrogen content, and lower non-digestible fiber.

#agrivoltaics #california #farming #solar power

33 notes · View notes

salemelas · 3 months ago

Text

OC Masterpost

hihi! having to redo this because my previous one got borked, and posting it publicly so that i can link it easier without redirect issues (^^ゞ y'know how tumblr is, etc etc.

warning: this post is very long and has multiple images! (and speaking of those images, this site was used to create the tokens seen below.)

◈ Elder Scrolls

Rildras Moon-and-Star

Male, he/him

Dunmer

The Nerevarine and Nerevar reborn

Father of Vedyra, grandfather of Vedathyr, son of Nedrala and Azura

Former lover of Dagoth Ur

May be a demiprince, but hates the daedra (and admittedly also the aedra) with all his heart

Sword warrior and destruction caster

Retired to a life of being a mushroom farmer after raising his daughter to adulthood

#oc moon and star (tag is attached to post)

Dagoth Vedyra

Female, she/her

Dunmer

Scion of House Dagoth and Founder of the House Dagoth Reforged

Daughter of Rildras and Dagoth Ur, mother of Vedathyr and Strides-Through-Ashes, granddaughter of Nedrala and Azura

Arcanist

Scholar with a focus on the dwemer, especially their disappearance

#oc vedyra (tag is attached to post)

Dagoth Vedathyr

Male, he/him

Dunmer

Heir to House Dagoth

The Last Dragonborn

Member (not the leader!) of the Companions, werewolf

Dual-handed warrior

Son of Vedyra, grandson of Rildras and Dagoth ur, great-grandson of Nedrala and Azura

Mercenary much to his pleasure, legendary figure of history much to his displeasure

#oc vedathyr (tag is attached to post)

Nedrala

Female, she/her

Dunmer

Ashlander exile from the Urshilaku Tribe

Former consort and chosen of Azura

Potter by trade

Mother of Rildras, grandmother of Vedyra, great-grandmother of Vedathyr

No tag yet

Strides-Through-Ashes | Dagoth Nehota

Female

Argonian, she/her

Found by Vedyra as an abandoned egg

Shadowscale aspirant, assassin

Adopted daughter of Vedyra, biological parents unknown

Member of House Dagoth

No tag yet

Dagoth Tsabi

Female, she/her

Khajiit

Found by one of Vedyra's scouts as the sole survivor of an ambushed khajiiti caravan

Vedyra's apprentice for dwemer studies

Illusion and restoration caster

Scholar with a focus on dwemer technology

No tag yet

Dagoth Nenyael

Female, she/her

Altmer

Joined House Dagoth after being abandoned as a teenager by her family in Morrowind following a tryst with a dunmer boy that resulted in a pregnancy

Mother of a yet-to-be-named son

Vedyra's apprentice for arcane studies

Arcanist

Scholar with a focus on Apocrypha and Hermaeus Mora

No tag yet

Dagoth Dralyn

Male, he/him

Dunmer

Was once a of House Redoran, but was exiled for sympathizing with Vedyra's desire to rebuild House Dagoth; was subsequently welcomed into the House Dagoth Reforged with open arms

Restoration caster

Dabbles in a little bit of every trade that he can get his hands on

No tag yet

Lyrius | Wades-Through-Deep-Waters

Male, he/him

Altmer

Hero of Kvatch

Listener of the Dark Brotherhood

Was adopted by two argonian fishermen after his parents died in a shipwreck off the coast of the Black Marsh

Has worshiped Sithis since he was very young, as that his adopted parents worshiped Sithis

Dual dagger fighter

Accidental daedric prince

Lover of Lucien Lachance

#oc lyrius (tag is attached to post)

Kanbael

Male, he/him

Dunmer

Vestige

Champion of Vivec

Nightblade, dual-hand wielder nonetheless

Devout believer in the Tribunal

Part of the Thieves Guild

No tag yet

◈ Dungeons & Dragons

Vesper Dysgeyma

Nonbinary, they/he

Tiefling (Mammon)

Demigod of Umbra, god of the dead and dusk

College of Spirits bard

Lawful neutral

Joined the party to help them kill a despot king seeking immortality, stayed for the food

#oc vesper (tag is attached to post)

◈ Dragon Age

Talasan Mahariel

Male, he/him

Dalish elf

Hero of Ferelden (main)

Lover of Zevran

Father of Kieran and the glorious Barkspawn

Two handed weapon warrior

Brokered for peace between the Dalish and the werewolves

Sided with the mages

Sided with Prince Bhelen and Paradon Caridin

Saved Connor with the Circle of Magi's help

#oc talasan mahariel (tag is attached to post)

Andromache Surana

Female, she/her

Circle elf

Hero of Ferelden

Lover of Leliana

Spirit healer and blood mage

Brokered for peace between the Dalish and the werewolves

Sided with the mages

Sided with Prince Bhelen and Paragon Caridin

Sacrificed Isolde to save Connor

#oc andromache surana (tag is attached to post)

◈ Baldur's Gate 3

Vharis Zhendiae

Male, he/him

Drow

Dark Urge

Paladin of Vengeance

Lover of Astarion

Rejected the Urge

Twin brother of Luminara (my boyfriend's Dark Urge, who is not listed here for the reason of not being my OC)

#oc vharis zhendiae (tag is attached to post)

Red

Nonbinary, they/them

High elf

Dark Urge

Assassin rogue

Lover of Karlach

Rejected the Urge

No tag yet

Not yet added:

Dragon Age: Garrett Hawke; Inquisitor Athevera Lavellan; Inquisitor Ilrian Lavellan, Rook

Mass Effect: Ariane Shepard

Baldur's Gate 3: Azran, Serene

#salem chatter #long post ₁⁞³—©#oc vedyra #oc vedathyr #oc lyrius #oc vesper #oc talasan mahariel #oc andromache surana #oc vharis zhendiae #oc moon and star

10 notes · View notes

female-malice · 8 months ago

Note

Thoughts on veganism?

It's fine. Food is food.

At the grocery store, meat is 3x more expensive than tofu.

Jigsaw Farms in Australia is one of the most sustainable animal agriculture farms in the world. They recently discovered that even a sustainable operation hits carbon saturation after 10 years of animal agriculture. And I don't mean sustainable as an empty industry buzzword. I mean world-class sustainable agriculture recognized and monitored by ecologists. Just so you understand what that might look like, here's a description of Jigsaw:

The 3,378-hectare farm spans six titles, bought between 1996 and 2003. Hardwood timber plantations cover 295 hectares, 24 hectares is remnant forest and a further 268 hectares are set aside for biodiversity. It hosts a fine wool merino operation with about 20,000 ewes, and 550 head of cattle.

If you do absolutely everything right, you can sequester the carbon of animal agriculture for a decade. After that, no matter what you do, you will not be able to sequester more carbon than you produce. The land will be saturated.

I believe this discovery gives a road map for an ideal agricultural transition.

Let's say tomorrow the entire global animal agriculture industry, everyone from factory farms to family farms, decides to become Jigsaw. First, it would take about 5 years to transition the land and infrastructure. Then there would be about 10 years of sustainable animal agriculture. And I'll add an extra five years there to make it flexible. So that's 20 years. A 20 year transition. After that, we'll eat our last farmed animal products. And then there'd be tons of carbon-rich land that could be used for plant agriculture.

Unfortunately, humans haven't evolved a sustainable hivemind. We have massive variation in social behavior. So, with a transition like this, there will be early adopters, bandwagoners, and stragglers.

Now let's talk about fishing.

The fishing industry can theoretically be eternally sustainable. Large scale wild catch can go on forever. Farming shellfish can go on forever. Farming fish like salmon and cod is a massive ecological disaster but other forms of aquaculture are fine. We already know exactly how to run this industry in a 100% sustainable way. There's no mystery to it and all the technology is available. Unfortunately, in the fishing industry, we once again run into the problem of variation in human social behavior. There are both angels and devils who work on the ocean. And the devils are economically rewarded while the angels toil away and go bankrupt.

Sustainable food production methods are not profitable in our current economic system. It's impossible to make them profitable. Right now, there is only one way to make a profit in food production. You need to destroy the land and ocean and doom future generations to starvation. Basically, by stealing value from the future, you can make a profit and be wealthy in the present. Farmers in France have been viciously protesting for their right to steal from the future. Their government tried to regulate them into respecting the people of 2070s France. But they don't want to do it. Human variation in social behavior is very difficult to deal with.

And finally, there's hunting. Ecologically, we need hunters who are humans as well as the reintroduction and promotion of non-human predators. However, poachers and wildlife traffickers can destroy an ecosystem faster than any other industry. They can delete an entire species in less than a year. Hunting deer and rabbits is not profitable. Wildlife trafficking is extremely profitable. So once again, angels and devils and money.

#cc

7 notes · View notes

rjzimmerman · 26 days ago

Text

Excerpt from this story from Grist:

A growing number of companies are bringing automation to agriculture. It could ease the sector’s deepening labor shortage, help farmers manage costs, and protect workers from extreme heat. Automation could also improve yields by bringing greater accuracy to planting, harvesting, and farm management, potentially mitigating some of the challenges of growing food in an ever-warmer world.

But many small farmers and producers across the country aren’t convinced. Barriers to adoption go beyond steep price tags to questions about whether the tools can do the jobs nearly as well as the workers they’d replace. Some of those same workers wonder what this trend might mean for them, and whether machines will lead to exploitation

On some farms, driverless tractors churn through acres of corn, soybeans, lettuce, and more. Such equipment is expensive, and requires mastering new tools, but row crops are fairly easy to automate. Harvesting small, non-uniform and easily damaged fruits like blackberries, or big citruses that take a bit of strength and dexterity to pull off a tree, would be much harder.

That doesn’t deter scientists like Xin Zhang, a biological and agricultural engineer at Mississippi State University. Working with a team at Georgia Institute of Technology, she wants to apply some of the automation techniques surgeons use, and the object-recognition power of advanced cameras and computers, to create robotic berry-picking arms that can pluck the fruits without creating a sticky, purple mess.

The scientists have collaborated with farmers for field trials, but Zhang isn’t sure when the machine might be ready for consumers. Although robotic harvesting is not widespread, a smattering of products have hit the market, and can be seen working from Washington’s orchards to Florida’s produce farms.

#agriculture #farming #water #irrigation #farm workers

2 notes · View notes

industrynewsupdates · 1 month ago

Text

Vertical Farming Market Recent Trends and Growth Analysis Report 2024 – 2030

The global vertical farming market size is expected to reach USD USD 24.95 billion by 2030, according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc. It is expected to expand at a CAGR of 20.1% from 2023 to 2030. Increased use of Internet of Things (IoT) sensors for producing crops is likely to spur market demand over the forecast period. Information obtained from the sensors is stored on the cloud and analyzed to perform the required actions. The growing automation in agriculture and increasing use of big data and predictive analytics for maximizing yields are also likely to drive the market.

Vertical farming is effective in ensuring stability in crop production and maintaining reliability even in adverse climatic conditions. It provides multiple benefits over the traditional farming technique, such as less use of water, the lesser need for agrochemicals, and low dependence on agricultural labor. Vertical farming makes use of metal reflectors and artificial lighting to maximize natural sunlight.

Genetically modified organisms and the environmental and health effects of pesticides and other non-natural substances that are used for increasing agricultural production have encouraged consumers to adopt organic foods. According to the Organic Trade Association, the U.S. organic industry sales increased by around 5% in 2019 owing to the increased investment in infrastructure and education. As per the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, the handlers and growers of organic products need to comply with the regulations.

Gather more insights about the market drivers, restrains and growth of the Vertical Farming Market

Detailed Segmentation:

Market Concentration & Characteristics

The vertical farming market growth stage is high. The vertical farming market is witnessing a significant degree of innovation, marked by the adoption of advanced technologies such as sensors and cameras in order to enhance resource efficiency, increase yields, and address challenges such as limited space and environmental constraints. Also, technologies such as hydroponics, aeroponics, LED grow lights, and automation systems are commonly employed to enhance efficiency and crop quality.

Market Dynamics

The growth of the vertical farming market is attributed to factors such as steady population growth, government incentives, limited availability of cultivable land, and the increasing demand for high-quality and fresh food. Moreover, the increasing consumer demand for organic food is positively impacting the growth of the vertical farming market, creating favorable business opportunities. With consumers placing a higher value on organic products, vertical farming is a viable solution to meet this demand.

Component Insights

On the basis of components, vertical farming market is segmented into hardware, software, and services. The hardware segment accounted for the largest market share in 2022. Hardware plays a significant role in maintaining an environment in vertical farming. The segment is further categorized into lighting, hydroponic components, climate control, and sensors. The lighting segment led the market and accounted for more than 44.46% of global hardware revenue in 2022. A large share of the lighting segment can be attributed to the dependence of vertical farms on artificial lighting. Artificial lights provide sufficient light intensities required for crop growth. The climate control segment is expected to register the highest CAGR of 20.6% over forecast period. Increasing adoption of hydroponic components by farmers to minimize weight load and infrastructure needed to support equipment is anticipated to drive demand for hydroponic components.

Growing Mechanism Insights

The Hydroponics segment registered the largest market share in 2022 and is expected to remain dominant between 2023 and 2030. Hydroponics is a popular growth mechanism due to low installation costs and ease of operations. It is a method of growing plants without soil, where soil is replaced by mineral solution inserted around plant roots. Additionally, the hydroponics method removes the risk of soil organisms causing diseases.

Crop Category Insights

The fruits, vegetables, & herbs segment registered the largest market share in 2022 and is expected to remain dominant between 2023 and 2030. Increasing cultivation of commonly grown fruits and vegetables in vertical farming is driving segment growth. Crops grown in vertical farming provide maximum profit to companies involved in their cultivation. At the same time, vertical farming improves biodiversity as it does not cause land disturbances. As such, vertical farming is in high demand for growing different types of crops. Further, fruits, vegetables, & herbs are segmented into tomato, lettuce, bell, chili peppers, strawberry, cucumber, leafy greens (excluding lettuce), herbs, and others. Among which tomatoes segment led the market and accounted for more than 24.23% of global fruits, vegetables, & herbs revenue in 2022.

Structure Insights

The shipping container segment dominated the market with a share of about 53.32% in 2022 and is expected to remain dominant between 2023 and 2030. This growth is attributed to the ability of structure to help grow crops irrespective of geographic location. One of the primary benefits of container-based farming is that container farms are easy to transport, and one doesn't require a large piece of land or dedicated building to start cultivating.

Regional Insights

In terms of revenue, Europe dominated the vertical farming market in 2022 with a share of approximately 31.7% and is expected to remain dominant between 2023 and 2030. Growing awareness regarding the importance of alternative farming owing to less availability of fertile agricultural land and increasing population in the region is the key factor anticipated to spur the demand.

Browse through Grand View Research's Next Generation Technologies Industry Research Reports.

• The global synthetic data generation market size was valued at USD 218.4 million in 2023 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 35.3% from 2024 to 2030.

• The global service virtualization market size was valued at USD 786.0 Million in 2023 and is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17.4% from 2024 to 2030.

Key Companies & Market Share Insights

Some of the key players operating in the market include Agrilution GmbH; Aerofarm; Brightfarms Inc.; Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd; Freight Farms; GrowUp Urban Farms Ltd.; Green Sense Farms, LLC; Vertical Farm Systems.

• Vertical Farm Systems is engaged in the development of fully automated growing systems with reusable medium and energy efficient climate cells. The company utilizes artificial intelligence (AI) and automation for optimized growing conditions.

• Brightfarms Inc., is an indoor farming company that provides fresh packaged salad. The company sells their product locally that are grown in controlled environment. The company is inclined towards development of efficient vertical farming system with a focus on resource efficiency and sustainable practices.

Key Vertical Farming Companies:

• AeroFarms (U.S.)

• Illumitex, Inc. (U.S.)

• American Hydroponics (U.S.)

• Agrilution GmbH

• Brightfarms Inc.

• Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd.

• Freight Farms

• GrowUp Urban Farms Ltd.

• Green Sense Farms, LLC

• Vertical Farm Systems.

Vertical Farming Market Segmentation

Grand View Research has segmented the global vertical farming market report based on structure, growing mechanism, crop category and region

Vertical Farming Structure Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2017 - 2030)

• Shipping Container

• Building-based

Vertical Farming Component Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2017 - 2030)

• Hardware

o Lighting

o Hydroponic components

o Climate control

o Sensors

• Software

• Services

o System Integration & Consulting

o Managed Services

o Assisted Professional Services

Vertical Farming Growing Mechanism Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2017 - 2030)

• Hydroponics

• Aeroponics

• Aquaponics

Vertical Farming Crop Category Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2017- 2030)

• Fruits Vegetables, & Herbs

o Tomato

o Lettuce

o Bell & Chili Peppers

o Strawberry

o Cucumber

o Leafy Greens (excluding lettuce)

o Herbs

o Others

• Flowers & Ornamentals

o Perennials

o Annuals

o Ornamentals

• Others (Cannabis, Microgreens)

Vertical Farming Regional Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2017 - 2030)

• North America

o U.S.

o Canada

o Mexico

• Europe

o Germany

o U.K.

o France

o Italy

o Spain

• Asia Pacific

o China

o Japan

o India

o Singapore

o South Korea

• South America

o Brazil

• Middle East and Africa (MEA)

Order a free sample PDF of the Vertical Farming Market Intelligence Study, published by Grand View Research.

Recent Developments

• In March 2023, BrightFarms, a pioneer in the indoor farming industry, is growing by establishing four additional regional greenhouse centers that introduce sustainably farmed leafy greens to a broader audience in the Eastern and Central United States. The newly built greenhouse centers are expected to meet the rising demand for organic food and initiate distribution to retailers by 2024. With this expansion, the company is expecting 10x revenue growth by 2024.

• In February 2023, AeroFarms and Public Investment Fund (PIF), a wealth funding body of Saudi Arabia, announced a joint venture to establish indoor vertical farms in the Middle East and Saudi Arabia.

#Vertical Farming Market #Vertical Farming Market size #Vertical Farming Market share #Vertical Farming Market analysis #Vertical Farming Industry

2 notes · View notes

farmerstrend · 13 hours ago

Text

Is this the Largest Sweet Potato in Kenya? The Inspiring Story of Manoah Kilach's 11-Kilogram Sweet Potato

In the verdant Ngata area of Nakuru County, Manoah Kilach has transformed agricultural practice through meticulous organic farming and technological innovation. A retired educator turned agricultural entrepreneur, Kilach stands as a testament to the potential of modern, sustainable farming techniques. On a sun-drenched Friday morning, Kilach proudly displayed an extraordinary achievement: an…

0 notes

danmoscatiello · 2 months ago

Text

Sustainable Agriculture Practices That Are Reducing Global Carbon Emissions

As the world seeks to combat climate change, agriculture plays a key role in either contributing to or mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Modern, intensive farming practices are responsible for a significant portion of global emissions, but sustainable agricultural practices can offer solutions to reduce carbon emissions and help achieve climate goals. In this article, we’ll explore some of the most impactful methods farmers are adopting to reduce their carbon footprint while ensuring food security.

Regenerative Agriculture: Restoring Soil Health and Sequestering Carbon

One of the most promising approaches in sustainable farming is regenerative agriculture, which focuses on restoring soil health and increasing biodiversity. This method involves practices such as cover cropping, crop rotation, and reduced tillage. By keeping the soil covered with plants year-round and minimizing soil disturbance, regenerative agriculture increases the soil's ability to store carbon, enhancing soil fertility and reducing the need for synthetic fertilizers.

Farmers who implement regenerative practices often see healthier soils, which act as a natural carbon sink, pulling carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it in the ground. In turn, these healthier soils improve water retention, reduce erosion, and promote greater biodiversity, creating a more resilient farming ecosystem. This is critical for combating climate change, as healthy soils can sequester significant amounts of carbon over time.

Agroforestry: Integrating Trees into Farmland

Agroforestry is another key sustainable practice that helps reduce carbon emissions. This method involves planting trees and shrubs alongside crops or integrating them into livestock systems. The trees absorb carbon dioxide as they grow, acting as long-term carbon storage, while also providing shade, reducing soil erosion, and increasing biodiversity on the farm.

By combining trees with crops, agroforestry creates a balanced ecosystem that supports both plant and animal life. The trees also help regulate local climates, provide additional income streams from timber or fruit production, and improve soil structure. As an added benefit, agroforestry systems are more resilient to climate shocks such as droughts and floods.

Conservation Tillage: Minimizing Soil Disturbance

Traditional farming methods often involve tilling the soil to prepare for planting. However, this process can release large amounts of carbon stored in the soil into the atmosphere. Conservation tillage practices, such as no-till or reduced-till farming, minimize this disturbance, keeping more carbon in the soil.

By reducing or eliminating tillage, farmers can preserve soil structure and prevent carbon loss. Additionally, no-till farming increases water infiltration and reduces the need for synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, further cutting down on GHG emissions. These practices are especially useful in areas prone to erosion, where soil health is critical for long-term agricultural success.

Integrated Pest Management (IPM): Reducing Chemical Use

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a sustainable approach that reduces the reliance on synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. This practice involves using biological controls, crop rotation, and resistant crop varieties to manage pests and diseases naturally. By cutting down on chemical inputs, farmers can lower their overall carbon footprint, as the production and application of pesticides and fertilizers are major sources of GHG emissions in conventional agriculture.

IPM also promotes healthier ecosystems by protecting beneficial insects, improving soil health, and reducing the risk of pesticide runoff into waterways. With fewer chemicals in the environment, biodiversity is preserved, and farms become more resilient to pests over time.

Precision Agriculture: Using Technology to Optimize Resources

Precision agriculture employs modern technology to optimize the use of resources such as water, fertilizer, and pesticides. GPS-guided equipment, soil sensors, and drones allow farmers to apply inputs more efficiently, ensuring that crops receive exactly what they need without waste. This method not only improves crop yields but also significantly reduces the overuse of chemicals and water, both of which contribute to carbon emissions.

By using data-driven insights, precision agriculture allows for more targeted interventions, which means less energy is required to grow crops, and fewer emissions are produced. The result is a more efficient and sustainable agricultural system.

Carbon Farming: Capturing and Storing Carbon

Carbon farming is a technique that focuses explicitly on sequestering carbon in soils through improved agricultural practices. This involves planting cover crops, rotating crops, and using organic fertilizers, all of which increase the organic matter in the soil. The added organic matter boosts the soil's ability to retain carbon, thus reducing the amount of CO₂ in the atmosphere.

Farmers participating in carbon farming can even receive incentives or carbon credits for their efforts, creating an additional economic benefit. As more farmers adopt these practices, the potential to store vast amounts of carbon in agricultural soils increases, helping to mitigate climate change on a global scale.

Improved Livestock Management

Livestock farming is a significant contributor to methane emissions, one of the most potent greenhouse gases. However, improved livestock management practices can help reduce emissions from this sector. Strategies such as rotational grazing, which involves moving livestock between pastures to prevent overgrazing, can improve soil health and sequester carbon.

Additionally, dietary supplements for livestock, such as seaweed-based additives, have been shown to reduce methane emissions from digestion. These innovations, combined with better manure management practices, can significantly lower the carbon footprint of livestock farming.

Key Sustainable Agriculture Practices Reducing Carbon Emissions

Regenerative agriculture to improve soil health and carbon sequestration

Agroforestry to integrate trees and reduce emissions

Conservation tillage to minimize soil disturbance

Precision agriculture for optimized resource use

Carbon farming for increased soil carbon storage

Integrated pest management to reduce chemical use

Improved livestock management to cut methane emissions

In Conclusion

Sustainable agriculture is essential in the global effort to reduce carbon emissions and combat climate change. From regenerative practices that enrich the soil to precision farming that minimizes waste, these methods offer a pathway toward a more sustainable, resilient food system. By adopting these practices on a global scale, agriculture can shift from being a major contributor to climate change to a key player in the solution.

#Reducing Global #dan moscatiello #Sustainable Agriculture

4 notes · View notes