Welcome to iGrow News, Your Source for the World of Indoor Vertical Farming
Why Use Hydroponics or Aquaponics
Your best chance for success in gardening in a survival situation is diversification.
Why Use Hydroponics or Aquaponics
Posted on January 8, 2018
Hydroponics, Aquaponics or Soil?
Your best chance for success in gardening in a survival situation is diversification.
Traditional soil crops paired with hydroponics and aquaponics, indoors or out, can increase your yields extend your growing season, and ensure food sources even if one method fails.
Example: Corn is not necessarily an ideal hydroponic crop, and does well in traditional soil methods. Tomatoes do well in hydroponic setups. You can increase your corn planting area, giving a higher yield of a crop that is versatile and can be stored easily.
Moving your tomatoes to a hydroponic setup gives you more control over harvest time, staggering crops to ensure you lose less of a highly perishable crop. If done indoors with lights, tomatoes can be grown year round.
Protein readily available and renewable
With aquaponics, not only do you create a symbiotic natural environment, but you get a complete balanced offering of food, with vegetables being grown and fish being fed. A readily available protein source never hurts.
Food unique to you and your needs
By using alternative methods of growing, You can give yourself and your family nutritional variety in winter months or off seasons. If done indoors, you can have food that may not grow in your climate or USDA zone.
Expanding the variety of your crops ensures your family’s health and can be a valuable asset for bartering.
What crops do best for each setting
Crops that do very well in hydroponics systems: tomatoes, peppers, lettuce, spinach, strawberries, and eggplants.
The best crops for aquaponics: leafy lettuces, kale, chard, basil, mint, arugula.
What this means for you
Think of the diversity you can add to your diet without sacrificing space for precious potatoes, corn, beans, and wheat. Imagine being able to offer such a variety in a bartering situation.
Hydroponics and aquaponics may seem complicated or like too much work, but they are worth the effort. It really doesn’t take much equipment or know how to start the simplest setups.
Both methods are becoming very popular alternatives to traditional farming, so information, kit plans, and physical kits are widely available.
Recommended reading:
Aquaponics Gardening: A Step-By-Step Guide
Hydroponics for self-sufficiency
Kits and supplies:
Applications Are Now Open For The Iowa AgriTech Accelerator’s Class of 2018.
i Grow News is a proud supporter of the Iowa AgriTech Accelerator. Based in Des Moines, Iowa. The Accelerator seeks early-stage companies with an idea, intellectual property or prototype for agricultural innovation for its Class of 2018.
Applications are now open for the Iowa AgriTech Accelerator’s Class of 2018.
If you know of an early-stage company with an idea, intellectual property or prototype for agriculture, they can apply for this year’s cohort at www.agiowa.com/apply.php.
Companies selected to participate will receive seed funding, subsidized housing, time with mentors and investors and opportunities to build strategic partnerships.
I’m pleased to be a mentor for this year’s cohort.
Debate Continues Over Organic Hydroponics
Debate Continues Over Organic Hydroponics
- Deborah Jeanne Sergeant, New York Correspondent
-
- January 5, 2018
Hydroponic and aquaponic growers use nonsoil media and water instead of soil. And that’s what makes Liana Hoodes, policy adviser at Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York, suspicious of these operations being classified as organic.
“The foundation of organic farming is the soil,” Hoodes said. “It’s about the life of the soil, not just the crops on the soil. Organic systems should be based on managing organic systems.”
The National Organic Standards Board, an advisory board to the USDA, voted in November to allow hydroponic and aquaponic operations to be certified organic via a new organic standard for nonsoil farming, which did not exist previously.
NOFA-NY, however, will not certify any hydroponic operations, at least not yet.
“The organic certification law specifically refers to soil fertility,” Hoodes said. “There’s lots of places in regulations that speak to managing and improving soils, and soils as the basis of what organic is about.”
Hoodes thinks the USDA “failed organic farmers” by not evaluating the complexity and nuances of the systems “before they allowed big businesses to have huge factories of hydroponics and to have it labeled as ‘organic.’”
Hoodes said she is bothered by the lack of a legal definition of hydroponics and aquaponics, though the closed system of aquaponics does represent the ecological biodiversity supported by a soil-based organic grower.
“You might be able to define an aquaponic system that is ecologically sound,” she said. “Animal welfare may be an issue as essentially they’re not abiding by the natural behavior of the animal. Fish aren’t meant to be held in a glass cage.”
Hoodes thinks hydroponic systems can diminish the ecological environment. And while she likes the fact that these systems usually use less energy, she thinks the systems don’t meet the high bar of organic agriculture.
“Organic is a high bar, the gold standard, but it isn’t the only thing out there,” she said. “Hydroponics are not part of organic. You have to be increasing the health of the soil all the time. You can’t destroy the soil base. We have to take all sorts of steps to build the soil. There are other systems that may do a lot for us.”
The Organic Trade Association, based in Washington, D.C., does not support soil-less agriculture.
“Organic is a voluntary standard and it is critical to achieve industry consensus pre-rulemaking when USDA updates standards,” said Maggie McNeil, director of media relations for the association. “We’re looking to support good policies that reflect organic principles and we want to see a recommendation that reflects consensus and give NOP something they can work with.”
But hydroponics growers disagree, claiming what they do falls in line with what other organic farmers are doing.
Linda Eldred, owner of Strawberry Fields Hydroponic Farm in Auburn, grows 15,000 strawberry and vegetable plants outdoors on a quarter acre using hydroponic methods.
She doesn’t use pesticides and uses only organic inputs, such as organic fertilizer, but isn’t certified organic.
While she said she respects NOFA-NY’s viewpoint, she contends her plants provide healthful produce because “they get exactly what they need. The weeds aren’t robbing the nutrients. That can hurt your yield. A lot of organically grown crops have that problem because they don’t spray and they can’t take care of the weeds. You may not have as good of a crop. With hydroponics, you can constantly monitor the plants’ nutrition.”
Eldred said she uses a medium of half perlite and verniculipe, coarsely ground rocks that give the roots something to hold onto and to help retain the water.
Matt Roman, co-owner of M&M Hydroponic Garden & Supply in Utica, sells a variety of organic fertilizer suitable for hydroponic growing.
He thinks organizations that don’t want to certify hydroponic operations as organic “don’t have enough knowledge to go by. There is a ton of organic fertilizer.
“It’s a thin line, but if you use 100-percent organic, you can call it organic,” Roman said.
Tinia Pina owns Re-nuble, a Brooklyn-based supplier of organic-based liquid soil and hydroponic nutrients created from organic certified produce waste.
She said that medium- to large-sized hydroponic and aquaponic growers haven’t adopted organic inputs as readily as smaller growers because the automatic equipment doesn’t have the ability to sense nutrients in organic fertilizer, in comparison to chemical-based fertilizers.
“There are ways to do it hydroponically and aquaponically that represent the same synergies in the soil, the degradation of nutrients by microbes and bacteria, that can be replicated, and technology is developing to prove it can be done in a closed environment,” Pina said.
Pina thinks hydroponic and aquaponic operations use much fewer nutrients than soil-based farms because they allow plants direct access to what they need. They also use less water since it’s not applied to plants from the top down in a closed environment.
“I think organic certification shouldn’t be limited,” she said. “Farms should have the option to get certified. I hope that more people looking to get into agriculture have the larger interest of society in mind and not make it a financially driven motive.
“Grow the largest supply of organic food as possible and don’t be so concerned about the type of growing process,” she said.
Hoodes said that while she isn’t against hydroponics and aquaponics, she thinks marketing and labeling products not grown in soil as organic provides a sub-par product to consumers at the same cost as soil-grown organic produce.
Deborah Jeanne Sergeant is a freelance writer in central New York. She can be reached at deb@skilledquill.net.
US: Sales of Organic Agricultural Products Continue To Increase
US: Sales of Organic Agricultural Products Continue To Increase
According to the Organic Trade Association, approximately 82 percent of U.S. households purchase organic food. In fact, the increase in sales from 2014 to 2015 was the largest on record at $4.2 billion. While organic acreage is less than 1 percent of total U.S. cropland, organic sales are nearly 5 percent of all food sales and continue to increase at a steady rate.
According to the USDA (2017), over 75 percent of the certified organic operations are concentrated in the West, Northeast, and Upper Midwest.
In terms of food purchased in the U.S., 8 percent of all dairy products and nearly 14 percent of all fruits and vegetables are organic and demand continues to increase. The 2017 Outlook for Organic Agriculture Forum forecasted growth for organic confectionery, sweet and savory snacks, ice cream and frozen desserts, baby food, soups and sauces, dressing and condiments.
At this point you may be wondering, “what defines an organic agricultural product”? The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines organic agriculture as “an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony.” While there are many different takes on organic production, in order to use the USDA Organic label, producers must comply with the national standards set by the National Organic Program.
Source: MSU Extension (Rob Sirrine)
The Face of Farming Is Changing, As An Increasing Number of Millennials Are Becoming Farmers
The Face of Farming Is Changing, As An Increasing Number of Millennials Are Becoming Farmers
Jan 02, 2018
The face of farming is changing, as an increasing number of millennials are becoming farmers.
They're interested in organic food, and sustainable farming practices and their choices are making an impact on big food companies.
Millennials are flocking to the farm and Chris Hay is one of them with his 150-acre farm.
But the 34-year-old wasn't born on a farm.
He studied philosophy in college and up until seven years ago, Hay was living a city life, working a desk job.
Chris Hay, owner, say Hay Farms said, "It didn't jibe with a lot of the goals that I had for myself professionally. I enjoyed working with food, and all those things kind of just meshed into why not try farming?"
That led him to a job on a farm and now he's the owner of "say Hay Farms" in rural Yolo County, California.
He's not alone.
According to the USDA's most recent census of farmers from 2012, the number of principal farmers ages 25 to 34 increased 2.2 percent from five years before, while some of the older age brackets saw double digit declines.
A new survey by the National Young Farmer Coalition also finds that the upcoming generation of farmers is demographically different from previous generations.
They're likely to be college-educated, not grow up in farm families, use sustainable practices, and produce organic food.
Among those recruiting millennial foodies into farming, Kimbal Musk, brother of tech billionaire Elon Musk.
Kimbal Musk, Founder, Square Roots said, "If you look at just five years ago, farming was considered you know, this is what your grandparents did. And over the past few years, there's been this extraordinary demand and desire to be a farmer amongst the younger generation."
He's disrupting the food chain with a collection of locally-sourced restaurants and an urban farm accelerator called square roots...they received 11-hundred applications from millennials to launch their own farming startups.
Musk said, "It comes from the desire to be part of the food revolution, to grow real food for their community, it's a wonderful thing that's going on and it's super exciting."
Feasting on organic food, millennials' focus on organic foods is having a real impact on business too.
Organic food sales in the U.S. totaled a record $43 billion dollars in 2016, more than doubling since 2007.
The biggest group driving those sales is millennial parents, according to the Organic Trade Association.
And in a note this year about the packaged food industry, Goldman Sachs wrote "millennial consumers should drive the entirety of the industry's growth in the next decade."
For Chris Hay, using sustainable practices and producing organic food isn't a business decision, it's just the right thing to do.
Hay said, "We're out here to help move the ball forward. And it's a whole system of change that needs to take place."
China Will Grow Potatoes On The Dark Side of The Moon By The End of The Year
China Will Grow Potatoes On The Dark Side of The Moon By The End of The Year
JANUARY 5, 2017 TIBI PUIU
Credit: Pixabay / rkarkowski.
The moon has been neglected for far too long, and China seems keen on moving fast to cover all the lost lunar ground. The nation’s ambitious space program, among other things, is set on achieving several important milestones.
A trifecta, consisting of a lunar probe, lander, and rover, will be deployed to the moon’s orbit and surface respectively. This will be the first time a man-made contraption makes a soft landing on the far side of the moon, a site of renewed interest for many scientists. The mission will also carry insects and plants that will form a mini-ecosystem on the moon whose response will teach us valuable lessons in preparations for a manned outpost or even a colony.
Potatoes on the dark side of the moon
This remarkable mission is part of the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program (CLEP), otherwise known as the Chang’e Program, named so in honor of the Chinese goddess of the moon. Previously, the Chang’e program had already sent two orbiters and one lander to the moon.
In the first half of 2018, Chang’e 4 will initially launch a relay satellite aboard a Long March 5 rocket that will be positioned at the Earth-moon Lagrange point 2 (EM-L2).
Artist impression of the relay satellite slated for launch. Credit: CNSA.
This is where the satellite can essentially remain stationary relative to the bodies, since the Earth and Moon gravities cancel each other out. From this point, the communications satellite will relay data between controllers on Earth and the Chang’e 4 lander and rover slated to touch down on the moon’s far side — also known as the dark side of the moon since it faces away from Earth.
The lander and rover will be launched together six months after the relay satellite is deployed at EM-L2. The lander will be equipped with various instruments designed to study the lunar environment and geology in detail, but also a mini-habitat comprised of insects and plants.
“The container will send potatoes, arabidopsis seeds and silkworm eggs to the surface of the moon. The eggs will hatch into silkworms, which can produce carbon dioxide, while the potatoes and seeds emit oxygen through photosynthesis. Together, they can establish a simple ecosystem on the moon,” Zhang Yuanxun, chief designer of the lunar habitat, told theChongqing Morning Post.
Last year, researchers grew potatoes in Mars-like conditions. Pulling the same stunt completely outside of Earth will be a whole different challenge which will be very intriguing to follow.
The Chinese lunar rover which is supposed to land on the dark side of the moon by the end of the year. Credit: CASC/China Ministry of Defense
The lander and rover will be deployed in the huge South Pole-Aitken Basin. This is the single-largest impact basin on the moon, measuring a staggering 2,500 km (1,600 miles) in diameter and 13 kilometers (8.1 miles) deep. Previously, missions like the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) and India’s Chandrayaan-1 orbiter confirmed that the basin contains water ice, likely sourced from meteors and asteroids.
This ice can survive in this form because the Aitken Basin is always shadowed. Once this finding was confirmed by NASA, the site has immediately been singled out as an important candidate for a possible lunar base. With this context in mind, the Chang’e 4 mission is valuable in the sense that it can help establish not only what the local terrain in the basin is like but also how the environment will influence organisms. For instance, gravity on the moon is just 16% that of Earth. Plants use gravity to decide the direction of their growth, and a strong or weak gravitational pull will also affect the height of plants.
If all of this sounds exciting, know that once the lunar habitat container is deployed at the end of this year, China plans to live stream the plants’ growth and development.
Your message can also be among the 20,000 that will be sent into space via the relay satellite. You can submit it to the WeChat account ‘slecbj’ from Dec. 19, 2017, to March 6, 2018.
webmaster@cnsa.gov.cn
Fellows Earn Urban Farming Certification
Fellows Earn Urban Farming Certification
- BY TAMMIE SMITH Richmond Times-Dispatch Dec 17, 2017
Alex Badecker was one of nine people earning certificates in urban agriculture December 12, 2017, as part of the Tricycle Urban Ag Fellowship program.
Urban farming nonprofit Tricycle last week graduated the first class of students to complete its 11-month fellowship program in urban agriculture.
The nine people received certificates in urban agriculture endorsed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service.
A number of the students plan to operate or already operate small farming operations. The training emphasized urban farming practices and management, said Beth Nelson, fellowship program manager.
The students spent 15 to 20 hours a week in training — hands-on in the field and in the classroom where topics included holistic business planning, farm business plan development, financial projections and cash flow, record keeping and decision-making for farm profitability.
“My goal is to sell to restaurants and farmers markets,” said Alex Badecker, who grows asparagus, sweet potatoes and other produce part time on an approximately 6,000-square-foot plot in Henrico County.
The others receiving certificates in urban agriculture were Sonia Allen, Kamala Bhagat, Nicole Broder, Ash Carr, Mark Davis, Kittie Storey, Dana Wright and Mandy Yarnell.
Broder said she wants to start a rooftop farm. Carr is planning a farm that will produce medicinal herbs and seeds.
Storey wants to be a small grower. “Keeping food in our local system is a big part of educating the public about where their food comes from,” Storey said.
Davis said “Tricycle and the fellowship have been one of the most powerful experiences” of his life.
The training was presented in collaboration with the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Bon Secours Richmond Health System. Last week’s ceremony was held at the Bon Secours Center for Healthy Living at 2600 Nine Mile Road.
Nonprofit Tricycle is recruiting for the next class of fellows, which will start in March.
For more information, go to tricycleurbanag.org. Application deadline is Jan. 19, and the fellowship runs from March to December. Scholarships are available, and there are information sessions in December and January for those who want to learn more.
The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation Opens Final Year of GRO1000 Grassroots Grants to Benefit Communities Through Gardens
The GRO1000 program will have funded the creation or enhancement of 1,000 community greenscapes in every state in the U.S. by spring 2018.
The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation Opens Final Year of GRO1000 Grassroots Grants to Benefit Communities Through Gardens
By GlobeNewswire, January 02, 2018
Program to Culminate Having Supported 1,000 Gardens and Greenspaces, Honoring Company's 150th Anniversary
MARYSVILLE, Ohio, Jan. 02, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Today, The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation announced the opening of theGRO1000 Grassroots Grants award program, inviting nonprofit organizations from across the country to apply for funds to improve their communities. The Grassroots Grants program, now in its eighth and final year, provides support to not-for-profit organizations to better their neighborhoods through the development of community gardens and greenspaces.
The GRO1000 program will have funded the creation or enhancement of 1,000 community greenscapes in every state in the U.S. by spring 2018. The program was originally developed to celebrate The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company's 150th anniversary, which is this year.
"It has been a great honor to improve hundreds of neighborhoods and thousands of lives through the development of these community gardens and greenspaces," said Jim King, president and chairman of The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation. "The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation looks forward to continuing its mission to connect people with the life-enhancing benefits of gardens."
From edible gardens to pollinator habitats, urban farms to sensory gardens, GRO1000 supports all types of community-driven greenspace projects and places priority on programs that significantly benefit youth. To date, the GRO1000 program has helped fund more than 12.7 million square feet of revitalized greenspace and 14,400 new garden beds. GRO1000 gardens are donating an estimated 560,000 pounds, or 2.9 million meals, of produce annually, and have helped connect more than 205,000 youth across America to meaningful experiences with nature.
The 2018 GRO1000 Grassroots Grants application is available online now at www.GRO1000.com. The deadline for application submission is February 19, 2018, at 11:59 p.m. EST. Grants range from $500 to $1,500 and are awarded based on youth engagement, community impact, harvest donation, and sustainability, among other factors. Winners will be announced on the first day of spring, March 20, 2018.
In the coming weeks, The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation will announce plans for its milestone 1,000th garden dedication and its continued work to support communities through the development of gardens and greenspaces. More information on the GRO1000 program can be found at www.GRO1000.com.
About The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation
The mission of The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation is to inspire, connect and cultivate a community of purpose. The Foundation is deeply rooted in helping create healthier communities, empower the next generation, and preserve our planet. The Foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization that funds non-profit entities that support its core initiatives in the form of grants, endowments and multi-year capital gifts. For more information, visit www.scottsmiraclegrofoundation.org.
Contact:
Lindsay LaSala
The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation
937-644-7621 (office)
937-516-2732 (mobile)
Lindsay.LaSala@Scotts.com
___________________________________________________________
Kailyn Longoria
Fahlgren Mortine
614-383-1633 (office)
646-919-1234 (mobile)
kailyn.longoria@fahlgren.com
Source: Scotts Miracle-Gro Company (The)
This article appears in: News Headlines
The Great Nutrient Collapse
Geoff Johnson for POLITICO | The Agenda | AGENDA 2020
The Great Nutrient Collapse
The atmosphere is literally changing the food we eat, for the worse. And almost nobody is paying attention.
09/13/2017
Irakli Loladze is a mathematician by training, but he was in a biology lab when he encountered the puzzle that would change his life. It was in 1998, and Loladze was studying for his Ph.D. at Arizona State University. Against a backdrop of glass containers glowing with bright green algae, a biologist told Loladze and a half-dozen other graduate students that scientists had discovered something mysterious about zooplankton.
Zooplankton are microscopic animals that float in the world’s oceans and lakes, and for food they rely on algae, which are essentially tiny plants. Scientists found that they could make algae grow faster by shining more light onto them—increasing the food supply for the zooplankton, which should have flourished. But it didn’t work out that way. When the researchers shined more light on the algae, the algae grew faster, and the tiny animals had lots and lots to eat—but at a certain point they started struggling to survive. This was a paradox. More food should lead to more growth. How could more algae be a problem?
Loladze was technically in the math department, but he loved biology and couldn’t stop thinking about this. The biologists had an idea of what was going on: The increased light was making the algae grow faster, but they ended up containing fewer of the nutrients the zooplankton needed to thrive. By speeding up their growth, the researchers had essentially turned the algae into junk food. The zooplankton had plenty to eat, but their food was less nutritious, and so they were starving.
Loladze used his math training to help measure and explain the algae-zooplankton dynamic. He and his colleagues devised a model that captured the relationship between a food source and a grazer that depends on the food. They published that first paper in 2000. But Loladze was also captivated by a much larger question raised by the experiment: Just how far this problem might extend.
“What struck me is that its application is wider,” Loladze recalled in an interview. Could the same problem affect grass and cows? What about rice and people? “It was kind of a watershed moment for me when I started thinking about human nutrition,” he said.
In the outside world, the problem isn’t that plants are suddenly getting more light: It’s that for years, they’ve been getting more carbon dioxide. Plants rely on both light and carbon dioxide to grow. If shining more light results in faster-growing, less nutritious algae—junk-food algae whose ratio of sugar to nutrients was out of whack—then it seemed logical to assume that ramping up carbon dioxide might do the same. And it could also be playing out in plants all over the planet. What might that mean for the plants that people eat?
What Loladze found is that scientists simply didn’t know. It was already well documented that CO2 levels were rising in the atmosphere, but he was astonished at how little research had been done on how it affected the quality of the plants we eat. For the next 17 years, as he pursued his math career, Loladze scoured the scientific literature for any studies and data he could find. The results, as he collected them, all seemed to point in the same direction: The junk-food effect he had learned about in that Arizona lab also appeared to be occurring in fields and forests around the world. “Every leaf and every grass blade on earth makes more and more sugars as CO2 levels keep rising,” Loladze said. “We are witnessing the greatest injection of carbohydrates into the biosphere in human history―[an] injection that dilutes other nutrients in our food supply.”
He published those findings just a few years ago, adding to the concerns of a small but increasingly worried group of researchers who are raising unsettling questions about the future of our food supply. Could carbon dioxide have an effect on human health we haven’t accounted for yet? The answer appears to be yes—and along the way, it has steered Loladze and other scientists, directly into some of the thorniest questions in their profession, including just how hard it is to do research in a field that doesn’t quite exist yet.
IN AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, it’s been understood for some time that many of our most important foods have been getting less nutritious. Measurements of fruits and vegetables show that their minerals, vitamin and protein content has measurably dropped over the past 50 to 70 years. Researchers have generally assumed the reason is fairly straightforward: We’ve been breeding and choosing crops for higher yields, rather than nutrition, and higher-yielding crops—whether broccoli, tomatoes, or wheat—tend to be less nutrient-packed.
In 2004, a landmark study of fruits and vegetables found that everything from protein to calcium, iron and vitamin C had declined significantly across most garden crops since 1950. The researchers concluded this could mostly be explained by the varieties we were choosing to grow.
Loladze and a handful of other scientists have come to suspect that’s not the whole story and that the atmosphere itself may be changing the food we eat. Plants need carbon dioxide to live like humans need oxygen. And in the increasingly polarized debate about climate science, one thing that isn’t up for debate is that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is rising. Before the industrial revolution, the earth’s atmosphere had about 280 parts per million of carbon dioxide. Last year, the planet crossed over the 400 parts per million threshold; scientists predict we will likely reach 550 parts per million within the next half-century—essentially twice the amount that was in the air when Americans started farming with tractors.
If you’re someone who thinks about plant growth, this seems like a good thing. It has also been useful ammunition for politicians looking for reasons to worry less about the implications of climate change. Rep. Lamar Smith, a Republican who chairs the House Committee on Science, recently argued that people shouldn’t be so worried about rising CO2 levels because it’s good for plants, and what’s good for plants is good for us.
“A higher concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would aid photosynthesis, which in turn contributes to increased plant growth,” the Texas Republican wrote. “This correlates to a greater volume of food production and better quality food.”
But as the zooplankton experiment showed, greater volume and better quality might not go hand-in-hand. In fact, they might be inversely linked. As best scientists can tell, this is what happens: Rising CO2 revs up photosynthesis, the process that helps plants transform sunlight to food. This makes plants grow, but it also leads them to pack in more carbohydrates like glucose at the expense of other nutrients that we depend on, like protein, iron and zinc.
In 2002, while a postdoctoral fellow at Princeton University, Loladze published a seminal research paper in Trends in Ecology and Evolution, a leading journal,arguing that rising CO2 and human nutrition were inextricably linked through a global shift in the quality of plants. In the paper, Loladze complained about the dearth of data: Among thousands of publications he had reviewed on plants and rising CO2, he found only one that looked specifically at how it affected the balance of nutrients in rice, a crop that billions of people rely on. (The paper, published in 1997, found a drop in zinc and iron.)
Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is reducing the protein in staple crops like rice, wheat, barley and potatoes, raising unknown risks to human health in the future. | Getty Images
Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is reducing the protein in staple crops like rice, wheat, barley, and potatoes, raising unknown risks to human health in the future. | Getty Images
Loladze’s paper was first to tie the impact of CO2 on plant quality to human nutrition. But he also raised more questions than he answered, arguing that there were fundamental holes in the research. If these nutritional shifts were happening up and down the food chain, the phenomenon needed to be measured and understood.
Part of the problem, Loladze was finding, lay in the research world itself. Answering the question required an understanding of plant physiology, agriculture and nutrition―as well as a healthy dollop of math. He could do the math, but he was a young academic trying to establish himself, and math departments weren't especially interested in solving problems in farming and human health. Loladze struggled to get funding to generate new data and continued to obsessively collect published data from researchers across the globe. He headed to the heartland to take an assistant professor position at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. It was a major agricultural school, which seemed like a good sign, but Loladze was still a math professor. He was told he could pursue his research interests as long as he brought in funding, but he struggled. Biology grant makers said his proposals were too math-heavy; math grant makers said his proposals contained too much biology.
“It was year after year, rejection after rejection,” he said. “It was so frustrating. I don’t think people grasp the scale of this.”
It’s not just in the fields of math and biology that this issue has fallen through the cracks. To say that it’s little known that key crops are getting less nutritious due to rising CO2 is an understatement. It is simply not discussed in the agriculture, public health or nutrition communities. At all.
When POLITICO contacted top nutrition experts about the growing body of research on the topic, they were almost universally perplexed and asked to see the research. One leading nutrition scientist at Johns Hopkins University said it was interesting, but admitted he didn’t know anything about it. He referred me to another expert. She said they didn’t know about the subject, either. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, an association representing an army of nutrition experts across the country, connected me with Robin Foroutan, an integrative medicine nutritionist who was also not familiar with the research.
“It’s really interesting, and you’re right, it’s not on many people’s radar,” wrote Foroutan, in an email, after being sent some papers on the topic. Foroutan said she would like to see a whole lot more data, particularly on how a subtle shift toward more carbohydrates in plants could affect public health.
"We don't know what a minor shift in the carbohydrate ratio in the diet is ultimately going to do,” she said, noting that the overall trend toward more starch and carbohydrate consumption has been associated with an increase in diet-related disease like obesity and diabetes. "To what degree would a shift in the food system contribute to that? We can't really say.”
Asked to comment for this story, Marion Nestle, a nutrition policy professor at New York University who’s one of the best-known nutrition experts in the country, initially expressed skepticism about the whole concept but offered to dig into a file she keeps on climate issues.
After reviewing the evidence, she changed her tune. “I’m convinced,” she said, in an email, while also urging caution: It wasn’t clear whether CO2-driven nutrient depletion would have a meaningful impact on public health. We need to know a whole lot more, she said.
Kristie Ebi, a researcher at the University of Washington who’s studied the intersection of climate change and global health for two decades, is one of a handful of scientists in the U.S. who is keyed into the potentially sweeping consequences of the CO2-nutrition dynamic, and brings it up in every talk she gives.
"It's a hidden issue,” Ebi said. “The fact that my bread doesn't have the micronutrients it did 20 years ago―how would you know?"
As Ebi sees it, the CO2-nutrition link has been slow to break through, much as it took the academic community a long time to start seriously looking at the intersection of climate and human health in general. “This is before the change,” she said. “This is what it looks like before the change."
Soybeans growing in a field outside Lincoln, Nebraska, one of many crops whose nutrient content is shifting as a result of rising carbon dioxide levels. | Geoff Johnson for POLITICO
LOLADZE'S EARLY PAPER raised some big questions that are difficult, but not impossible, to answer. How does rising atmospheric CO2 change how plants grow? How much of the long-term nutrient drop is caused by the atmosphere, and how much by other factors, like breeding?
It’s also difficult, but not impossible, to run farm-scale experiments on how CO2affects plants. Researchers use a technique that essentially turns an entire field into a lab. The current gold standard for this type of research is called a FACE experiment (for “free-air carbon dioxide enrichment”), in which researchers create large open-air structures that blow CO2 onto the plants in a given area. Small sensors keep track of the CO2 levels. When too much CO2 escapes the perimeter, the contraption puffs more into the air to keep the levels stable. Scientists can then compare those plants directly to others growing in normal air nearby.
These experiments and others like them have shown scientists that plants change in important ways when they’re grown at elevated CO2 levels. Within the category of plants known as “C3”―which includes approximately 95 percent of plant species on earth, including ones we eat like wheat, rice, barley and potatoes―elevated CO2has been shown to drive down important minerals like calcium, potassium, zinc and iron. The data we have, which look at how plants would respond to the kind of CO2 concentrations we may see in our lifetimes, show these important minerals drop by 8 percent, on average. The same conditions have been shown to drive down the protein content of C3 crops, in some cases significantly, with wheat and rice dropping 6 percent and 8 percent, respectively.
Earlier this summer, a group of researchers published the first studies attempting to estimate what these shifts could mean for the global population. Plants are a crucial source of protein for people in the developing world, and by 2050, theyestimate, 150 million people could be put at risk of protein deficiency, particularly in countries like India and Bangladesh. Researchers found a loss of zinc, which is particularly essential for maternal and infant health, could put 138 million people at risk. They also estimated that more than 1 billion mothers and 354 million children live in countries where dietary iron is projected to drop significantly, which could exacerbate the already widespread public health problem of anemia.
There aren’t any projections for the United States, where we for the most part enjoy a diverse diet with no shortage of protein, but some researchers look at the growing proportion of sugars in plants and hypothesize that a systemic shift in plants could further contribute to our already alarming rates of obesity and cardiovascular disease.
Another new and important strain of research on CO2 and plant nutrition is now coming out of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist at the Agricultural Research Service headquarters in Beltsville, Maryland, is drilling down on some of the questions that Loladze first raised 15 years ago with a number of new studies that focus on nutrition.
Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, examines rice growing in his laboratory in Beltsville, Md. Ziska and his colleagues are conducting experiments to find out how rising carbon dioxide levels affect the nutrient profile of plants. Plant physiologist Julie Wolf harvests peppers to study changes in vitamin C, lower right. | M. Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO
Ziska devised an experiment that eliminated the complicating factor of plant breeding: He decided to look at bee food.
Goldenrod, a wildflower many consider a weed, is extremely important to bees. It flowers late in the season, and its pollen provides an important source of protein for bees as they head into the harshness of winter. Since goldenrod is wild and humans haven’t bred it into new strains, it hasn’t changed over time as much as, say, corn or wheat. And the Smithsonian Institution also happens to have hundreds of samples of goldenrod, dating back to 1842, in its massive historical archive—which gave Ziska and his colleagues a chance to figure out how one plant has changed over time.
They found that the protein content of goldenrod pollen has declined by a third since the industrial revolution—and the change closely tracks with the rise in CO2. Scientists have been trying to figure out why bee populations around the world have been in decline, which threatens many crops that rely on bees for pollination. Ziska’s paper suggested that a decline in protein prior to winter could be an additional factor making it hard for bees to survive other stressors.
Ziska worries we’re not studying all the ways CO2 affects the plants we depend on with enough urgency, especially considering the fact that retooling crops takes a long time.
“We’re falling behind in our ability to intercede and begin to use the traditional agricultural tools, like breeding, to compensate,” he said. “Right now it can take 15 to 20 years before we get from the laboratory to the field.”
AS LOLADZE AND others have found, tackling globe-spanning new questions that cross the boundaries of scientific fields can be difficult. There are plenty of plant physiologists researching crops, but most are dedicated to studying factors like yield and pest resistance—qualities that have nothing to do with nutrition. Math departments, as Loladze discovered, don’t exactly prioritize food research. And studying living things can be costly and slow: It takes several years and huge sums of money to get a FACE experiment to generate enough data to draw any conclusions.
Despite these challenges, researchers are increasingly studying these questions, which means we may have more answers in the coming years. Ziska and Loladze, who now teaches math at Bryan College of Health Sciences in Lincoln, Nebraska, are collaborating with a coalition of researchers in China, Japan, Australia and elsewhere in the U.S. on a large study looking at rising CO2 and the nutritional profile of rice, one of humankind’s most important crops. Their study also includes vitamins, an important nutritional component, that to date has almost not been studied at all.
USDA researchers also recently dug up varieties of rice, wheat and soy that USDA had saved from the 1950s and 1960s and planted them in plots around the U.S. where previous researchers had grown the same cultivars decades ago, with the aim of better understanding how today’s higher levels of CO2 affect them.
Mathematician Irakli Loladze tosses sugar over vegetables outside his home in Lincoln Nebraska, to illustrate how the sugar content of the plants we eat is increasing as a result of rising carbon dioxide levels. Loladze was the first scientist to publish research connecting rising CO2 and changes in plant quality to human nutrition. | Geoff Johnson for POLITICO
In a USDA research field in Maryland, researchers are running experiments on bell peppers to measure how vitamin C changes under elevated CO2. They’re also looking at coffee to see whether caffeine declines. “There are lots of questions,” Ziska said as he showed me around his research campus in Beltsville. “We’re just putting our toe in the water.”
Ziska is part of a small band of researchers now trying to measure these changes and figure out what it means for humans. Another key figure studying this nexus is Samuel Myers, a doctor turned climate researcher at Harvard University who leads the Planetary Health Alliance, a new global effort to connect the dots between climate science and human health.
Myers is also concerned that the research community is not more focused on understanding the CO2-nutrition dynamic, since it’s a crucial piece of a much larger picture of how such changes might ripple through ecosystems. "This is the tip of the iceberg," said Myers. "It's been hard for us to get people to understand how many questions they should have."
In 2014, Myers and a team of other scientists published a large, data-rich study in the journal Nature that looked at key crops grown at several sites in Japan, Australia and the United States that also found rising CO2 led to a drop in protein, iron and zinc. It was the first time the issue had attracted any real media attention.
“The public health implications of global climate change are difficult to predict, and we expect many surprises,” the researchers wrote. “The finding that raising atmospheric CO2 lowers the nutritional value of C3 crops is one such surprise that we can now better predict and prepare for.”
The same year―in fact, on the same day―Loladze, then teaching math at the The Catholic University of Daegu in South Korea, published his own paper, the result of more than 15 years of gathering data on the same subject. It was the largest study in the world on rising CO2 and its impact on plant nutrients. Loladze likes to describe plant science as “noisy”―research-speak for cluttered with complicating data, through which it can be difficult to detect the signal you’re looking for. His new data set was finally big enough to see the signal through the noise, to detect the “hidden shift,” as he put it.
PHOTOS: How to measure a plant
What he found is that his 2002 theory—or, rather, the strong suspicion he had articulated back then—appeared to be borne out. Across nearly 130 varieties of plants and more than 15,000 samples collected from experiments over the past three decades, the overall concentration of minerals like calcium, magnesium, potassium, zinc, and iron had dropped by 8 percent on average. The ratio of carbohydrates to minerals was going up. The plants, like the algae, were becoming junk food.
What that means for humans―whose main food intake is plants―is only just starting to be investigated. Researchers who dive into it will have to surmount obstacles like its low profile and slow pace and a political environment where the word “climate” is enough to derail a funding conversation. It will also require entirely new bridges to be built in the world of science―a problem that Loladze himself wryly acknowledges in his own research. When his paper was finally published in 2014, Loladze listed his grant rejections in the acknowledgements.
Author:
Helena Bottemiller Evich is a senior food and agriculture reporter for POLITICO Pro.
Urban AG Certificate And Fellowship Program
Urban AG Certificate And Fellowship Program
If you think in terms of a year, plant a seed; if in terms of ten years, plant trees; if in terms of 100 years, teach the people.
Through our Urban Ag Certificate and Fellowship program, we are certainly planting seeds and we are planting trees, but most importantly we are teaching people. And, if you like to eat you should be glad we are. The average age of farmers is 58 years old, less than 5% of our country’s farmers are of color and women are underrepresented in the field, yet simultaneously agriculture is the largest industry in our state and the demand for locally grown food is so great that it is not currently being met.
As we look to our local community, we must consider the needs of the Richmond region and how our local food system impacts all of us. It can’t be ignored that collective research tells us that the children born in our city are not born into a place of equity – a child born in the East End is predicted to live 20 years less than a child born just a few miles away in the west end of our city. Why is this? It’s not because of the care they receive within the walls of our hospitals – that care is excellent in both locations. Instead, it is opportunities to play safely outside, to have basic access to real food, to have opportunities for a good education and great jobs that provide self- sufficiency and independence that generates true health.
We recognize incredible opportunities to bridge these disparities while cultivating a new generation of urban farmers. Tricycle’s Urban Agriculture Fellowship and Certificate program is the first program of it’s kind designed in partnership with the USDA- Natural Resources Conservation Service. Urban Ag fellows dig in with Tricycle staff, subject matter experts from USDA, VA Tech, Rodale Institute, Roots of Success, Small Business Association and others for an 11-month term that provides formal instruction and hands-on experiences grounded in the business of sustainable urban agriculture.
Americans Love Spices. So Why Don't We Grow Them?
"We don't really grow spices in the United States," says Lev Sercarz. "Not because we can't, but because big agriculture is more focused on things like corn and soybeans. So we import from other countries and we pay a price for that."
Americans Love Spices. So Why Don't We Grow Them?
December 26, 2017 | KRISTEN HARTKE
The United States leads the world in spice consumption, but also in spice imports.
Nikada/Getty Images/iStockphoto
Nutmeg, cinnamon, and cloves are probably ramping up in importance in your spice cabinet right about now — the classic flavors of the winter season. But while you might be shopping for local ingredients for your favorite recipes for eggnog or maple-glazed ham, the odds are that the spices you're using were imported from the other side of the world.
THE SALT
From Ancient Sumeria To Chipotle Tacos, Cumin Has Spiced Up The World
Lior Lev Sercarz thinks spices should be local, too.
As the owner of La Boite, a spice store in Manhattan that creates blends for chefs and home cooks, Lev Sercarz travels far and wide in search of the best spices. "Spices tell the story of the world," he says. "There's a reason why good spices are good — they are the flavors of the regions that they come from and they also support that economy."
Nowhere is the demand for spices more evident than in the United States, which leads the world in both consumption and imports. A U.S. Department of Agriculture reportshowed that Americans have dramatically embraced spices over the past 50 years: Per capita spice consumption in 1966 was 1.2 pounds annually, while that figure more than tripled by 2015 to 3.7 pounds.
THE SALT
How Snobbery Helped Take The Spice Out Of European Cooking
Clearly, Americans think spice is nice, but how robust are our taste buds? Vanilla beans, pepper — black, white and chili — sesame seed, cinnamon, mustard and oregano are the most common spice imports in the U.S., and there has been an uptick in cumin, paprika and turmeric in recent years. Lev Sercarz sees a public that is gaining appreciation for an expanded menu of global foods, from Indian to Korean to Ethiopian, but it comes at a cost.
"We don't really grow spices in the United States," says Lev Sercarz. "Not because we can't, but because big agriculture is more focused on things like corn and soybeans. So we import from other countries and we pay a price for that."
One example is sesame seeds: Despite the fact that we do actually grow some sesame seeds in the U.S., they are primarily grown for export, so we remain one of the world's top importers of sesame seeds. Think about that the next time you breakfast on a sesame seed bagel.
Cheryl Deem, executive director of the American Spice Trade Association, has some doubts about the possibility of growing more kinds of spices in the U.S. "Most spices are grown outside of the U.S. because they require tropical or subtropical climates in which to grow, which for the most part cannot be found in the U.S. It's really a practical matter."
She points out that dried chili peppers are grown in the Southwest and dehydrated onion and garlic are grown in California and Oregon, although recent California droughts have affected garlic production, giving Chinese garlic growers an edge.
Lev Sercarz disagrees somewhat, noting that coriander, mustard, ginger, galangal and paprika are all crops that should be able to grow and thrive in the U.S.
THE SALT
No Innocent Spice: The Secret Story Of Nutmeg, Life And Death
And a group of researchers in Vermont certainly thinks that there's at least one spice crop that American farmers might want to consider growing: saffron.
Margaret Skinner, an entomologist and research professor at the North American Center for Saffron Research and Development at the University of Vermont, believes that crop diversification is essential to the survival of small family farms. So she and her colleagues have been active in developing ways for farmers to grow saffron.
"This is a very high-value crop that is harvested in the late fall, when much of the field work is done for many farmers, especially those growing vegetables," Skinner says. "Spice production is a natural extension from traditional vegetable production and is likely the most logical way it will be increased."
After attending a University of Vermont Extension meeting last winter, Patti Padua, who owns Cobble Creek Nursery in Monkton, Vt., with her husband, John, was enthusiastic about giving saffron growing a try.
"We purchased 2,500 corms [bulbs] from Holland and planted them in beds in late August of this year. Our first harvest was this October," she says.
That harvest was a bit of a disappointment, with a yield of about 150 stigma (the part of a plant where pollen germinates), but Padua is undaunted. "There was a learning curve on drying, and I think we finally got it right by using a food dehydrator, where we can dry at a low temperature. Harvesting went well and the processing is a pleasant and doable task."
She thinks the income potential is worth the trial and error, especially because there isn't a big investment up front and the dried saffron is easy to store.
While Padua says that she has quite a few retired women friends who are interested in helping to process the next saffron crop, which could be in the range of 2,500 flowers whose stigmas have to be hand-plucked, ASTA's Deem stresses that labor costs are probably a major factor in why spice farming has never taken off in the U.S.
"It is assumed that Vermont-grown saffron would be more expensive, perhaps significantly so, because of labor costs. The issue for the industry then is whether the quality and desire for U.S.-grown saffron would be significant enough to justify the higher cost."
Lev Sercarz, however, thinks there's a market, pointing to the Espelette region of southwestern France as a model for how a spice can have an important economic impact on a community.
"The Espelette pepper is not native to France," says Lev Sercarz, "but when farmers started to grow it there, it took on the properties of the area, producing a pepper that is beautiful, fruity, citrusy, with nice heat. They use it to cure hams in the Basque region and it became very famous."
With no local oversight, the crop began to suffer from insects and pesticides. So farmers got together to determine best growing practices and successfully lobbied in 2000 for AOC (appellation d'origine contrôlée) status, which clearly defines where and how certain foods can be grown.
"The farmers understood that there could be a potential problem in the future if they didn't develop standards for growing the Espelette," Lev Sercarz says. "And now that one pepper is responsible for 30 percent of the economy in that region."
That 30 percent statistic is what he hopes might draw the interest of American farmers.
"There's good money in spice farming," he says. "Why should the dried basil I buy at the grocery store be grown in Israel? There's no reason we can't produce that here."
Kristen Hartke is a food writer based in Washington, D.C.
AR Systems Develops New Automation and Control Systems for Indoor Agriculture Industry
AR Systems Develops New Automation and Control Systems for Indoor Agriculture Industry
System provides comprehensive control for automated farms, one of the fastest growing segments in AgTech
NEWS PROVIDED BY AR Systems
LOS ANGELES, Dec. 21, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- AR Systems (www.automatedretailingsystems.com), a technology provider of systems that power automated retailing systems, self-service kiosks, and automated farming, unveiled their newest comprehensive control integration for the indoor agriculture market.
AR Systems also announced that it is the exclusive provider of automated control technologies to Grow Pod Solutions, a leading California-based developer of indoor container-based farms. AR Systems provides the farming control software, its proprietary Bipolar Ionization system, fertigation scheduling, and full-time surveillance. The system is fully automated and allows operators to monitor the cultivation process from anywhere in the world.
Shannon Illingworth, Chief Innovation Officer at AR Systems, said that the company has the most innovative and reliable automated farming control technologies in the world.
"Automated farming in portable shipping containers provides a practical solution to so many challenges," he said. "Our proprietary controls allow for the cultivation of a wide variety of plants, fruits, and vegetables, virtually anywhere in the world."
AR Systems also provides data and insight into the cultivation process. Data does two things for a farm: it helps growers increase yields and drives down operational costs. But even more importantly, data helps farmers drive up top-line revenue. According to Agrilyst, data can help farms increase revenue by more than 20%. How? Insights drive better optimization, varietal selection, growth speed, irrigation adjustments, and more.
According to global market insights, indoor farming is a $14.8 billion per year industry, and that doesn't count another$6.7 billion from the cannabis industry.
"This market is growing rapidly because it allows anyone to grow for profit or for humanitarian efforts. AR Systems is proud to be a technology leader and provide the systems that form the backbone of this impressive industry."
About AR Systems
AR Systems is a developer of premium automation technologies that power retailing solutions, self-service kiosks, and indoor farming.
Connect with AR Systems:
Call AR Systems at (951) 465-7700
Email the company at info@automatedretailsystems.com
Visit the website at www.automatedretailingsystems.com
Facebook: www.facebook.com/automatedretailsystems
SOURCE AR Systems
Related Links: http://www.automatedretailingsystems.com
France Takes Top Spot in 2017 Food Sustainability Index
France ranks number one in the 2017 Food Sustainability Index (FSI), which grades 34 countries according to their food system sustainability.
France Takes Top Spot in 2017 Food Sustainability Index
France ranks number one in the 2017 Food Sustainability Index (FSI), which grades 34 countries according to their food system sustainability. Developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit and the Barilla Center for Food & Nutrition Foundation (BCFN), the FSI evaluates food sustainability issues across three pillars—food loss and waste, sustainable agriculture, and nutritional challenges.
Other top-scoring countries include Japan, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Portugal, Italy, South Korea, and Hungary. These countries typically demonstrate strong and effectively implemented government policy that address the three main pillars. Scores on lifestyle, such as physical activity and diet composition, as well as social and climate-related indicators, such as the participation rate of women in farming and monthly freshwater scarcity, are also important factors in the overall ranking.
The top performer in the food loss and waste pillar is France, followed by Germany, Spain, and Italy. In 2016, the French government passed legislation that prohibits supermarkets from throwing away food approaching its sell-by-date, requiring them to donate it to charities or food banks. Other measures have reduced food wastage in schools and prompted companies to report on food waste data.
The top performer in the sustainable agriculture pillar is Italy, followed closely by South Korea, France, and Colombia. Italy has pioneered new techniques to reduce water loss in agriculture and has implemented sustainable agricultural techniques for climate change mitigation and adaptation nationwide.
Japan scores the highest in the nutritional challenges pillar, ranking first in the life expectancy at birth—84 years—and the healthy life expectancy indicators. South Korea, Hungary, France, and Portugal also scored highly.
According to the index, high-income countries tend to have a higher level of food sustainability, however, there are several outliers. The wealthiest nation in the index, the United Arab Emirates, ranks last, while the United States ranks twenty-first. Ethiopia, the poorest country FSI researchers evaluated, ranks twelfth. Other factors such as high levels of human development, smaller populations, and slower rates of urbanization also correlate with higher food sustainability.
An interactive online database providing country ranking and profiles, case studies, and infographics is available on the FSI website.
Will Bitcoin Work in Agriculture?
Will Bitcoin Work in Agriculture?
December 5, 2017
By: Nathan Faleide
If you checked the Internet lately, you’ve probably seen the words, Bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and blockchain. I won’t describe them in great detail here, but Google is your friend.
Currently, Bitcoin is the talk of the town gaining 1,000% in value in the last year and now is worth north of $10,000 a coin from $1,000 earlier in the year. Some say it’ll go to a million by 2020. There are also other cryptos like Ethereum, Litecoin, and bitcoin Cash that have gained in value and interest. Some are naturally worth more than others and have unique attributes to them. Behind it all is this thing called blockchain. Basically, it’s a recording system ledger that tracks every single transaction and where it came from going back from the beginning. Many industries are trying to find ways to incorporate blockchain and cryptos and I think agriculture is next.
Now there are some oddities when it comes to cryptocurrency. With Bitcoin, for example, it’s really not that great of a currency currently. There is a limit of 21 million coins and you actually have to mine them via solving complex mathematical problems that can only be solved by supercomputers, which takes a lot of energy. It is kind of a crazy process. Because of these limits in the amount of coins, this brings wild swings in the value, and thus most people are using it as an investment instead of using it for buying things. Also, there is a fear of missing out, “FOMO” for short, because of the increased value.
Many governments, banks, and investment groups still don’t trust cryptos due to zero regulation and control. They are havens for “bad money,” especially for laundering and everything that goes with that. The wild swings in value also scare off established groups. In addition, the amount of money involved and the changes in the way money is being handled is scaring these groups because people have a new way to manage money. The scariest thing of all for governments and banking groups is that cryptos will allow an open and trackable way to manage, invest, and control money without them.
With all this being said, cryptos and blockchain technology are becoming very popular and it seems are not going away. I’m no expert in this topic, but I see YUGE (to quote our president) possibilities for both of these new technologies in agriculture.
Below are a few ways I see cryptos and blockchain becoming advantageous for ag:
- Tracking data ownership: As it is well known, data ownership and control in ag are huge issues. With blockchain technology, each transaction can be tracked very precisely in a standard way that cannot be changed. It can provide the true source, identity, and ownership regardless of where it comes from. For instance, whoever created the data can create their own special code that only they know and can basically lock that data or parts of that data to anyone they want, while also giving access to others that they feel want it. This is all tracked and whoever does use the data can be looked up easily.
- Crypto Commodities: The beauty of cryptocurrencies is that anyone can actually create them. Many companies are creating their own currencies to have others invest in. Those groups of cryptocurrencies then can only be traded for that one company creating a certain value. I can see this being used with crops, whether specialty or larger markets like corn, beans, and wheat. Think of it this way, a small or large farm could create their own cryptocurrency to invest in the farm or to buy certain crops they grow because they do it differently. Each farm is unique in its own way and cryptos could provide a way to bring that unique value to the farm without having commodity traders and outside influences change the value. The value then comes from how that farm produces that crop. Oh, I did I mention it is all tracked from start to finish with blockchain? The industry could start small, crypto wheat, corn, soybeans, etc… and this could be done by region or state then slowly get into more defined areas. The possibilities are endless, and at the end of the day, it puts control in the hands of the producer. A dream for every farmer.
- Easier trading: From what I’ve already brought up, trade is a big issue especially with talks of NAFTA imploding. Cryptos and blockchain could disrupt this entire process. The transfer of money tied to trade is a huge issue in the world. This is sometimes why there is so much waste of food and why the efficiencies of transporting goods sometimes fail. Having a centralized currency that is unique to a crop could benefit millions by providing fair and even trade throughout the world. This would allow smaller farmers to provide similar value to their crops as large corporate farms. Someone could even place the smaller farmer’s crops at a greater value and track where that commodity is exchanged anywhere without complex tariffs, trade regulations, and money transfers. What it really can do is reduce the bureaucracy involved with trading any commodity. Of course, many groups and countries would still need to accept this, but I do think agriculture is destined to go this way eventually.
So, these are a few major reasons why cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology can help agriculture and I’m sure there are many more. In all reality, these things may never happen and maybe my wild ideas are just crap. I’m not hear to say they will absolutely work. But I will say some of the core issues with ag could potentially be solved, or if anything helped, by technologies like cryptocurrencies and blockchain. I recommend looking into it more to educate yourself on the potential.
I’ll try to really excite you for a moment here. With Bitcoin and Ethereum gaining 1,000% and more over the last few years, envision using precision ag technology on the farm, which can be tracked and allow you to value your corn crop at, say $8/bu. Some may want your corn more than Joe Blow neighbor, who doesn’t use precision ag and thus only gets $3/bu. Since you can prove what you did in a marketplace, anyone can basically invest in you while you create your own value.
Heck, I’m going to “coin” a few phrases here: CornCoin, Wheatereum, SoyCash. Imagine farmers pushing the value based on how they perceive the market instead of speculators or traders in Chicago that don’t know squat. Oh, how the ag market could change. You could start “farming” CornCoins like they “mine” Bitcoin. Doesn’t that sound like fun? I hope that people smarter than me figure this out somehow because personally I only see positives going forward as long as bread doesn’t cost $10 a loaf.
Either way, check these technologies and currencies out and think about how you could see them work in ag. Maybe it’s the next big thing or next big flop. Only one way to tell. Bring on the vultures to fund it, I guess. I’ll take 100 million, please.
Electrical Conductivity: The Pulse of the Soil
Electrical Conductivity: The Pulse of the Soil
November 30, 2017 in Crops, Disease, Eco-Farming, Soil Fertility, Soil Life, Soils
Traditionally soil consultants have used electrical conductivity to measure salinity, however conductivity can tell us much more about the physical structure and health of the soil. Based on these direct measurements, electrical conductivity can also indirectly measure crop productivity.
When we walk into our home on a dark night, the first thing we usually do is turn on the lights. With the flip of a switch, we complete the electrical circuit initiating the flow of electricity to the light bulb, illuminating our home.
In the human body, electricity controls the flow of blood from the heart to all organs. In the same way we flip a switch turning on the lights, electrical signaling in the body tells the heart when and how often to contract and relax. These electrical signals can be altered by the intake of nutrients. Case in point, the intake of high-salt foods can lead to a higher pulse rate. With a higher pulse rate, your heart and other organs must work harder in order to function properly. Certainly this extra work puts added stress on the body. In contrast, consuming a balanced form of energy can reduce the stress put upon the body.
Waking up in the morning and only consuming caffeine does not give you the same energy as waking up and eating a balanced breakfast. While both inputs may increase your readiness in the morning, physiologically they affect the human body in different ways. Inputs into any biological system whether human, animal, plant or soil consequently will affect the system in different ways.
In 1946, Albert Einstein theorized that all matter is energy. His theory, which gave us the formula E=mc2, laid the foundation for future generations to begin using energy theories in daily problem-solving. If all matter is equal, simply a form of energy, then conceptually the human system is no different than the soil/plant system. Furthermore, the same concepts which we apply to our own physical health can be applied to soil and plant health.
Quantifying the human body’s energy level is done by monitoring pulse rate. In the soil, the current energy level in the field or in the lab can be achieved by measuring the electrical conductivity of the soil. Electrical conductivity is a direct measure of the energy flow in the soil system. Energy, measured in ergs (energy released per gram per second), is a function of the soil’s ion concentration, clay type, moisture content, porosity, salinity and temperature.
As consultants and growers we are focused on crop productivity. We often aim to maintain the nutrient or ion concentration in the soil solution best suited for the highest crop production.
This ion concentration is expressed by the quantity of ions surrounding the diffuse layer of the soil colloid and also by the soil’s moisture content. Electrical conductivity is a direct measurement of these factors and can be used in the field to tell us how much energy is available for plant growth.
It is important to note that natural fluctuations in electrical conductivity can occur. In the soil, the conductor of electrical current is water. As soil moisture changes due to dry periods and/or rainfall events, electrical conductivity can vary. Abiotic factors are variables in the accurate representation of the ion concentration in the soil solution.
However, overall, if the electrical conductivity (concentration of ions in the soil solution) is either too high or too low it will be reflected in decreased crop productivity. From our experience, the majority of problems facing growers and consultants can be related to abnormal electrical conductivities.
Crop productivity is governed by three disciplines of science: physics, chemistry and biology. Explaining electrical conductivity on a chemical or biological level requires a much more lengthy and detailed explanation. By focusing on the physics of electrical conductivity, referring to it as energy, simplicity can be brought to such a complex topic.
Einstein taught us that an object’s mass is a function of energy. If you apply this concept to crop production, crops (mass) are simply an expression of energy. In order to produce mass (yield), energy is needed. For a plant to perform photosynthesis and produce mass; an initial energy requirement must be met. This energy requirement comes largely from the electrical current in the soil. Thus, soil electrical conductivity can be utilized as a direct measurement of energy and an indirect measurement of crop productivity.
Crop Productivity
Crop productivity can be simplified into two stages: growth and decomposition. We can discern that the growth stage of the plant life cycle has different energy requirements than the decomposition stage. The energy needed to produce mass in the form of plant growth varies between 200 and 800 ergs. When the energy in the soil falls below or above these values for a prolonged period of time, the plant can no longer produce mass (growth) and decomposition will set in. With the onset of decomposition in the plant tissue, disease and decay will follow. During the growth life cycle of the plant, energy must be present to produce mass (growth).
In order to produce mass in the form of a nutrient-dense, healthy plant, the energy coming from the electrical conductivity of the soil must come from “good” sources. Electrical conductivity coming from biological activity, flocculation, soil moisture and clean balanced nutrients (ions) can be considered “good” sources of energy. Electrical conductivity coming from salinity in the soil solution can be defined as a “bad” source of energy. “Bad” sources of energy will produce nutrient-poor, unhealthy, low-energy and quickly decomposable mass.
Nutrient-dense, healthy, high-energy plant mass is what we as consultants and growers should be trying to achieve. Yes, by using these “bad” sources of energy you can produce high quantities of mass (high yields). We see this year in, year out with the use of synthetic fertilizers.
However, if your goal is to produce high-quality, nutrient-dense, healthy plant mass, your energy source must come from “good” sources. Low salt fertilizers, organic matter, biological amendments, cover cropping and proper soil stewardship can provide your soil with “good” sources of energy. All of which indirectly restores your soils’ fertility and sustainability for future generations.
If all matter is energy and all energy is matter, we as consultants and growers must begin to think in terms of energy.
In order for seeds to germinate, an energy requirement must be met. In order for plants to grow, an energy requirement must be met. In order for plants to reproduce, an energy requirement must be met. In order for plants to dry out and be harvested, an energy requirement must be met. In order for your soil to repair itself over winter, an energy requirement must be met. And in order for you to have read this article, an energy requirement was met.
By Glen Rabenberg & Christopher Kniffen. This article appeared in the April 2014 issue ofAcres U.S.A.
Glen Rabenberg is the CEO and owner of Soil Works LLC. Soil Works LLC is home to Genesis Soil Rite Calcium, PhosRite, TestRite Labs and GrowRite Greenhouse. Glen Rabenberg extensively travels the world solving soil problems with a little bit of simplicity and the “rite” tools.
Christopher Kniffen is writer, public speaker and manager of the research and development department of Soil Works LLC. For more information Rabenberg and Kniffen can be reached at Soil Works LLC. 4200 W. 8th St., Yankton, SD 57078, 605-260-0784.
Resources:
Eigenberg, R.A., J.W. Doran, J.A. Nienaber, R.B. Ferguson, and B.L. Woodbury. “Electrical conductivity monitoring of soil condition and available N with animal manure and a cover crop.” Special issue on soil health as an indicator of sustainable management. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
Johnson, C.K., J.W. Doran, H.R. Duke, B.J. Wienhold, K. Eskridge, and J.F. Shanahan. 2001. “Field-scale electrical conductivity mapping for delineating soil condition.” Faculty Publications, Department of Statistics. Paper 9, digitalcommons.unl.edu/statisticsfacpub/9.
McBride, R.A., A.M. Gordon, and S.C. Shrive. 1990. “Estimating forest soil quality from terrain measurements of apparent electrical conductivity.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54:290-293.
McNeill, J.D. 1980. “Electrical conductivity of soils and rocks.” Tech. note TN-5. Geonics Ltd., Mississauga, ON, Canada.
Rhoades, J.D., N.A. Manteghi, P.J. Shouse, and W.J. Alves. 1989. “Soil electrical conductivity and soil salinity: new formulations and calibrations.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 53:433-439.
Block Rockin Eats: How Blockchain Could Revolutionize The Global Food Chain
Companies have begun to test blockchain technology within the global food chain, with startups and well-established corporations alike trying their hand at what may be the next big leap in the Internet of Things.
Block Rockin Eats: How Blockchain Could Revolutionize The Global Food Chain
Source: Sharon Cittone - Seeds&Chips - Chief Content Officer
12-05-2017
Unless you’ve been on a vision quest somewhere outside of the bounds of data coverage, you’ve probably been hearing quite a bit about blockchain recently. It is the technology upon which cryptocurrencies like bitcoin depend, and as the value of a Satoshi continues to climb, so too do the potential applications for blockchain in other areas of global commerce.
Companies have begun to test blockchain technology within the global food chain, with startups and well-established corporations alike trying their hand at what may be the next big leap in the Internet of Things. If you’re still at a loss as to how blockchain works, how it could be applied to things like tomatoes or olive oil, and why it might make a difference don’t worry, you’re not alone. Blockchains are a complicated concept that even the most tech savvy people have a hard time explaining but beneath all of the jargon is a system that could make a huge difference in the food that makes its way to your table.
Blockchain Explained: A Primer
Imagine an old-timey General Store like the ones in a Western that your grandfather used to watch. There was inevitably a wise old store owner who kept records of everyone’s purchases on his ledger, and he might apply his own unique codes to each purchase whether he was to be paid in cash, or in trade. As long as the store owner was able to keep track of the ledger, ensure that it was kept up to date, and keep it in a safe place, this could be quite an effective system. Indeed, relationships like these, based on mutual trust between merchant and client, were often the backbone of local economies.
Now imagine that the same ledger were to be used, but with no old-timey shopkeeper and instead of tracking the transactions of a local business, the ledger would keep a record of large sums coming in and out from around the world in a sort of intergalactic general store. How could you be sure that it would be kept safe? How would you be able to track all of the transactions? How could you trust anyone in the system, if you didn’t even know who they were or where they were from?
Enter blockchain. This digital ledger is administered and monitored by a peer-to-peer network that records, observes, and encrypts every single economic transaction, not only of money but of pretty much anything and everything that has value. Each transaction that is recorded and encrypted becomes a block, and when the transactions continue they form chains. As such, no blocks can be altered without altering every other block that follows it in the chain, and that requires the approval of everyone monitoring the system. Because the system is so vast and those virtual hall monitors are themselves rewarded when more people sign on to the ledger, there are a lot of checks.
With these controls, Blockchain makes it possible to establish an economy based on trust between individuals that is decentralized and incorruptible, and which opens a financial system to everyone. In a blockchain based system, individuals don’t have to worry about their credit rating, a bank branch that will see them, or a loan for which they might not meet the strict criteria set up by a bank or financial institution. All you need is a smartphone, a bit of bandwidth (ok, a lot of bandwidth) and something of value that you want to be included in the ledger. The old timey general store is dead, long live the old timey general store.
The Food Chain on the Blockchain
Until now, blockchain technology has been most successful when applied to cryptocurrency like Bitcoin (for which it was invented) along with hundreds of other cash-based networks. With the coming of Ethereum, blockchain advanced beyond the idea of currency exchange with Dapp, or decentralized application. Where Bitcoin and others provide users with a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, Ethereum makes it possible to apply the same concept to things like title registries, voting systems, or regulatory compliance.
Or, food. The global food chain is made up of countless steps and exchange points between planting, harvesting, transporting, packaging, shipping, and purchasing any one of the millions of things we eat every day. Moreover, the very nature of the food chain is decentralized because nearly anyone can grow their own food and sell it on the global market, as long as they are in compliance with health and safety regulations.
But this is where things start to get messy. The global food system is mired in competing and often contradictory regulations that differ by state, region or country and along the way, there is no telling what happens to the products themselves. The recent EU egg recall is a perfect example of this dilemma: in September 2017, 40 different countries were found to be selling eggs tainted by the pesticide Fipronil, which may be harmful if consumed in large quantities. While two people in the Netherlands were detained for their role in the scandal, the actual origin and cause of the contamination remains a mystery.
Enter blockchain. Because it relies on the collaboration of many different players with competing that are nonetheless all directed towards the same goal, blockchain technology manages to transform anarchy into a functional system. There is no one focal point or director of a blockchain, but each individual involved has an interest in doing their part to make the system work. Applying this to the food chain means that the entire life cycle of a product could be monitored, recorded, and protected against interference or corruption so that when it reaches your plate, you know exactly where it came from. More specifically, there are three areas where blockchain technology could significantly improve the global food system:
- Transparency and accountability. By tracking a product from its point of origin to its point of sale, each hand that touches it is tracked and signs off on their participation in the life cycle of a food item, whether tomatoes, baby food or beef. If a recall must be put into force, regulatory bodies can much more quickly identify the points along that cycle, target their inquiries, and come up with definitive solutions.
- Monitoring best practices, origin, and processing integrity. Products claiming to be ‘farm to table’, ‘organic’, or ‘fair trade’ abound on the global market, but there is no foolproof way to ensure that these labels are legitimately applied and that the foods they label are faithful to those ethical standards. Moreover, counterfeit products account for tremendous losses on the global market, not only to large companies but to the small farmers who try to ensure the standards of their products. Tracking a product like olive oil from the time olives are harvested from the tree to their bottling in a plant and distribution around the world could save billions of dollars a year while also delivering the high-quality product that consumers believe they’re buying.
- Access to the market for developing countries. Because blockchain is available to anyone with a smartphone and an internet connection, farmers and producers in developing countries can participate in the global food chain on their own terms instead of relying on multinational conglomerates to do their bidding. The cocoa trade, which relies largely on West African cocoa farmers, translates to low returns to the people actually doing the hard work of growing and harvesting. If we truly want to support ‘fair trade’ we must create the conditions under which it can actually happen.
- Ensuring international labor standards. As the Guardian recently uncovered, conditions for vegetable farmers in Southern Italy are tantamount to indentured slavery. Sadly, this is but one example of a vulnerable population whose rights go unprotected while they provide a vital service for the survival of the world’s population. Building labor standards into the blockchain is as easy as entering a few computer codes, and enforcing them becomes a necessary part of the product as growing, transporting, or packaging.
These may sound like lofty goals, strung together by wide-eyed millennials who think the problems of the world can be solved by a few lines of computer code. However, integrating blockchain into the global food chain can increase productivity, efficiency and ultimately profit, which should give anyone who stands to gain from the food industry cause for reflection. Indeed, food-based blockchain is already being developed by some of the biggest names in international business.
Building Blocks: Blockchain in Action
Applications of blockchain to the food system are already sprouting up, and they’ve got some big names behind them. Ripe.io, a startup that uses blockchain in agriculture, was started by two former Wall Street financiers who believed that blockchain could be used in more meaningful ways than just mining for cash. Their pilot project, on Ward’s Berry Farm outside of Boston, tracks and documents the supply chain of the first ever blockchain tomatoes. They monitor the ripeness, color, and sugar content of 200 tomatoes on 20 different plants using sensors to record environmental factors including light, humidity, and air temperature. Additional sensors placed in the buckets where the tomatoes are packed for distribution keep track of the humidity in the storage facilities. Ripe has also partnered with Sweetgreen Inc., a farm-to-counter salad franchise, to track their crops and distribute that information to farmers, food distributors and restaurants to whom they deliver. The result is a higher quality product with a traceable chain of custody that can legitimately call itself farm-to-table.
Swiss startup Ambrosus has also employed the blockchain protocol to track one of the most contentious and corrupted products in the supply chain, olive oil. Their project mapped the olive oil supply chain and identified the stakeholders and weak points in the system, with extensive research into the ways that olive oil can be mislabeled and mishandled, resulting in a poor quality product that makes its way onto supermarket shelves around the world. Fraud is rampant in the olive oil industry, with an estimated 70% of the olive oil sold in the US either counterfeited or adulterated. These cases of fraud are not only economically damaging: in 1981, counterfeit olive oil sold in Spain led to thousands of deaths after the oil was found to have been adulterated with industrial grade-grapeseed oil. Due to the lack of transparency in the olive oil supply chain, the guilty parties were never found. The Ambrosus Olive Oil project shows that while the olive oil supply chain is particularly vulnerable as the popularity of olive oil continues to grow around the world, implementing blockchain protocols could effectively save the industry from its own success.
Perhaps the biggest sign that blockchain means business is the August announcement that some of the largest groups in the global food chain would collaborate with IBM on a blockchain protocol designed to increase consumer confidence in their products. The computer giant introduced a fully-integrated, enterprise-grade production blockchain platform via the IBM Cloud which allows users to access data about any number of products within minutes. Using the Hyperledger open source software, the IBM blockchain has tested a number of pilot projects where any participating member has a level of control over transactions, but no one member has exclusive control. Thus far, IBM has delivered their blockchain platform to over 400 companies including financial services, supply chains and logistics, retail chains, governments, and health care systems. The food supply consortium includes Dole, Nestle, Unilever and Walmart among many others. If blockchain began as a refuge for techies, it’s certainly much more than that now.
Hitting a Roadblock? Challenges to the Blockchain Protocol
With all of these applications and many others on the horizon, the future looks bright for blockchain. But as any revolutionary will tell you, there’s a big difference between ideas and execution, and bringing blockchain from the virtual world of bitcoins to the real world of tomatoes is not without difficulties. Those digital general store ledgers work because they’re comprehensive, and every aspect of the system is integrated into the larger goal of creating and protecting value. When you apply that to the lived experience of a food product, there are an enormous amount of factors to consider. For example, what if the truck drivers transporting the food aren’t members of the blockchain? Even the founders of Ripe admit that blockchain is a great resource, as long as people are willing to collaborate. What if unionized truck drivers aren’t allowed by their own rules to be in the blockchain?
Generating incentives is another major challenge standing in the way of making blockchain a comprehensive solution for the global food chain. Ripe didn’t generate any revenue on their pilot project with Ward’s Berry Farm, and for a farmer living hand to mouth, this might not entice them to invest in the equipment, certification, and training that blockchain protocols require. And while IBM’s blockchain protocols may be attracting the likes of Unilever and Nestle, there’s no indication that small or medium sized businesses will gain any greater access to the market, solely by virtue of their participation in the system. For blockchain to become truly transformative, the people whose lives and livelihood are most affected by it need to know that it will make their businesses stronger in the long run, and they need to see it for themselves. Just as with Bitcoin, it’s the wealthy investors with capital to lose who are best positioned to take big risks. For the little guy, blockchain might still be a handful of magic beans that they sell the farm for in the hopes that they’ll grow.
All of this leads to the biggest challenge of blockchain to the food system, legitimacy. In its earliest stages, blockchain technology looks incredibly promising for farmers, distributors, and consumers. But if it doesn’t manage to ensure the quality of a product, or if it doesn’t result in fewer cases of food contamination, will people still believe that it has value? Any new idea or innovation ultimately faces this challenge, but in the global food chain, the stakes are increasingly high. Putting all of our eggs in the blockchain basket risks lowering consumer confidence even further, and raising skepticism among the very people that blockchains are meant to protect.
While it’s too early to tell if blockchain is the wave of the future or a passing fad, the potential rewards do seem to outweigh these concerns. If the global food chain can truly become the global blockchain, the very nature of our relationship to food could be transformed for the better.
By Sharon Cittone - Seeds&Chips - Chief Content Officer
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Study
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Study Demonstrates that Both High Yields and Nutritional Quality of Leafy Greens Can Be Achieved With LUXEON SunPlus Lime LEDs
In a comparison study, Rensselaer researchers determined that LUXEON SunPlus Lime + Purple and Green + Purple LEDs provided beneficial growth spectra, resulting in high crop yield and high levels of antioxidants important to human health.
San Jose, CA – December 5, 2017 – The results of a controlled horticulture lighting study conducted by the NSF funded Center for Lighting Enabled Systems and Applications (LESA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI, Troy, NY), have been released. The study, utilizing a variety of commercial LEDs, compared the effectiveness of different LEDs on the growth of red lettuce Rouxai. The best combined yield and antioxidant concentrations in the lettuce was observed using LUXEON SunPlus Series LEDs. “Comparing the growth results using different combinations of LEDs shows that the spectra that performed best for yield (fresh weight), anthocyanin and chlorophyll concentrations were the LUXEON SunPlus Lime + Purple and Green + Purple LEDs from Lumileds,” said LESA’s Dr. Tessa Pocock, a global expert on light and plant physiology. “Green light is necessary for crop growth and the specific wavelengths within the green region matters.” This work is also part of the Greenhouse Lighting and Systems Engineering (GLASE) Consortium operated by LESA and Cornell University and funded by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) that is examining the most effective way to add green light to horticultural fixtures.
“Growers today are experimenting with various LEDs to arrive at the best color combinations for their crops. The LESA study indicates that such experimentation is paying off because a common, nutrient-rich crop can be produced with excellent yield,” said Jennifer Holland, Product Line Director of the LUXEON SunPlus Series. The study demonstrated that a light spectrum like the combination of LUXEON SunPlus Lime and Purple, which contains a certain ratio of royal blue, green, deep red and far red components, is beneficial to growth optimization.
For details of the study, see here: www.lumileds.com/uploads/702/WP34-pdf
To learn more about the LUXEON SunPlus Series including the new Far Red and Deep Red LEDs, see www.lumileds.com/horticulture
About Lumileds
For automotive, mobile, IoT and illumination companies who require innovative lighting solutions, Lumileds is a global leader employing more than 9,000 team members operating in over 30 countries. Lumileds partners with its customers to push the boundaries of light.
To learn more about our portfolio of lighting solutions, visit lumileds.com.
For further information, please contact:
Kevin Lucido
Senior Director of Global Marketing Communications
Lumileds
+1 650 576 3864
Kevin.Lucido@lumileds.com
Urban Agriculture Just Got Serious! Plantagon Is Building 10 Underground City Farms In Stockholm – And Locals Are Invited To Join In…
Plantagon CityFarm® is a new concept for using empty premises for resource efficient and sustainable food production in cities. The first plant is located under Stockholm’s iconic “DN Skrapan” in Kungsholmen, and the goal is to have ten production facilities for indoor production in the Stockholm area by 2020.
Urban Agriculture Just Got Serious! Plantagon Is Building 10 Underground City Farms In Stockholm – And Locals Are Invited To Join In…
Press Release • Dec 01, 2017
Plantagon is building 10 underground city farms in Stockholm – and locals are invited to join in…
STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN (December 1, 2017) – We hear a lot about smart sustainable innovations coming from Sweden, from turning rubbish into fuel, recycling excess heat from data centres, geothermals etc… Swedish pioneers Plantagon, are now taking on sustainable city farming on an industrial scale.
Plantagon CityFarm® is a new concept for using empty premises for resource efficient and sustainable food production in cities. The first plant is located under Stockholm’s iconic “DN Skrapan” in Kungsholmen, and the goal is to have ten production facilities for indoor production in the Stockholm area by 2020. Now the public is invited to a crowdfunding campaign on the Fundedbyme Investor Platform to support the expansion.
"The reason for a crowdfunding campaign is that we believe that people that care about the future of cities, food production and the health of our planet should be given the opportunity to be a part of the solution. To us, it is important to create and expand together, showing that we are a movement for healthy sustainable food. Together, we can make a difference for safe food production in cities - now and in the future", says Owe Pettersson, CEO of Plantagon International.
The goal of the campaign is to reach between 3.5 and 7.5 million kronor. The minimum amount to participate is set at SEK 1,000. All who participate will get a blueprint for a home-growing system if they would like to start cultivating at home. For all who participate at the level of SEK 10,000 or more, a private guided tour and your own harvest of vegetables and herbs inside the facility are included. Read more about the campaign here: www.fundedbyme.com/plantagon
Collaborators in the project include Samhall (a state-owned company with a mandate to create work that furthers the development of people with functional impairment causing reduced working capacity), ICA Maxi Lindhagen (a very local supermarket store), and world-renowned chef Pontus Frithiof with the restaurant, Pontus Tidningspressen, in the same building.
Ten units by 2020
"The first unit in the DN house is already fully funded and under construction. We aim to sign contracts on plant number two and three in March 2018 to start these in December 2018. Then we continue with plant four and five. The goal is that we have ten facilities running in Stockholm by 2020", says Owe Pettersson.
Plantagon CityFarm Stockholm is part of Plantagon Production Sweden AB, a subsidiary of Plantagon International AB. CEO of the new production company is Owe Pettersson, who is also CEO of Plantagon International AB.
Plantagon's technology for industrial indoor and urban cultivation is a response to the need for new solutions for sustainable food production that can provide for the growing urban population around the world while maximizing the use of unused urban spaces. Cultivation takes place in a controlled environment without any forms of chemical pesticides. Plantagon CityFarm® saves 99 percent of water consumption compared with traditional agriculture and carbon dioxide emissions are reduced to almost zero, while 70 percent of the energy used is reused to heat the offices in the DN House. By saving and reusing resources, production costs are significantly reduced.
What does Urban Agriculture really mean?
For Plantagon, it means that it must be sustainable environmentally, sustainable for society and also economically sustainable. Many players in food tech talk about urban agriculture or city farming, but no one has managed to cover all three goals. Delivering locally and using smart energy systems minimizes costs as well as emissions. Large-scale production using efficient cultivation systems while training the future farmers through Samhall, Plantagon plans on taking urban agriculture to the next level and developing the industry globally.
Please go to investment page for more information
Contacts
Carin Balfe Arbman, Communications Manager, Plantagon, tel. +46-70-633 35 08, carin.balfe-arbman@plantagon.com
Anna Karlsson, Press Contact, Manifest Stockholm, +46-735-20 28 80,anna@manifeststockholm.se
Plantagon International is a world-leading pioneer within the field food security and CSR – combining urban agriculture, innovative technical solutions and architecture – to meet the demand for efficient food production within cities; adding a more democratic and inclusive governance model.
www.plantagon.com www.plantagon.org
Why Some Young Workers Are Leaving White-Collar Jobs for Farming
Why Some Young Workers Are Leaving White-Collar Jobs for Farming
December 4, 2017 | Gina Belli
There was a time in the United States when it was very common to work as a farmer. In 1820, 72 percent of the workforce was employed in “farm occupations.” By the late 1980s, that figured had fallen to just about 2 percent.
The industry is aging, too. According to the Labor Department, today the median age of farmers in the U.S. is 55.9 years old. But, that might be starting to change. These days, a growing number of young workers are going into farming, and they’re often leaving behind desk jobs to do it.
Farmers Are Getting Younger
The number of farmers aged 25 to 34 increased 2.2 percent between 2007 and 2012, according to the latest U.S. Department of Agriculture data, per the Chicago Tribune. This is only the second time in 100 years that the number of farmers under the age of 35 has increased. These young people are already starting to have a real impact on this challenging industry.
“There’s real power in the young people and what they’re bringing to this, and to the agriculture, which is a tedious, tiresome, labor-intensive, and low-wage industry,” Henry Gordon-Smith of Blue Planet Consulting told Civil Eats.
There aren’t enough young farmers in this new generation to replace the ones who are retiring. But, the shift could “contribute to the growth of the local food movement and could help preserve the place of midsize farms in the rural landscape,” according to the Chicago Tribune article.
The number of farmers aged 25 to 34 increased 2.2 percent between 2007 and 2012.CLICK TO TWEET
They Aren’t Your Grandfathers’ Farmers
Many of these young farmers didn’t grown up on farms, as farmers often did in years past. Perhaps that’s why they’re open to doing things a little differently. This group is far more likely to grow organically, operate small farms, diversify crops or animals and to be involved in community supported agriculture (CSA) programs and farmers markets.
Other young farm workers are finding work in places like warehouse farms. Indoor agriculture, which utilizes techniques like vertical farming, hydroponics and aquaponics, is expanding in areas in and around cities.
“Food jobs have steadily left our cities for the past 100 years, and local food demand is driving production that is now bringing some of these jobs back to the communities in which their food is produced,” Paul Lightfoot, CEO of BrightFarms, told Civil Eats. “This has no downside for urban markets—it only increases jobs and economic activities.”
What They’re Leaving Behind
Perhaps these young farmers aren’t just moving toward rural farms but also away from office life, and the workday grind that goes with it. Of course, farming is unbelievably hard work. But, it’s a very different kind of experience than what workers encounter in white-collar employment.
“I wanted to have a positive impact, and that just felt very distant in my other jobs out of college,” 32-year-old farmer Liz Whitehurst told the Chicago Tribune. “In farming, on the other hand, you make a difference. Your impact is immediate.”
More than 50 percent of millennials say they would take a pay cut in order to find work that’s aligned with their values. And, 75 percent say they feel that businesses are focused on their own agendas not on improving society. One way to reconcile this is to leave office life behind and blaze a new trail.
Some of these young workers have even been bold enough to leave city life behind and try their hand at rural midsize farming. They might not have the numbers to replace the farmers who came before them, but they might revolutionize our agricultural system just the same.
Do You Know What You're Worth?
Tell Us What You Think
How do you think farming in the U.S. will change in the years to come? We want to hear from you! Leave a comment or join the discussion on Twitter.
Glyphosate Gets EU Greenlight for Five More Years
Glyphosate Gets EU Greenlight for Five More Years
NOVEMBER 28, 2017 EMMA COSGROVE
On Monday, the European Union voted to extend the license for glyphosate, the best-selling pesticide in the world, for use in the EU for another five years. Glyphosate is sold by most major agricultural input suppliers but is most associated with Monsanto, which markets it under the brand name Roundup.
The decision comes after weeks of votes and protests about the future of the controversial chemical in the EU, which has been far more skeptical than other parts of the world regarding glyphosate and the genetically-modified seeds created to resist it by Monsanto.
Glyphosate is controversial not only because of its link to genetically modified organisms, which have garnered intense public suspicion and also confusion but also because a 2015 study by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer that deemed it “probably carcinogenic to humans”. However, an October Reuters report alleged that the World Health Organization edited “non-carcinogenic findings” out of its 2015 report.
Without this license extension, Roundup would have gone completely out of circulation within the EU in three weeks – which some warned could have caused a farmers revolt. The decision has been well-received by farmers’ groups, but falls far short of the 15-year license extension proponents were originally seeking.
Opposition to the extension has largely come from environmental groups including Greenpeace EU, The Green Party, and Friends of the Earth Europe, among others.
In favor of the decision was the UK National Farmers Union, EU farmers groups Copa, representing farmers from 56 countries, and Cogeca, representing 31 agricultural coops.
After the vote, Monsanto Europe tweeted, “Europe’s regulatory authorities completed a multi-year reassessment and found glyphosate is safe for use. Glyphosate has fulfilled all requirements for a fill 15-year renewal. There is no scientific basis for approving authorization for only five years.”
Ashley Fox, the European parliament’s conservative party leader, told the Guardian that the vote “simply prolongs the uncertainty for our farmers, who are being badly let down. They cannot plan for the future without long-term assurances about the availability of substances they rely on.” The process to renew the license yet again will restart in two years.
Adding further uncertainty, individual member states may still choose to ban glyphosate within their own borders. France plans to do this within three years according to President Emmanuel Macron. Belgium, Greece, France, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malta, and Austria were all opposed to the extension.
Makers of biological ag inputs, which often offer a way to decrease or eliminate the use of chemical inputs, told AgFunderNewsthat they are unphased by the recent machinations.
“From our viewpoint, it’s not surprising that the glyphosate license has been extended in Europe for another five years. Whatever one thinks about glyphosate or the use of chemical pesticides in general, it’s clear that the transformation of large-scale farming practices has to be gradual,” said Tom Laurita, CEO of New Leaf Symbiotics, a biological crop input startup based in St. Louis with funding from Monsanto’s VC arm Monsanto Growth Ventures.
Laurita, who expressed his support for reducing overall synthetic chemicals in the environment, added that since his products are formulated to be compatible with existing chemical pesticides, the vote is neither good nor bad news for NewLeaf.
Donald R. Marvin, CEO of Inocucor, also a biological stimulants producer for agriculture, agreed that this decision will have little bearing on the Candian company’s expansion into Europe. “We don’t view the business and regulatory environment of countries comprising that region as uncertain when it comes to farming. We are certain that Europe’s farmers are in need of environmentally friendly crop inputs just like our grower partners here in the Americas.”