• v2vhD7HK@slrpnk.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Modern industrial agriculture has one outstanding advantage: productivity. Hundreds of acres of land can be cultivated with the labor of three or four persons.

    Permaculture on the other hand doesn’t allow for such productivity. Most people will need to grow their own food to some degree. That’s actually great in the sense that food production becomes increasingly local, produced where it is consumed, in such a way that all nutrients make their way back to the soil in a cycle which has been broken by modern agriculture.

    As another commenter pointed out, permaculture can seem unscientific at times. And it’s perfectly fine. We all have different sites, climates, soils and experience, no size fits it all and it’s often difficult in such circumstances to find the best solutions. Some will employ more unconventional ideas, as long as it works for them.

    In the end, it will always make a lot more sense than planting a few hundred acres with a genetically engineering crop monoculture that can only survive with a constant supply of pesticides and fertilizer, while depleting the soil.

    More reading: https://leanlogic.online/glossary/lean-food/

    • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.netM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m the one calling it unscientific. I would like to clarify, that I’m only making that statement RE: weird techniques (like electroculture) that have no backing, or, in the case of electroculture, are just flat incorrect.

      Another poster in my local perm group was promoting his method of soil homeopathy…a method that inherently does not work in soil systems, as they often require large inputs to change things.

      I would also like to point out that while I agree with you re: monoculture = bad, I disagree that GMOs are inherently bad. all of the crops we grow for the most part have had their genetics modified through selective breeding. Wheat came from a rice-grass like species, and was domestic centuries ago. I think what you are opposed to, however, are large inputs of petrochemical like pesticides, and Fertilizers.

      Again, fertilizers aren’t inherently bad themselves, but like any soil amendment (including those used in permaculture) need to be used carefully and their application rates calculated based on site specific soil test values. mass application of any amendment is going to place you in a bad situation.

      Finally, I want to say I’m not trying to pick your perspective apart, but to point out that there is a LOT to consider in fixing agriculture, and that both systems have their merits. I think the right management of ag systems lies somewhere in the middle of conventional vs perm ag.

      • TiredSpider@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The biggest problem with gmos rn is that companies can patent them. But that isn’t really a gmo problem as much as a capitalism problem. What I’m saying is we need pirates for genetics.