▲ 61 points
back
18 comments
If this interests you, I've been watching a lot of permaculture and regenerative agriculture videos on YouTube and there is some really encouraging stuff going on out there!
I have no idea how to make the restorative stuff go more mainstream, but it's really impressive to watch small communities or determined individuals entirely change a landscape in a few decades.
A few I've enjoyed:
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T39QHprz-x8
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSPkcpGmflE
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4OBcRHX1Bc
I've enjoyed a few of those as well, but there's one thing that keep bugging me.
Supposedly it takes very little time, little investment (a few people doing most of it by hand with some guidance) and works like magic (e.g. Al Baydha Project).
Why isn't there a "revolution" happening and every neighboring area also adopting that approach?
So much of it seems so obvious, I'd expect some people with excavators building some berms in the US deserts and the place exploding with life in a year or three. But it doesn't happen. Why? Are there any issues that aren't shown in the films? Are there powerful enemies (who wants to keep the desert deserted?) that are lobbying against it?
I don't watch these kinds of videos, but from a multi hour interview with someone who grows food commercially in permaculture, it sounds like it takes a lot of time, patience, planning and knowledge.
I don't know what scams you are looking at but regenerative agriculture is incredibly complicated and time consuming but not physically labor intensive because it is compatible with mechanization.
Conventional argiculture is the simple and lazy version where instead of trying to understand your local ecosystem you just douse everything in fertilizer, pesticide, etc so you don't have to care what is happening in your soil.
You've articulated my exact thought after watching these too! I have no idea, and I'd be curious to find out as well.
Even if it's not well understood broadly in society, it does seem like it would spread neighbor-to-neighbor on a local level. I don't get it.
Where these two disciplines are likely to shine most is that both of them honor the role of fungi in the ecosystem. One of the areas we're discovering is that fungi have ways to deal with some soil contaminants. There are some soil scientists that are pushing for different ways of testing mineral contents of soil based on bioavailability instead of counting parts per billion.
I recall years ago when SuperCritical Water Oxidation (SCWO) was a thing that they were eager to point out that fully oxidized lead is less toxic, and that SCWO oxidizes basically everything you put into it (including the ceramic liner). When SCWO proved difficult to scale up to industrial levels, they researched using it just for cleanup of superfund sites.
I've seen some comments in the few papers I've read on soil fungi that some oxidize toxic metals and others compartmentalize them so they don't affect cellular processes.
I've seen such photos before but I can never get over how those garbage beaches look.
I think the point is that the garbage was already there. This is a significant improvement.
Yea I get that part.
Encouraging, but also still struck and saddened by how filthy Manila Bay is.
The amount of garbage in that one location alone makes things like banning disposable straws, etc seem pointless in comparison.
Along this vein I’d be curious if we could grow mangroves on the pacific garbage patch?
The shade and roots might even attract enough fish to provide the plants with fertilizer.
> Despite the common public perception of the patch existing as giant islands of floating garbage, its low density (4 particles per cubic metre (3.1/cu yd)) prevents detection by satellite imagery, or even by casual boaters or divers in the area.
You know that the pacific garbage patch is not a solid patch or floating garbage, right?
Uhh, in salt water???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangrove
Mangroves can handle salt water. The issue is that they aren't actually free-floating forests out in the ocean, which is what GP would need for their idea.
Well and the patch is like 4 plastic particles per cubic meter.
That too, but addressed by another response.
Thats.. not that much.