www.bloomberg.com
Take another hit. mtmuleyYou know I was thinking about this because that's who I am and stuff like this keeps me up at night. It seems like the easiest solution is for the political elite is to take public lands for these and other uses. Now I know that some folks disagree with the existence of public land to begin with (think our good friends in the Great State of Texas), but I like em and would like to keep them around.
There is another (complicated), solution that may end up saving some capital expensive and repurpose some privately held land that could be affected. Now, this may end up changing some lives so it may be controversial.
It appears that we can grow many foods in repurposed warehouses closer to population centers which would cut down on transportation costs/exhaust emissions, increase food freshness, increase growing cycles and food production (i.e.. higher turn rates of the space being utilized to grow food), due to artificial photosynthesis. These systems seem to use less water, less soil (if any), and lower capital costs of farming equipment like tractors and large land purchases.
If this works it would likely cause a lot of farm land to be repurposed for energy uses or for growing elk herds. It would be terrible to see farm land lost to condos and further subdivisions as it contributes both to our food system and to our natural environment.
Next up: Mark Oshima - farming up
Growing populations mean we need more food from less land, so vertical farming may be the key to building a better working world.www.ey.com
You do realize you’re talking about replacing 300 million+ acres of farmland with greenhouses don’t you?You know I was thinking about this because that's who I am and stuff like this keeps me up at night. It seems like the easiest solution is for the political elite is to take public lands for these and other uses. Now I know that some folks disagree with the existence of public land to begin with (think our good friends in the Great State of Texas), but I like em and would like to keep them around.
There is another (complicated), solution that may end up saving some capital expensive and repurpose some privately held land that could be affected. Now, this may end up changing some lives so it may be controversial.
It appears that we can grow many foods in repurposed warehouses closer to population centers which would cut down on transportation costs/exhaust emissions, increase food freshness, increase growing cycles and food production (i.e.. higher turn rates of the space being utilized to grow food), due to artificial photosynthesis. These systems seem to use less water, less soil (if any), and lower capital costs of farming equipment like tractors and large land purchases.
If this works it would likely cause a lot of farm land to be repurposed for energy uses or for growing elk herds. It would be terrible to see farm land lost to condos and further subdivisions as it contributes both to our food system and to our natural environment.
Next up: Mark Oshima - farming up
Growing populations mean we need more food from less land, so vertical farming may be the key to building a better working world.
www.wpr.org
Yup - but it's really less space because food production turn rates and yield is higher under their method - like 27 times less. The company in the report is already feeding NYC. It's also less for food because much of that land isn't for food, its in ethanol production. I think that they only have plans for leafy greens and vining plants though. I haven't seen anything with root vegetables.
My concern about these type of large scale projects is that people will be so enthralled about environmental progress away from fossil fuels that they will disregard any impact to wildlife. I don't know that it's bad, but I don't know if its good either. Look at that footprint, it's huge and I imagine a huge fence around it as well. I hope that someone took wildlife in consideration to provide mitigation efforts to it's potential negative impact.Funny you mention this. This headline and picture caught my attention this morning. Actually the picture about made me puke. It looks like a wasteland to me.
3 Utilities Spending $649M To Buy State's Largest Proposed Renewable Energy Project
Three Wisconsin utilities are planning to buy what is slated to become the single largest renewable energy plant in the state. Utilities owned by Milwaukee-based WEC Energy Group and Madison Gas and Electric are investing $649 million in the 465-megawatt Koshkonong Solar project in Dane County...
I like it - issue is all those pesky land and building owners who are going to want their cut. Large scale private projects from energy companies would typically want to have control of their equipment on other folks personal property.
Just depends how much you are willing to spend for your electricity.
Just depends how much you are willing to spend for your electricity.
Tesla Solar Roof price increase explained: why it’s suddenly soared in cost
Tesla's solar-harvesting tiles have seen a price increase. Here's why.www.inverse.com
Like this government incentive program?
Good luck Ben. Do your due diligence and let me know how it goes. Let wllm do the spread sheets if it gets complicated.
Yes, but I think that it's going to have to be better than that to get all those folks to change. It's going to need to be a public works project like building the highway system or railroad big to do what they want to do.Like this government incentive program?
Federal Solar Tax Credit in 2023: Complete Guide
Learn all about the federal investment tax credit (ITC), also known as the federal solar tax credit, which saves you money on solar.www.energysage.com
Good luck Ben. Do your due diligence and let me know how it goes. Let wllm do the spread sheets if it gets complicated.
