Grocery prices set to rise as soil becomes "unproductive" - eviltoast

Summary

Grocery prices are expected to rise globally as soil degradation, driven by overfarming, deforestation, and climate change, reduces farmland productivity.

The UN estimates 33% of the world’s soils are degraded, with 90% at risk by 2050. Poor soil forces farmers to use costly fertilizers or abandon fields, raising prices for staples like bread, vegetables, and meat.

Experts advocate for sustainable practices like regenerative agriculture, cover cropping, and reduced tillage to restore soil health.

Innovations and government subsidies could mitigate impacts, but immediate action is critical to ensure food security.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Not many people have mentioned this so I guess I’ll bring it up:

    The two major factors negatively impacting sustainability of agriculture are

    • Ammonia (NH3) is mined as a way to enrich agriculture with Protein, more specifically the ammonia bonds with nitrogen allowing plant development, but it’s not exactly infinite. Synthetic Ammonia can be produced but is extremely emission heavy as it is often a petrochemical byproduct with the vast majority of Hydrogen (H) is produced from fossil fuels refining.

    • Modern Invasive Pests/Disease are commonly spread across continents. Lack of plant biodiversity leads to viral outbreaks called “blights” which can lower or even wipe out entire regions of crops. Invasive species most notably insects can plague regions for years without any natural predators. Globalization and Industrialization have created these hurdles, but the yield of such practices are absolutely necessary to feed the current human population.

    There are no solutions except reducing the human population. Which isn’t going to happen, because people are stupid animals and the people we’ve empowered all over the world are morons who cannot read the writing on the wall.

    • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      This isn’t even true. The carrying capacity of earth for people hasn’t been met. We can absolutely engineer things to be both sustainable and livable at current populations. Rhetoric that advises we “depopulate” is borderline neo-fascism, the same stuff Christians say to bring on the apocalypse.

      James Cassidy at Oregon State University has his SOIL lecture series on YouTube. We have many ways to repair our soil and to improve farming. Killing people/ “depopulating” isn’t one of them. Shame on you.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        I’m saying we need to have less kids and you’re saying that belief is christofascism, lmao

        Despite many noteworthy christofascists supporting population growth such as Elon Musk.

        Have fun engineering an entirely new way to supply food for over 7 Billion people that nobody has ever tried before. I look forward to your results. It’s a good thing you were taught by the world’s greatest minds over on fucking YouTube.

        • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Read again, he’s a soil scientist and professor at OSU that made his lecture available for free on YouTube.

          You didn’t say “less kids,” you said smaller population.

          And I can see how much of an appetite you have for learning things that aren’t “kill kill death death,” so yeah. Won’t waste more of my time explaining. You can’t even be bothered to understand that professors can post lectures online.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            And you, after watching a couple of lessons on YouTube, are here lecturing me despite knowing absolutely nothing of my qualifications. I retract nothing.

            “kill kill death death,”

            You’re the first person to mention killing or death in this entire thread.

  • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Gee, spoke about heavy metals being deposited in our fields via exhaust and tractor tires a while ago and was called stupid. It’s not stupid, tractors are bad for soil and should be replaced with drones.

    • shottymcb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Wow, I didn’t realize drones had gotten powerful enough to plow, seed, and harvest. That’s amazing, do you have any links to plowing drones? Sounds cool.

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        The entire point is to not plow ever. It’s bad to penetrate the soil.

        We have drones that can farm. I’m not going to list them all because it’s clear you lack any foundational knowledge and just need a summary, so here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_drone

        My own family uses drones in farming here in the US. Not for everything, yet, but gee, if our government would fund it, it would happen immediately. Idk how this is surprising.

  • Caboose12000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m gonna fucking uninstall this app I’m having a nervous breakdown fuck off i just want some memes not existential fucking dread GAAAAHHHH

    • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      “Why is WW3 and world-ending climate change so stressful? Can’t you just post memes about Mondays and lasagna?”

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      tell me about it, dude.

      We’re on the precipice of total collapse. Farmlands failing, Ocean Currents are collapsing, Climate change is accelerating, Intellectuals are being demonized in favor of ignorance and fascism… The possibility of WW3 hanging over us thanks to all of the previous.

      the next 20 years are going to be the cursed time that “may you live in interesting times” was talking about.

      • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        How nice of you to conveniently list out all the current events worth having an existential crisis over, in a reply to a person having an existential crisis

        • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          They didn’t list them all, the climate change one is more nuanced than that: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/sep/23/earth-breach-planetary-boundaries-health-check-oceans

          Yes there are 9 planetary boundaries for us to be able to live here, and we’ve crossed 7 of them.

          People SHOULD be having existential crises. Wtf are existential crises for if not SPECIES ENDING EVENTS? That’s why we evolved to freak tf out over this, to help us care enough to address it. That you all would rather numb yourself to it is a testament to how shitty of a species humans truly are. Our ONE fucking advantage is not intelligence, but adaptability. Go on, adapt. Get this shit figured out.

          • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Dawg they are having an existential crisis. A bunch of us are, because just about every thread on the big communities on here remind us of how shit things are every day. I wouldn’t rather be numb to it, and I’m not suggesting other people to be numb to it. I’m saying it’s funny that someone wrote a comment about how much this site reminds them of all the shit going on, then someone replies directly to them with a list of more shit.

            Please don’t get yourself into the mindset that because everything is shit, we all have to feel like shit all the time too.

    • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s no joke: conventional Ag is extremely tough on soils, and depletes soil organic matter, and reduces topsoil thickness though ploughing. Add on top of that contamination from various sources (not just Ag) and the picture is bleak.

      • Omgboom@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        conventional ag

        Industrial farming is incredibly harmful to the soil. There are other methods that are far less harmful and can actually be beneficial to soil health, the problem is they don’t scale well.

        There is a great YouTube channel called No-Till Growers that really goes into some cool farming methods that are much less destructive

        https://youtube.com/watch?v=hNyu4_RWGZo

        Edit: this is probably a better video and I think it’s in a playlist about soil health. But honestly all of his videos are great

        https://youtube.com/watch?v=4aZhevnaLWw&list=PLGMgkMLKOtWv0efQXhQtuu01WfWL5yBDf&index=1&pp=iAQB

      • rayyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        conventional Ag is extremely tough on soils

        No shit. My daughter and husband bought a house built on the corner of a field in Ohio that was farmed for years. You couldn’t get a shovel into the ground there because it was like cement.

    • bean@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 days ago

      Right?? My first thought was, another excuse to raise prices and shrinkflate even more. Because that’s the solution! 🤬

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Soil depletion killed the Sumerians. It’s older than billionaires. If we attribute every single problem to class inequality, eventually we’re going to be wrong, because there are other problems in the world. If you think billionaires have power over us, nature is vastly more powerful.

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Reduced tillage is a big one. There’s a massive misconception out there that the best thing you can do for your soil is go dig it up and turn it over. Soil is alive, and tilling disrupts microbial and fungal action that contribute to its health - by physical rupture of fungal colonies but also by exposing underground life to more sunlight and oxygen. As you kill the top several inches by physical disruption, it becomes dust much more easily washed away by wind and rain: erosion.

    We do it to remove weeds before planting, and loosen soil to ease germination. Planting mixed crops or cooperative cover crops are good alternatives for weeds which are massively underused. And overall we may just need to accept some immediate productivity loss in order to ensure long term survival. Farmers are smart, but not smart enough. Too much emphasis on operating tools and fertilizers to optimize yield like land is a machine you can tune, and not enough focus on reducing the need for all this with a more subtle approach with increasing long term yield but perhaps lower yield next year. With farmers always one season away from bankruptcy, you can see why they make the wrong trade offs.

    Soil depletion is at the bottom of a lot of civilization collapses in event history. The whole reason the Egyptians lasted as long as they did is that the annual Nile flooding replenished their soil with minerals brought down from higher ground by the flow of water. It wasn’t just the water itself.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      No till or low toll is pretty much the default on most soil types now, at least on North America and Europe. There some areas where its not the case but I wouldn’t judge anyone unless I had many years of experience in their particular environment. Sometimes what looks dumb from outside isn’t possible or feasible when you’re in the middle of it.

      One problem we’ve found with no till after 20 years is stratification compaction just from rainfall and equipment, even with tramlining. Its starting to seem like it needs a working up every few years, or planting down to forage and more active livestock action. The advantage with that would be better carbon sequestration but its not really profitable if land prices/rent are high in that area.

      And yes, in a profession with millions of dollars on the line every season, its really hard to make changes if you’re just getting by.

    • Lag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      And overall we may just need to accept some immediate productivity loss in order to ensure long term survival.

      I see a massive issue in this plan.

  • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Perfect reason to hand out more BCs. Need to keep the pop for only wanted children. More human than tons of starving unwanted kids.

  • vikingr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    “Here’s how the millennials’ love of vegetables is destroying the planet”

      • vikingr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 days ago

        “Here’s why feudalism is the remedy for selfish, lazy millennials.”

        This is gonna happen, I guarantee it 😂.

        This damn country.

      • vikingr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, it’s a riff on how everything is the millennials’ fault in the news the past decade or so.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not everything is class and inter generational warfare. This has been building for centuries. The Sumerians compromised their soil and this eventually erased them.

  • The_v@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    The best thing for the environment and soil health is to not farm it. There is no such thing as environmentally friendly agriculture. It is always destructive.

    We farm the land we do because it’s profitable.

    Irrigated acres make up less than 7% of the land area used for agriculture but produce 65% of the total yield.

    Protected culture (greenhouses, high tunnels, etc) produce 10x to 20x more per acre than open field production.

    Increasing our water storage and transport infrastructure on a massive scale, combined with expansion of protected culture could reduce our agricultural land requirements by as much as 80%. All wiithout changing our diets.

    Imagine 80% of the farmland rewilded? Massive stretches of native ecosystems rebounding without fertilizer or sprays.

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      There are ways to create sustainable farms. It’s about diversity of crops and cycling what crops are grown each year.

      https://www.edibleforestgardens.com/

      There is no environmentally friendly factory farming. There is no healthy market-conscious farming. There are absolutely ways to be kind to the earth and grow food for a small community.

      • The_v@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        We need food for billions not a small community.

        Food forest = lower environmental impact per acre but a higher environmental cost per kg of production. It’s also highly environmentally irresponsible to add in invasive species, disease, and pests into and established ecosystem. These are all spread by seed, soil, and plant tissue of the crops we grow.

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          But…billions make up many small communities. That’s my point. Self-reliance, mutual aid. That’s the answer. Not globalized solutions.

          • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            99% of us do non ag jobs and if we moved to everyone trying to farm a billion would starve and the worlds economy would implode.

            Lack of resources would lead to both local and global violence as desperate people hurt each other.

            Imagine a city of a million people abandoning all the work they do to all collectively invade rural areas to set up farms they have no idea how to run!

            • TheFriar@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              22 hours ago

              I’m sorry, what exactly is your point? Stop eating vegetables, just eat meat? And why would every single person need to do this? The point of “community” is relying on others more locally. We need to downscale dramatically. The end goal being self reliance on community, but that’s not sudden exodus of every single person next Tuesday to move out of cities. Why would it be? It seems like you’re going way out of your way to make a point you don’t even believe.

            • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              You’re taking the proposed solution to an extreme end of the spectrum in an effort to argue against it.

              We don’t need all ~7 billion of us to become self sufficient farmers. We don’t even need 1 billion of us to become farmers.

              What we need in the immediate short term is to encourage the adoption of better agricultural practices, such that the mega farms that currently support us can continue to support us, while minimizing their environmental* impact.

              What we need in the medium term is to encourage people to create local food gardens in their communities, via education campaigns and subsidies. By no means does that mean every living being on the planet needs to take up a trowel and a hoe, but people should be encouraged to participate in the production of their own food.

              What we need in the long term is to find solutions that turn those local food gardens into permanent, sustainable, long term solutions that can support entire communities. Vertical farming, indoor hydroponics, stuff like that. Which means publicly funded research and more subsidies.

              There’s steps to it. It’s a process. It will take time, it won’t happen overnight. No one is suggesting that “a city of a million people abandon all the work they do and collectively invade rural areas to set up farms they have no idea how to run”. That’s a strawman you’ve made up in your head.

          • The_v@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            But… we don’t have unlimited hectares of suitable land for people to fuck up. That’s the point… A food forest concept would require every last bit of ariable land on the planet and still not provide enough food for everyone.

            The entire idea shows a complete lack of understanding what it takes to feed people at the scale of billions.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I imagine harvesting, planting, and everything else that needs to be done is much harder in “protected culture” compared to normal agriculture.

      We farm the way we do because we have always done it like this, except on a smaller scale obviously, otherwise almost everyone would still be a farmer.

      Completely moving over to “protected culture” would be enormously expensive, hard, and unless some really advanced technical advancements happen so, impossible.

      • The_v@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Irrigated and/or protected culture… Protected culture for the crops that make sense. Irrigated in for all others.

        We farm the way we do because historically we go through periods of innovation then stagnation. When the way we farm no longer works and we either rapidly innovate again or the civilization flounders and dies due to famine and war.

        “Enormously expensive,” it’s all in perspective. It’s damn cheap compared to the cost of the environmental damage we are currently doing. FYI The equipment and technology already exist to do it as well.

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Irrigated? That seems incredibly water intensive.

          FYI The equipment and technology already exist to do it as well.

          How do you farm crops like wheat and corn that way?

          • The_v@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            Agriculture is water intensive. The more land we use, the more water we need. Whether from the sky or from a irrigation canal, it’s still water used to grow crops not native environments. Reducing our land footprint reduces our total water usage. That’s what matters, not the per hectare usage.

            Corn and wheat - just irrigating itincreases the average yield by 2x to 10x depending on the region.

            If you’ve never been in a 50 hectare greenhouse it’s hard to imagine (they are 12-15m tall). These greenhouses are all in soil as well. The larger a greenhouse is the more efficient it is as maintaining temperature. You can get 2-3 cycles per year in them depending on light levels. So the yields are irrigated + 50% per cycle and 2-3 cycles per year instead of 1 cycle. Supplemental lighting can push it to a solid 3 cycles.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    staples like bread, vegetables, and meat.

    One of these is vastly different from the others in terms of planetary destruction.