Comments
IDontTrustGod t1_iqwfpc4 wrote
Excellent questions, when these circumstances are accounted for and introduced in indoor pre-planting it’s typically called Hardening
It would be a real shame if they haven’t prepared for these circumstances, but it wouldn’t be the first time
Alyssarr t1_ir0j2ez wrote
Thank you for sharing! Yes it would be a shame, and I often worry about things like this that remove natural competitive mechanisms that would increase fitness in plants in a rapidly changing environment. I’ve worked on the hands-on side of habitat restoration for almost 10 yrs now and am very interested in getting into research either in propagation or field restoration trials. There’s a lot of disconnect between folks on the ground and people making the plans.
Sariel007 OP t1_iqvgt9i wrote
>It is a long way from the romance of a sun-dappled Highland glen. Picture instead a white cube equipped with the computer-controlled automation you would sooner expect to see in an Amazon or Ikea warehouse.
>Scotland’s state forestry agency believes this prefabricated structure, erected at an agricultural research centre near Dundee, could play a significant part in its quest to help combat climate heating by greatly expanding the country’s forest cover.
>Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS) wants to plant tens of millions of new trees in the coming years – conifers such as Norway and sitka spruce, douglas fir and Scots pine, and broadleaf varieties such as oak, alder and birch.
>This white cube, held up by steel ribs and girders, can help it do so at a remarkable speed and efficiency, producing saplings six times faster than it takes to grow them naturally outdoors. In the open, it would take about 18 months to bring a tree seedling up to 40-50mm in height; in these units, that growing time is about 90 days.
>“Essentially, this isn’t a building. It’s a machine; it’s a growing machine,” said Georgia Lea, a communications manager for Intelligent Growth Solutions (IGS), the Edinburgh-based firm that has designed the system.
Grayox t1_iqvug4s wrote
I'll never forget roadtripping through Scotland and just being blown away by how few trees they had on their hills and mountains. So much area prime for reforestation!
beatthestupidout t1_iqzrkze wrote
Iceland is very similar, though getting better with reforestation efforts. The problem that far North is the trees grow incredibly slowly, and when they're small (which they are for longer), they're vulnerable. That's the real benefit of this machine, you skip the bit where the deer eat all your saplings and you're back to square one.
Rexxhunt t1_ir068nk wrote
I always knew deer would be on the wrong side of climate change
Enormousexecutive t1_iqzqyn3 wrote
The issue that comes from that is that the ground has been made extremely boggy and resistant to reforestation as a result of ripping all the foliage out
Aurum555 t1_iqwf7zj wrote
Doesn't this contribute to a weaker less dense tree? I know sequoia if allowed to grow in full sun from seed will grow too tall too fast and cannot support their own weight and fall over. Is this not a risk in a scenario like this as well?
InSight89 t1_iqyaxyq wrote
What is the problem with vertical farming?
I keep reading about all the pros. It's significantly less resource intensive (especially when it comes to the very limited amount of water that's available). Takes up significantly less realestate. Is seemingly simply to control and maintain. So, what's stopping it from becoming mainstream?
cdurgin t1_iqyqobv wrote
The downside is it's almost always much more expensive. It's a lot cheaper to grow 20 acres of corn in a field in the Midwest than it is to grow the same amount in a much smaller footprint indoors.
Current technology and methods have gotten very efficient and it's hard for new technology to compete.
gandalfian t1_iqyd2kz wrote
In England it's competing with some huge Dutch green houses that already mass produce dirt cheap veg heated partly by wind power and the sun all from a small piece of land some way north. So what problem does that leave vertical farming to solve?
DrNobodii t1_iqxp8rr wrote
Why not continue in storage growth? If it’s so much faster and the only concern is power and space why not build bigger factory and bigger reactor.
FuturologyBot t1_iqvkh3x wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Sariel007:
>It is a long way from the romance of a sun-dappled Highland glen. Picture instead a white cube equipped with the computer-controlled automation you would sooner expect to see in an Amazon or Ikea warehouse.
>Scotland’s state forestry agency believes this prefabricated structure, erected at an agricultural research centre near Dundee, could play a significant part in its quest to help combat climate heating by greatly expanding the country’s forest cover.
>Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS) wants to plant tens of millions of new trees in the coming years – conifers such as Norway and sitka spruce, douglas fir and Scots pine, and broadleaf varieties such as oak, alder and birch.
>This white cube, held up by steel ribs and girders, can help it do so at a remarkable speed and efficiency, producing saplings six times faster than it takes to grow them naturally outdoors. In the open, it would take about 18 months to bring a tree seedling up to 40-50mm in height; in these units, that growing time is about 90 days.
>“Essentially, this isn’t a building. It’s a machine; it’s a growing machine,” said Georgia Lea, a communications manager for Intelligent Growth Solutions (IGS), the Edinburgh-based firm that has designed the system.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/xuhnyd/a_growing_machine_scotland_looks_to_vertical/iqvgt9i/
Bobby_feta t1_iqxx6hu wrote
They’ve been studying these in Australia for years, but it doesn’t seem to be gaining much political interest. Which, isn’t surprising given the Australian gov’s typical take on environmental issues (often akin to ‘can’t cars just run on coal?’), but if someone could see the bigger picture these would be amazing for Australia. We have a surplus in free energy from the sub and a huge amount of land that’s already been cleared for agriculture, but the soil is poor and water scarce. We really need these. And it’s kind of future proof - most of our weird comes from exporting energy and minerals, all of which are finite.
[deleted] t1_iqy45pb wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iqyk9qi wrote
[removed]
taste_fart t1_iqz2u3a wrote
I’ve been wondering why no one has been talking about vertical farming these days, especially with the impending water crisis of the western US, which is blighted with wasteful irrigation practices of impractical and thirsty crops.
cybercuzco t1_irbm2zw wrote
I’m just waiting for them to start growing giant sheets of cellulose. If you unrolled a tree the Cambrian layer is all that is really growing. Hook it up to the right plumbing and nutrients and you can grow an arbitrary sized sheet of cellulose. The sheet gets shaved off in 1/8” thicknesses every so often to make plywood out of it.
firekeeper23 t1_iqyu4mn wrote
Tree saplings........ yeah right. I believe you. Lol
Alyssarr t1_iqvwb29 wrote
This is cool! I find that in restoration it’s the transplant survival though where you really see things fail or succeed. Are these saplings just as resistant to pests, weather, etc as a sapling raised outdoors? Can they survive transplanting better or worse? Are their root systems properly established in a way for structure and water efficiency?