Where do we see farming in 50 years?

[martian]

That wouldn`t be competitive under todays price-relations !?
When you can grow 10 ton/ha wheat you can turn that into 3 to 4 tons/ha meat, depending on the animal (pig, chicken), but you have to use 100 ltr/ha fuel and another 200 ltr. as fertilizer at least and add some overseas soybeans.....
How much meat from cows or sheep can be produced on grass with how much fertilizer ??

You are right that under todays prices it doesn't look that competitive, although we reckon our cattle pay their way ok with no bought inputs (ie fertiliser or hard food). However the picture changes if you put the 'real' cost of fertilisers and sprays into the equation, which one day circumstances may dictate that we have to do: as others have pointed out, N fertiliser is very energy intensive to make, cheap fossil fuels enable us to buy it at £250/tonne or whatever, but that is only sustainable if @Farmersdaughter gets her Fission powerplant up and running, or something else comes along.

Which is why I think we need to plan ahead a bit and work out a way of farming using solar power as much as possible, via cover crops, soil biology and all the other stuff we'll learn about tomorrow at the CA Conference in Baldock...

There is another point which we haven't really talked about, which is the issue of what foods are actually good for you. We've spent millenia evolving to eat omnivorously and the bacteria in our intestines have worked out how to process this 'natural' food in such a way as to keep us healthy, then suddenly we are eating processed pap and facing an epidemic of degenerative diseases. A properly run Health Service would be concentrating on this, rather than spending billions treating people who get ill eating the wrong food. As Albert Howard et al used to say, put a fence on top of the cliff rather than have an ambulance on stand-by at the bottom...

 

[Kevtherev]

@neilo

 

[mikep]

You are right that under todays prices it doesn't look that competitive, although we reckon our cattle pay their way ok with no bought inputs (ie fertiliser or hard food). However the picture changes if you put the 'real' cost of fertilisers and sprays into the equation, which one day circumstances may dictate that we have to do: as others have pointed out, N fertiliser is very energy intensive to make, cheap fossil fuels enable us to buy it at £250/tonne or whatever, but that is only sustainable if @Farmersdaughter gets her Fission powerplant up and running, or something else comes along.

Which is why I think we need to plan ahead a bit and work out a way of farming using solar power as much as possible, via cover crops, soil biology and all the other stuff we'll learn about tomorrow at the CA Conference in Baldock...

There is another point which we haven't really talked about, which is the issue of what foods are actually good for you. We've spent millenia evolving to eat omnivorously and the bacteria in our intestines have worked out how to process this 'natural' food in such a way as to keep us healthy, then suddenly we are eating processed pap and facing an epidemic of degenerative diseases. A properly run Health Service would be concentrating on this, rather than spending billions treating people who get ill eating the wrong food. As Albert Howard et al used to say, put a fence on top of the cliff rather than have an ambulance on stand-by at the bottom...

Think of the collective madness we are suffering from as a nation. You cannot fart without a risk assessment and method statement but you can eat yourself into an early grave from sugar and fat laden food with the blessing of all concerned.
Food as a sustainer is not valued now only as a fuel to get from a to b on the go. I have great sympathy with the slow food movement and that would be my wish for the future that we were valued producers of high quality products.
The chance of that and the reason for my overwhelming cynicism is that too many of the public are just consumers with faulty values. They will scrimp and save to have a plasmaj tv, new phone or the latest car and eat sh!t. This keeps the corporates happy and we pick up the tab for the NHS. It seems that the only reason for a government is to get money from poor people into multinationals pockets as quickly as possible. Witness tax collection, who has to pay? Only the hard workers on low wages anyone earning good money can find a way to make tax efficient savings and the apples of this world pay sfa.
I hate the base materialism and especially this time of year when it is all excess losing sight of the whole point of the celebration. We are not even allowed to enjoy the moment as the sales adds and holiday ones will start whilst we still wish we hadn't eaten so much. it's not bah humbug from me but bah bugger off to the corporates.
I would love to see high value high quality agricultural products produced more here but having done that and got the T shirt can tell you the market is very small and fickle so really the majority of us will have to produce cheap food for the masses who will waste a lot of it and ruin their health on the rest.
Having said that there are niches but its going to be like musical chairs with less places every time the music stops, the trick i suppose is dont dance to the tune.

 

[Dan Powell]

Think of the collective madness we are suffering from as a nation. You cannot fart without a risk assessment and method statement but you can eat yourself into an early grave from sugar and fat laden food with the blessing of all concerned.
Food as a sustainer is not valued now only as a fuel to get from a to b on the go. I have great sympathy with the slow food movement and that would be my wish for the future that we were valued producers of high quality products.
The chance of that and the reason for my overwhelming cynicism is that too many of the public are just consumers with faulty values. They will scrimp and save to have a plasmaj tv, new phone or the latest car and eat sh!t. This keeps the corporates happy and we pick up the tab for the NHS. It seems that the only reason for a government is to get money from poor people into multinationals pockets as quickly as possible. Witness tax collection, who has to pay? Only the hard workers on low wages anyone earning good money can find a way to make tax efficient savings and the apples of this world pay sfa.
I hate the base materialism and especially this time of year when it is all excess losing sight of the whole point of the celebration. We are not even allowed to enjoy the moment as the sales adds and holiday ones will start whilst we still wish we hadn't eaten so much. it's not bah humbug from me but bah bugger off to the corporates.
I would love to see high value high quality agricultural products produced more here but having done that and got the T shirt can tell you the market is very small and fickle so really the majority of us will have to produce cheap food for the masses who will waste a lot of it and ruin their health on the rest.
Having said that there are niches but its going to be like musical chairs with less places every time the music stops, the trick i suppose is dont dance to the tune.

This is the way I feel too. I'm currently trying to snap myself out of it and act in a positive way. After all if you're not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.

How to act though?

My own view is that the world 250 years from now may be a little like that of 500 years ago. Towns and cities will be deserted in favour of self sufficient villages. We will refer to the period from the industrial revolution until 2075 as the Age Of Carbon Burning and everyone will be a tiny bit happier than they are today and much healthier. Books will be popular.

50 years from now though will be rather like today only more so. Energy will be exponentially more expensive. Democracy will fail as politians make populist promises that they cannot possibly follow through on. We will find that at just the point we need our local communities to pull together and unite towards common goals that our communities no longer exist and all we have left is individuals hooked on consumer culture and personal gratification.

Personally I think we should all take a leaf out of Joel Salatin's book and re-engage our local communities. Feed them. Offer them allotments if they want them. Create local festivals on our land and rebuild communities. The biological farming revolution will happen as an aside because no other way will be possible when oil is $1000 a barrel.

 

[mikep]

This is the way I feel too. I'm currently trying to snap myself out of it and act in a positive way. After all if you're not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.

How to act though?

My own view is that the world 250 years from now may be a little like that of 500 years ago. Towns and cities will be deserted in favour of self sufficient villages. We will refer to the period from the industrial revolution until 2075 as the Age Of Carbon Burning and everyone will be a tiny bit happier than they are today and much healthier. Books will be popular.

50 years from now though will be rather like today only more so. Energy will be exponentially more expensive. Democracy will fail as politians make populist promises that they cannot possibly follow through on. We will find that at just the point we need our local communities to pull together and unite towards common goals that our communities no longer exist and all we have left is individuals hooked on consumer culture and personal gratification.

Personally I think we should all take a leaf out of Joel Salatin's book and re-engage our local communities. Feed them. Offer them allotments if they want them. Create local festivals on our land and rebuild communities. The biological farming revolution will happen as an aside because no other way will be possible when oil is $1000 a barrel.

I think it's the only way really and that is why i would love to get the holistic idea more widely spread to give an alternative to the straightjacket nonesense that is organic farming.

To me, for want of an existing description, holistic is the ability to produce healthy food in an efficient and ecologically sensitive way with reduced and reducing reliance on artificial inputs.
When you explain it to people most of them get the idea and like it. Here we have Brighton to the south where the hippies have their last redoubt and if its not organic its evil so it can be hard going there (pretty sh!t hippies actually because a real hippy wouldnt know what they were eating except in the occasional lucid moments when the chemicals wore off).
Or yummy mummies and ladies who lunch to the north which is more fertile ground and if you get their attention you can do well. Unfortunately the northeners are quite fickle and the next fad is never far away whereas the failed hippies are much more loyal.
I have a project which i cannot divulge yet as it is nine months away and could be compromised but it has a bit of promise as it involves local communities with different interests and with a wide appeal. I know the OP is brewing an interesting one so there are things happening and i am sure more are out there somewhere. The trouble is they are small in scope at present but who knows from little acorns etc.
I must say that i do find this forum quite theraputic and the doctors say if i continue to improve i can start using the metal cutlery again fairly soon.

 

[David_A]

That wouldn`t be competitive under todays price-relations !?
When you can grow 10 ton/ha wheat you can turn that into 3 to 4 tons/ha meat, depending on the animal (pig, chicken), but you have to use 100 ltr/ha fuel and another 200 ltr. as fertilizer at least and add some overseas soybeans.....
How much meat from cows or sheep can be produced on grass with how much fertilizer ??

I think even today if you apply sufficient attention to detail you can out perform that wheat crop with livestock financially and possibly physically also if you consider the meat that can be produced form 1ha of grain crops.

 

[Old McDonald]

I think even today if you apply sufficient attention to detail you can out perform that wheat crop with livestock financially and possibly physically also if you consider the meat that can be produced form 1ha of grain crops.

In addition to which a few years (I prefer a minimum of four) in grass does so much good for the soil that continous cropping does not.

 

[mikep]

I think even today if you apply sufficient attention to detail you can out perform that wheat crop with livestock financially and possibly physically also if you consider the meat that can be produced form 1ha of grain crops.

In addition to which a few years (I prefer a minimum of four) in grass does so much good for the soil that continous cropping does not.

Trouble is if you increase the number of uk livestock the price will dip as buyers can take the mickey. Its just like the price up numbers up price down see saw but cutting out the price up bit.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Trouble is if you increase the number of uk livestock the price will dip as buyers can take the mickey. Its just like the price up numbers up price down see saw but cutting out the price up bit.

But not if the pound nose dives and the extra livestock just replace expensive imported meat

 

[mikep]

But not if the pound nose dives and the extra livestock just replace expensive imported meat

I see from your avatar that you are prepared for flying pigs

 

[David_A]

Trouble is if you increase the number of uk livestock the price will dip as buyers can take the mickey. Its just like the price up numbers up price down see saw but cutting out the price up bit.

This fact troubles me too. The outcone is less clear cut than sowing a crop, harvesting it and selling it. I suppose we are moving out of a comfortable zone (despite being barely profitable this year for too many). The theory is to cut production costs to the point that the market place only dictates the size of the profit, not whether there is one or not, as is generally the case currently.

 

[Dan Powell]

This fact troubles me too. The outcone is less clear cut than sowing a crop, harvesting it and selling it. I suppose we are moving out of a comfortable zone (despite being barely profitable this year for too many). The theory is to cut production costs to the point that the market place only dictates the size of the profit, not whether there is one or not, as is generally the case currently.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. And it boils down to this:

If the market is functioning correctly then it will price a product at the lowest possible level to ensure its needs are met. Too little profit for the producer and too many producers will cease production. Too much profit and we have a surplus. This is obvious.

The outcome is that if the price is x then only those who can produce for less than x survive. This will not be everyone as cost of production (COP) varies from farmer to farmer. So what happens? All farmers with a COP>x go out of business. Then those with a COP <x increase in size to fill the unmet production requirement. Result: The market will now set the price at a lower level as the production base is "more efficient." And so on year after year. This is why there are only a handful of massive companies left in each area of industry and why we need the competitions commission or subsidies.

In other words the market creates the conditions for its own unravelling.

Throw in the fact that in order to compete the average business will need to either innovate (e.g. use 5 fungicides not 4 per crop) or cut corners (e.g. disregard environmental legislation ) and that we externalise the costs of the environmental degradation that occurs in this process, and surely the rational conclusion is that the direction of travel that the market economy dictates is wrong and can only lead to disaster. IMO

And yet we are told this is progress.

 

[mikep]

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. And it boils down to this:

If the market is functioning correctly then it will price a product at the lowest possible level to ensure its needs are met. Too little profit for the producer and too many producers will cease production. Too much profit and we have a surplus. This is obvious.

The outcome is that if the price is x then only those who can produce for less than x survive. This will not be everyone as cost of production (COP) varies from farmer to farmer. So what happens? All farmers with a COP>x go out of business. Then those with a COP <x increase in size to fill the unmet production requirement. Result: The market will now set the price at a lower level as the production base is "more efficient." And so on year after year. This is why there are only a handful of massive companies left in each area of industry and why we need the competitions commission or subsidies.

In other words the market creates the conditions for its own unravelling.

Throw in the fact that in order to compete the average business will need to either innovate (e.g. use 5 fungicides not 4 per crop) or cut corners (e.g. disregard environmental legislation ) and that we externalise the costs of the environmental degradation that occurs in this process, and surely the rational conclusion is that the direction of travel that the market economy dictates is wrong and can only lead to disaster. IMO

And yet we are told this is progress.

The market economy only works as it should in isolation i.e.within the uk or ec. Put the uk/ec into a free market with competition from everywhere then you will be nailed by argentine beef producers, new zealand sheep producers usa grain etc.
This is ideal for politicians as they can moan about subsidies whilst relyng on world prices to keep the masses happily comsuming anything which is what our whole system s based on.
If you consider the basis of a sucessful econmy is growth the you must assume infinite ability to grow which even a moron can see is rubbish.
The whole system is rubbish but no-one will stop consuming until there is nothing left. I dont know the answer but consider the quality of tv programmes, more and more rubbish for idiots to keep them quite many years ago the Boss sang '80 channels and nothing on'. Sums up life if you think.
Happy Christmas!

 

[Dan Powell]

Quite. Happy Christmas! There's always a game of scrabble if nothing is on...

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

The market economy only works as it should in isolation i.e.within the uk or ec. Put the uk/ec into a free market with competition from everywhere then you will be nailed by argentine beef producers, new zealand sheep producers usa grain etc.
This is ideal for politicians as they can moan about subsidies whilst relyng on world prices to keep the masses happily comsuming anything which is what our whole system s based on.
If you consider the basis of a sucessful econmy is growth the you must assume infinite ability to grow which even a moron can see is rubbish.
The whole system is rubbish but no-one will stop consuming until there is nothing left. I dont know the answer but consider the quality of tv programmes, more and more rubbish for idiots to keep them quite many years ago the Boss sang '80 channels and nothing on'. Sums up life if you think.
Happy Christmas!

Very true, both of you.

I have been coming to the same conclusion, that endless economic growth will destroy the planet. And yet this is the "wisdom" on which capitalism seems based.

Very few (except the likes of Sir Richard Attenborough) are willing to publicly say that a world population of 9 BILLION by 2050 is not acceptable! Apparently over half the humans that EVER lived are alive today

 

[DrDunc]

Very true, both of you.

I have been coming to the same conclusion, that endless economic growth will destroy the planet. And yet this is the "wisdom" on which capitalism seems based.

Very few (except the likes of Sir Richard Attenborough) are willing to publicly say that a world population of 9 BILLION by 2050 is not acceptable! Apparently over half the humans that EVER lived are alive today

Perhaps Trump isn't such a bad thing.....

The wars that he will undoubtedly fail to prevent, if not actually provoke, are needed to wipe out a huge number of mouths.

 

[martian]

Golly, this is jolly! Happy Christmas everybody...

 

[mikep]

Golly, this is jolly! Happy Christmas everybody...

Yep real bonhomie and joy still as the song goes ' don't ask me what I think of you if I do not give the answer that you want me to'
Hoping for better but preparing for disappointment.
Happy new year.

 

[IEM]

I am generally positive about where farming will be in 50 years. I also hope to be around to see it and that my kids and future grandchildren will have a role in it.
I think:
Almost all crop establishment/protection/harvesting will be carried out by robots that are cheap to buy and maintain which are no bigger than a sheep (and possibly as small as nano bots). Smaller farms will have a few of them and large farms hundreds. This will make scale much less important than currently when 1 machine can harvest 1200+ ha of cereals and attention to detail and efficiency will be key profit drivers.
This may allow several different crops to be growing in one field at the same time even with different harvest dates. No cultivations will be required to establish them so soils will be truly healthy. Our current efforts with no-till, CTF, intercropping etc will look even more crude and inefficient in 50 years as ploughing with a horse looks to us now.
Robotics should allow us to grow better crops with a much lower environmental impact (maybe even a truly positive one). Not sure what my descendants will actually be doing towards growing the crops apart from printing out spare parts and chasing hare coursers.
Ruminant farming will be much more similar to how it is now but I suspect we will have to manage them much more efficiently and integrate them better into arable rotations.
Intensive livestock production who knows! Probably be growing broilers in 21 days at a FCR close to 1:1. (Not a good thing but will be cheap protein for the masses)

As for market prices/subsidies/regulation who knows? Don't think I could predict what will happen with any of that in the next 2 years let alone 50.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Golly, this is jolly! Happy Christmas everybody...

It's the way society is going that I'm worried about. Farming has a bright future with so many mouths to feed so long as they can afford the food.

I suspect that the current dichotomy between those who can afford good food and those that can't will widen, just like the pay gap does. There will still be a (substantial) market for premium food at a premium price but the mass market will be looking for ever cheaper food.

I have my doubts whether lab grown protein will be cost effective but hydroponics could provide a significant proportion of the mass market diet.

I agree that the days of ever bigger shiny kit are numbered. Effectively we'll go back to machines the size of the grey fergie or smaller but hi-tech and autonomous, doing way less soil damage.

I only hope that the penny finally drops on how the big food corporations are being allowed to adulterate cheap food for profit and so even the cheapest diets get healthier.