Will be a sustainable energy sources sufficient to produce enough fertilizer?

[Anonymous No.53202319]

Plants need nitrogen to produce protein and the production of nitrogen fertilizer is very energy intensive. So, could it be that the current global climate aims will lead to starvation? Less people means less productivity and smaller markets. How could one profit from such market conditions?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process

[Anonymous No.53202353]

>>53202319
short answer: no
most places will starve in the next ten years
it will be considered very lucky to be North American again since we are only place with agriculture, fertilizer AND oil gas

[Anonymous No.53202375]

Biosolids are more viable and need to be applied less often as a fertilizer and other farming chemicals

[Anonymous No.53202440]

>>53202353
Mmh... so starting a small and supply independent ammunition factory sounds like the best business to start where I am living atm. Happy Armageddon, anons.

[Anonymous No.53202488]

>>53202440
everyone should be praying for chinese collapse except for scumbag cheap goods resellers.
every other aspect of our ecnomy would involve and a multitude of business and industries would become viable here if we didn't ship oil to china

[Anonymous No.53202503]

Fucking hell, you guys aren't even talking about farming at all.

[Anonymous No.53202524]

>>53202319
>>53202440
Why are Guts and Griffith fighting over a negress? Makes no sense. And Griffith is a faggot. And Guts has access to cunny, yet keeps obsessing over that negress.

[Anonymous No.53202552]

>>53202524
The same reason two chads fight over anything: it's about winning and being better than the other.

[Anonymous No.53202585]

>>53202503
Have you ever worked on a farm? Without money printing and fossil energy you need one farmer to feed 5-10 people. The population living in cities jumped from 17% in 1801 to 72% in 1891 due to agricultural revolution.

[Anonymous No.53202598]

>>53202585
>source:https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory2/chapter/effects-of-the-agricultural-revolution/

[Anonymous No.53203479]

>>53202319
Depends on the Kardashev level you're talking about. For a sub-L1 like us, raw elements are almost entirely irrelevant. We have hording issues internationally, but those are inefficiencies introduced for social/civil reasons. Sure, some areas of the planet aren't particularly arable, but in terms of calories per acre we don't need more than a small % of surface area and decent logistics to support a population 10x to 100x larger than we have today.

HOWEVER, as you hit K1 and look to the stars, you realize a hard-cap on population: phosphorous. That's an element that's only created during certain specific supernovae that happen to be MEGA rare. Swaths of galaxies a parsec wide might have had a small handful in their entire histories. Thankfully, phosphorus isn't something you "use up," its a raw material you recycle constantly. Your cells use a molecule called ATP that can store/release energy (inserted into it by sugar chains) for mechanical processes. It's what you experience as "energy." Without phosphorus, your cells couldn't do stuff like muscle contraction.

So since every sapient being in your K3 civilization needs a few tens of kilos of phosphorus to support them (if you include the living beings in their food chains) it means that you can populate around 1/1000th of the area available in a normal star's (like Sol's) optimal orbit using the phosphorus in your galaxy.

>Be civilization capable of utilizing the energy of your entire galaxy
>Have hard cap on one particular element
>Entire galactic population can live in one solar system with room to grow 1000x

[Anonymous No.53205436]

>>53203479
Is it likely we still won't be able to manufacture chemical elements by that point? Or even that there still will be the same sort of biological organisms that exist today.

[Anonymous No.53205451]

>>53202552
it is for griffith
guts just wants a daddy to love him

[Anonymous No.53205505]

>>53202585
"Money printing" is completely unrelated. Back in 1891, people still knew what money was. If it can be printed, it's just credit. It can call be 'currency,' but it's not money.

[Anonymous No.53205522]

Not if Uncle Klaus has anything to say about it.

[Anonymous No.53205537]

>>53205505
Dumb semantics, there's not even a single asset class called money, theres many types of money informally called money. Liquidity is a continuum

[Jealous No.53205542]

There are sufficient land resources to grow food without chemical fertilizer.

[Anonymous No.53205553]

>>53202319
Russian fertilizer is no longer available for the european market unless bought expensively from Asian middlemen.

I honestly don't think it's going to be that bad because no one is panicking yet but then again that might be a bad sign

[Anonymous No.53205557]

>>53205542
Land doesnt produce phosphate or potash. Some nitrogen production is possible with low productivity.

[Anonymous No.53205689]

>>53205537
>Doesn't know what money is. Calls things of which he is ignorant "dumb."
But there's no point in arguing semantics. The only point I am trying to make is that currency creation and credit creation in no way are necessary for highly productive farming. I don't doubt that credit creation sped up the industrial revolution by allowing some farmers who couldn't otherwise afford the new farm equipment to buy it sooner and become more productive sooner. But in no way is printing necessary or even beneficial for farming in the long term. Running a printer in a treasury's basement does not make the crops on the farm grow better, nor increase the efficiency or their harvest.

[Anonymous No.53205697]

How can I cope with the fact that I'll never know the rest of the story, bros?

>>53202524
Isn't she canonically Middle Eastern?

[Anonymous No.53205761]

>>53202488

It's the cost of labor that's high in the US.

[Anonymous No.53205778]

>>53205689
Money provides the incentive for people to work.

[Anonymous No.53205793]

in canada the government forced farmers to cut fertilizer use by 30%. and yet for some reason this drives food prices up even though they're using less fertilizer i don't get it. what could be causing inflation in the food supply

[Anonymous No.53205864]

>>53205793
Less fertilizer results in lower crop yields.

[Anonymous No.53205960]

>>53205505
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTPopNG6LRM
Gold was back then and is still today cornered by the banks; today most farmers where I live are highly dependent from subsidies and new loans.

[Anonymous No.53205984]

>>53205778
This.
>picrel is the shrinking money supply before european bankers implemented their new gold backed currency in the US. They pribed the court to make this happen. Hardship makes people desperate for "solutions".

[Anonymous No.53206018]

>>53205697
>Middle Eastern; negress
Guts is the demon slayer and the one who killed 100 man, if he wants Cascar he should take her imo. I don't judge.

[Anonymous No.53206065]

>>53202375
Biosolids from human sewages contain antibiotics and other poisonous stuff.
Biosolids from animals need animals in the first place which requires either a lot of space or protein rich supplements. One can't fool nature imo.

[Anonymous No.53206969]

>>53205436
You vill accept the limitations, mortal

[Anonymous No.53207341]

>>53203479
Thx science anon.

[Anonymous No.53207584]

>>53205778
This is why the definition of money is important. Giving people pieces of paper does not necessarily incentivise them to work. Transfering value to them does. If you print enough of the pieces of paper that people call "money" these days, those pieces of paper lose their value and won't incentivise anyone to work. Would you do any work for a Zimbabwe dollar? It will take several hundred trillion of them to buy anything. Printing new dollars does not create any new value. It simply dilutes the pool of existing value.
>>53205960
An industry being dependent on subsidies is not an efficient allocation of capital. Subsidies are likely contributing to the shortage of food supply. Often, subsidies lead to farmers wasting their products because they get paid more for doing that than selling it.
Being dependent on new loans may be even worse as it is completely unsustainable. Sooner or later everybody that is dependent on new loans goes bankrupt.
The way I see it, making the agricultural industry dependent on subsidies and loans is an effect of using a debt-based monetary system. The subsidies can only be paid because the federal government is continually going farther and farther into debt, at an ever-quickening pace. In order to keep the debt-based monetary system liquid, policy makers have also incentivised continually increasing debt levels in the private sector as well, making it difficult for farmers to compete without leveraging high debt levels.
Bankers and governments have certainly created an environment where the agricultural industry is dependent on their debt-based monetary system, but it didn't have to be that way. I don't see any reason agriculture wouldn't have been more stable and just as or more efficient, if it operated in a sound money system.

[Anonymous No.53209447]

>>53207584
>Bankers and governments have certainly created an environment where the agricultural industry is dependent on their debt-based monetary system, but it didn't have to be that way.
I agree. Only upside is that the current situation creates opportunities to buy cheap land. In my region one square meter of good meadow is around 1.10$ while I earn round about 28$/h (not US; I converted into $)

[Anonymous No.53210517]

>>53205436
Yes, we can certainly manufacture elements. It's just a feat of engineering that takes eons. What you've gotta do is make a star with a very precise mass supernova.

1. Build half a dyson-sphere (this is called a Shkadov Thruster) to get a star moving.
2. Aim at another nearby star, such that the sum of their mass will add up to the supernova you need.
3. Wait until the star arrives. (You will die before it does.)

Isaac Arthur has a great talk on the subject, in his Fermi Paradox series. In it, Isaac talks about the possibility that the reason we don't have much or any contact with aliens is because of the absurd rarity of this one element.

[Anonymous No.53210617]

>>53210517
https://youtu.be/oPU9jeQbTOU

[Anonymous No.53211086]

>>53202524
she's not black. I wouldn't consider her white but she's certainly not black.

[Anonymous No.53211462]

>>53202319
You only need electricity to produce fertilizer. Not even joking, you can produce and condense Nitric Acid via leaping electricity across a gap filled with nitrogen gas, I.E. regular ole air.