Future Farming

I have thought often about the impact that CF/LENR can have on agriculture. The amount of energy that goes into the production and distribution of the world’s food supply is vast, and an improved source of energy could make a huge impact on the efficiency of agriculture and the cost of food. Energy from CF/LENR could be employed in traditional agricultural settings, and also used in new ones.

The video below shows an operational ‘vertical farm’ in Singapore — and shows how indoor farming in multilevel buildings is a viable alternative to traditional agriculture in places where land suitable for growing crops is not available. Combine this kind of farming with almost-free LENR energy for heating, lighting, and power for other uses, and you can see that there is incredible potential for a transformation of the way we produce many of our crops.


  • john E

    The Stone Barns Center Slow Tools Project

    “Nearly all of the tractors and their implements used by small farmers disappeared during the rise of the current global industrial farming system, beginning in the 1960s,” Today, the market for small-scale farm equipment and tools simply doesn’t exist—and that puts small farmers at a disadvantage.

    The Stone Barns Center for Agriculture and Food in Pocantico, NY ( if any of you are foodies you will know Dan Barber and the farm-to-table movement) is undertaking a project to provide tools (like tractors) to small scale farmers. LENR might end up fitting the bill this program in particular with even a smaller carbon footprint than they may be imagining

  • Italo R.

    I can’t see the video…

  • Zaghlool

    Well, the solar panels cover a large area of the limited land ,which is looking very ugly.
    I believe that the rising C.F.Technology will solve such problem.

    • Ramsy

      Actually I never ever been convinced that solar power could be a good source for large amount of energy.

      • daniel maris

        Have you never heard of roofs Ramsy?

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          I’ve heard of those, Daniel. None will be used for solar after implementation of CF, except maybe as a backup to charge your batteries for CF startup.

          • sparky

            Peak phosphorus.
            If LENR can solve that looming problem it would be something.

  • Jonas

    I do hope LENR, or whatever it will be called, could be a very important piece in the puzzle of self-sustainability, alongside 3D-printing technology and home farming – all of which will be intimately connected. Such a de-capitalisation might also, I really hope, bring a new era of empathy and relaxation, free e.g. of the slavery of traditional work. And with it a new dawn for veganism (even in-vitro meat, which might be ethically ‘sound’ is more energy-, nutritional-, water- and space-demanding than vegetable growing. If I’m permitted to dream…

    • daniel maris

      I agree (almost) entirely Jonas. I think we are on the cusp of a new revolution…an energy revolution which means we can move beyond global trading (with all its inequities and iniquities)n towards true self sufficiency in small human-scale communities.

      Speaking as an omnivore (our natural disposition let us remember), I hope also we are on the cusp of ethical meat. Lab meat is just about to go commercial this year I think (grown in cultures in the lab and stressed to develop muscle-like characteristics) – it will be added to burger meat. I look forward a couple of decades from now, to when we can grow in the lab meat that tastes as good as the real thing and we can release animals from what is often a pretty miserable existence.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        I don’t see anything unethical about eating meat. It’s just not very healthy.

        I don’t see anything wrong with global trading. That computer you’re using couldn’t exist with global trading.

        I don’t approve of anti-human religion, but that’s just me.

  • daniel maris
  • in house farming is probably useless, since we have a much greater and cheaper potential of farming by just increasing the efficiency of farming in underdevelopped zone like Africa.
    Africa could increase productivity by 10, and 3 will be enough to be self-sufficient.
    Human population is soon peaking at 9billion because of demographic transition, and will decline probably around 2050.

    This inhouse farming, fed by LENR or Nuke, however is a very good answers to the preacher of doom that repeat, decades after decades, the always proved false stupid Malthusian prediction…

    to give food to the planet, even to give meat, one just need to solve corruption in underdevelopped zone, which mean develo political awareness, which can be done by school… school also reduce fecundity, accelerating demographic transition, increasing farming efficiency, and helping resilience to natural catastrophes.

    as usual problem is political, which mean educational in fact.

    LENR cannot easily help to fight bad education and corrupted politicians…
    I won’t even be surprised if developed countries like in EU, fall back to block LENR and lower farming productivity because of demagogy and pathologic education by crony media exploiting submissive science feudal community to justify those crony politics.
    It is on the way. Hope LENR can help population reject Malthusian ideology, but not so sure.

  • walker

    Cheapest way to do this in big cities is to dig a big hole under a Tesco/Walmart cuts all transport costs for all fresh produce to zero. Holes in the ground are far cheaper to build than buildings. Just a big concrete lined pit will do then these conveyer belt planter arrangements, put fresh plants in one side then let them go down to the bottom and back up again the other side growing all the time under LENR powered lights, and pumped and purified water. When the come back up to the top crop, steam clean the beds to kill off pests, LENR again and re plant.

    No chemicals so all organic.

    Bye bye Monsanto etc.

  • MikeP

    I think that one of the greatest potentials for LENR in farming is with water. Contaminated water (such as alkali water containing such nice things as arsenic) can be purified and used. Water can be drawn from the atmosphere (there is existing, but not currently economic technology for doing this). Water can be better treated than now before being released back into streams and aquifers. The main downside is that many desert areas will turn into viable croplands and it will be important to preserve areas in a “pristine” state both for maintaining desert species and for the benefit of future generations.

  • Roger Bird

    The USA already spends 1/2 as much per capita for food production as any other nation on Earth. Our problem is not the cheapness or quantity of our food; it is the quality of our food. The entire category of organic food should be eliminated by making it the only category, and the so-called commercial food (non-organic) category should cease to exist. But people are too stupid to understand that the quality of their health (and happiness) depends upon the quality of their food. Just about every form of death and illness in the USA can be easily traced back to the qualtiy of the frankenfoods that we eat on a regular basis.

    • the greatest scnadal of real death about food in europe is becaus eof Organis food, and based on it’s definitions and regulation (scandal of e-coli because not cleaning with chloride nmore tha 80 dead, and 500 transplanted whith many that will die in the next years)…
      the most funny is that the organic lobby tried to blame the industry and it worked very well… despite the facts.

      you have to go to China to find so deadly food scandal.

      there are other similar scandal about organic food, and regulators know that organic food is more dangerous than even cheap food. for old and well know reasons (bacteria, mycotoxins, natural internal insecticides caused by lack of external insecticides)…
      it is well known, and like LENR or other facts, it is impossible to tell the truth…

      we have really a problem with science which, despite being clear and established, cannot be accepted , and is replaced by politically correct pretended to be scientific consensus.

      • MikeP

        For every label that becomes a fad, there will be companies willing to cater to that. So most “low fat” foods have sugar substituted for the fat and are worse for you than regular (just look at some labels!). “Free trade” just means buying a certificate and filling out a form where you declare you are following the rules (with no inspection or verification). Those who buy “free trade” often get the same coffee as non-free trade, but get to feel better about it for their money. I see much of “organic” as being the same. You get the same products, pay more for it, and get to feel good about yourself. While there are legitimate companies, I am sure, there will always be the opportunistic ones also. Don’t get me wrong. I prefer as few additives as possible and will not buy most supermarket breads because of that. At the same time I won’t buy organic just because it’s labeled organic.

        • Roger Bird

          MikeP, I agree with you. “Organic” the label has become a joke. I don’t bother with it. I do occasionally consult with http://www.cornucopia.org/ to see if someone is actually trying to follow the rules. I was speaking of organic the concept, of farmers actually caring about their end customers rather than their pocket books.

      • Roger Bird

        AlainCo, it is your responsibility to be understandable. It is not our responsibly to understand you when even your letter arrangement is screwed up.

        A superficial perusal of health does not give one the right to say stupid and out of context things. When you make the connection between what you eat and your health and get serious about your health, then your study of health won’t be so superficial and you won’t look for imperfections in vast improvements a nation’s food system and then you might have something useful to say.

        • maybe I am not clear, but probably you don’t under because you are misinformed about organic food reality.

          Organic food reduce land usage efficiency.
          The organic pesticides are used in huge quantity to compensate their inefficiency, and the total is that it is quite the same if not worse than classic.
          Product are more dangerous because they are less protected from aggressors and have to produce natural insecticides (you should get some education on those natural chemical, as toxic as artificial but produced inside) to fight .
          moreover some stupid regulation, in EU, like forbiding of sodium hypochlorite (javel) make the vegetable simply infected and dangerous.
          it have killed nearly a hundred people (the worst scandal in EU), and will kill more because their kidney is dead and they need transplant, and transplant often only delay death…

          recently there is an epidemic of datura (have effect similar to ecstazy or lsd) intoxication that is covered…

          organic food might look a good idea for young urban people, but when you dig it is simply dangerous religious trend.

          many fears of phytosanitary (for the consumer… for farmers there is a problem, yet some progress) is simply rumors without any proof, and the real cause of current sanitary problems are mostly the usual behavioral toxic : smoke, alcohol, lack of sport, diet disbalance, and stress…

          the problem around organic food is neo-religious… it is evident if you use honestly sociology method, which is never done because of ideological debate.

          • Roger Bird

            AlainCo, I apologize for my caustic response.

            I am sure that the label “organic” is deeply flawed. I am also sure the just letting commercial farmers run wild with artificial everything is even worse.

  • Thomas Guertler

    This article and viewpoint are missing the main problem of agriculture, water. Anyone who has flown over much of the U.S. has seen the crop circles of green in seas of brown wherever irrigation is present. With LENR the ability to desalinate water on low cost basis would revolutionize agriculture. This fact alone will allow more food to be grown and distributed than ever before. If it comes to fruition, it will help to drive the nearly 50% increase in food production that we will need by 2050.

    Don’t get me wrong, I love hydroponics and high intensity growning, but the real change will be the availablilty of water to drive the needed increases in production.