Posted by
Hemos
on from the soylnet-green-is-made-from-people dept.
ihnm writes "Science Daily has a story on the harvesting of the first soybeans grown in a space station. Does this mean McDonald's will start selling Space Burgers?"
Good source for interstellar travel
by
(trb001)
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I know they say they're researching this to make soybeans "cheaper and better for the consumer", but I gotta believe that they're second goal (if not their primary) is to find a way to grow food during interstellar travel. That's always been one of the biggest problems facing astronauts, you COULD get to Mars, but it would take 10 years and you wouldn't be able to pack that much food. If they could grow food, though, people can live off of an all vegetable diet. Heck, you can breed animals given a renewable source of vegetable food for them.
--trb
space farming?
by
Nmonic
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
How viable would it be to in say, 25 to 50 years have huge orbiting farming (greenhouse) satellites, fully automated (sorry farmers) and we (er, machines) harvest them year round. Forget the seasonal growing limitations here on earth, and there's no shortage of "real estate" to grow crops on in space, either.
Its obviously not fiesable right now, but if we could get the cost per pound of placing something in orbit down, it could be a reality.
Re:That's not what the UN thinks
by
fean
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
You're right... so lets all export all of the water from our farmlands to the needy countries of the world....
never mind that of the cows out here (in South Dakota)... I have NEVER EVER seen any actually irrigated... not with purified water, sometimes underground wells, but most farmers come up with this really neat idea of digging big holes in the ground, they call this a reservoir, it's a real nifty idea.
so this whole 5000 gallons of a resource we don't spend any energy "extracting" actually ends up being a bunch of bull-shit, as the water wouldn't be doing anything but SITTING...
just because you have an arguement, doesn't mean it's a good one... sure, there may be some places in the world where water is scarce... and we even felt the drought here in south dakota... but the point is that cattle can move to where the water IS, where you have to bring the water to the crops.... which do you think expends more energy?
there is nothing wrong with raising cattle, but there is something wrong with raising cattle where it's not viable
the magical soybean
by
tprox
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Soybeans are hardy and grow well in many conditions. Plus they provide the protein that people need to survive without having to require yet another living thing who is just going to end up being slaughtered for consumption (cow, for example).
Sure it sucks to eat tofu every day, but you have to give something up to survive in such closed quarters.
Slashdot Mirror
I know they say they're researching this to make soybeans "cheaper and better for the consumer", but I gotta believe that they're second goal (if not their primary) is to find a way to grow food during interstellar travel. That's always been one of the biggest problems facing astronauts, you COULD get to Mars, but it would take 10 years and you wouldn't be able to pack that much food. If they could grow food, though, people can live off of an all vegetable diet. Heck, you can breed animals given a renewable source of vegetable food for them.
--trb
How viable would it be to in say, 25 to 50 years have huge orbiting farming (greenhouse) satellites, fully automated (sorry farmers) and we (er, machines) harvest them year round. Forget the seasonal growing limitations here on earth, and there's no shortage of "real estate" to grow crops on in space, either. Its obviously not fiesable right now, but if we could get the cost per pound of placing something in orbit down, it could be a reality.
You're right... so lets all export all of the water from our farmlands to the needy countries of the world....
never mind that of the cows out here (in South Dakota)... I have NEVER EVER seen any actually irrigated... not with purified water, sometimes underground wells, but most farmers come up with this really neat idea of digging big holes in the ground, they call this a reservoir, it's a real nifty idea.
so this whole 5000 gallons of a resource we don't spend any energy "extracting" actually ends up being a bunch of bull-shit, as the water wouldn't be doing anything but SITTING...
just because you have an arguement, doesn't mean it's a good one... sure, there may be some places in the world where water is scarce... and we even felt the drought here in south dakota... but the point is that cattle can move to where the water IS, where you have to bring the water to the crops.... which do you think expends more energy?
there is nothing wrong with raising cattle, but there is something wrong with raising cattle where it's not viable
Soybeans are hardy and grow well in many conditions. Plus they provide the protein that people need to survive without having to require yet another living thing who is just going to end up being slaughtered for consumption (cow, for example).
Sure it sucks to eat tofu every day, but you have to give something up to survive in such closed quarters.
If the chinese do it, so can you!