0
2

[–] Wedhro 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Or you could just compost your trash/poop and feed it to worms to get the best slow-release fertilizer ever, almost for free, not to mention the benefits of not needing chemical labs nor polluting the land with said trash/poop. Bonus: multiple beneficial effects on soil structure and microfauna.

Cons: sorry, no patents nor nobel prizes.

0
2

[–] DonDiegoDeLaVega 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Why not rotate their crops, improve the soil with cover crops, vary their production, and use natural fertilizer? Because then they wouldn't be beholden to Big AG, having to buy new fertilizer each year and feeling the need to go with GMO seeds in hopes that they get the promised boost in production, which leads to more pesticides used and having to buy new seed yearly... Leading to less food stability than if they were to use traditional (pre industrial AG revolution) methods.

0
2

[–] Donbuster 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

If this pans out as economical, it will be huge. It will reduce the work needed to grow crops, making food affordable, while at the same time reducing environmental damage on a large scale. The dead patch in the gulf might begin to shrink rather than grow...

0
0

[–] BGAIN ago 

'Reduces environmental damage' meaning it causes environmental damage.

0
0

[–] KinkRaven ago 

So a big operational cost savings?

That would be excellent news, I'll actually read this article instead of just skim the comments :)

1
1

[–] Mtat 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

Slow release fertilizers aren't news, what is news is this particular kind of slow release.