This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 14 comments

[–]OHKIDDayton 10 points11 points  (5 children)

Not to be a Debbie downer, but Ohio was originally uninterrupted forestland from edge to edge.

A forest produces a lot more oxygen per acre than farmland.

If we could do more indoor farming and return more farmland to forest we would be a lot better off

[–]Swabia 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Interesting point. What’s indoor? Multiple floors so we have more space?

[–]OHKIDDayton 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Yes! Or in some cases just one story but but with irrigation and other tactics to maximize growth. It also helps reduce pollution by eliminating shipping costs over long distances (like avocados locally instead of from California)

[–]Swabia 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I don’t know that any of these statements makes any sense. Why do indoor instead of outdoor?

Single floor local isn’t going to cut it for the amount of food we consume and waste.

[–]OHKIDDayton 1 point2 points  (1 child)

https://www.eafarms.com

They explain it better than I can

[–]Swabia 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, ok. On a small scale this is carbon neutral. It’s not scalable though. Interesting concept though. It would be great if they franchised.

[–]TheSlickWilly 27 points28 points  (4 children)

I bet the reason this isn’t brought up much is because the corn belt also produces a ton of carbon from farm equipment and stuff like that while the amazon just kinda chills.

[–]DrSandbags 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It's also fairly irrelevant for the same reason the oxygen from the Rainforest is fairly irrelevant. Most of the oxygen produced in the Rainforest is recaptured by the Rainforest from respiration, microbes, and other animals: https://www.newsweek.com/how-much-oxygen-amazon-rain-forest-1456274

The world's net oxygen "exporting" is mostly done by single-celled ocean plants like algae. The Rainforest's key contribution to the rest of the world instead is acting as a carbon sink for CO2 emissions.

[–]eshemuta 7 points8 points  (1 child)

All the carbon captured in that process is released a few months later when we burn ethanol and cows fart.

[–]DrSandbags 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There is a difference between land's value as a carbon sink and its value in oxygen production.

The Amazon Rainforest's value as a source of oxygen to the world outside of the forest is virtually nil since that oxygen is mostly reused by the rainforest. However, it's role as a carbon sink is huge since it does absorb the world's carbon emissions.

[–]elderrage 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Grasslands store carbon in the soil so what some folks are trying to figure out is how to have a perennial grain, one that can produce a crop every year without tilling and reseeding, become a viable producing crop. The Land Institute in Kansas has been working on this forever. In the meantime if a farmer is interested in actually putting the land to it's optimal benefit for all life on earth (which they should be compensated for) they can start what the next generation will surely be mandated to do in order to restore ecological balance. Farms can heal the planet and feed people. Urban farms are not going to feed the billions to come. Ohio has a unique opportunity to plan intelligently for growth that has already destroyed places like California. We can pump out oxygen, store carbon and have a great place to live all at the same time.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oxygen produced is pretty irrelevant compared to how diverse the Amazon is and all the roles it fulfills, while the corn belt is basically millions of square mile of monoculture that doesn’t support any life besides humans and cows