Soil

[jake williams]

Increasingly my main long term enviromental concern is about soil. I really have neither a profound understanding of biology, nor of soil science, but it seems like we're taking a ridiculous amount of biomass out of the ground, and most of it either ends up in landfills or in the ocean.

Isn't this a problem? I feel like something here doesn't add up. The forestry companies here replant trees, but they're pulling out millions of tons of wood a year, and it's thin soil.

I may be being really naive, but isn't this a problem?

[TheSultan]

I honestly don't see soil mineral depletion as becoming a problem any time within the near future, I do however think deforestation is something worth our concern.

Also, this may be interesting to know: When a piece of land is leveled and prepared for construction of some kind, all of the topsoil (the nutrient rich part of the soil) is skimmed off. After the leveling process is complete a grossly thin layer is replaced on top of the hard ground. The rest is hauled off to be sold. Just another example of how capitalism promotes destruction of the environment for a quick, easy dollar.

[leftace53]

My main concern for soil (if there is one) would be with arable soil is that we keep building on it. Back in the day, people settled around areas with nice farming soil, and as technology progressed they built large buildings on it, and now cities like Toronto (yes oahahahahaha Canada lolololo) are built on mostly farming land, which could be used for I dunno, carrots, and are currently used for housing capitalist finance businesses. But no, I don't like carrots, so potatoes.

[Ovi]

Increasingly my main long term enviromental concern is about soil. I really have neither a profound understanding of biology, nor of soil science, but it seems like we're taking a ridiculous amount of biomass out of the ground, and most of it either ends up in landfills or in the ocean.

Isn't this a problem? I feel like something here doesn't add up. The forestry companies here replant trees, but they're pulling out millions of tons of wood a year, and it's thin soil.

I may be being really naive, but isn't this a problem?
It's a huge problem. Cutting trees and replanting them is not enough to regrow a forest. You need to replace the lost nutrients, phosphorus being perhaps the most important here. Phosphorus is a non renewable resource, which makes modern agriculture and forestry unsustainable by relying on it. There are sustainable equivalents, such as sustainable agriculture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_agriculture), but obviously, clear cutting and synthetic fertilizers are cheaper. While phosphorus resources should last for at least another century (though there are more pessimistic scenarios), by the time we realize we're out of phosphorus, the soil will be too degraded to allow sustainable practices. Yet another reason to hate the market and capitalism: agriculture being unsustainable, the cost we pay for food today is smaller than in reality, by externalizing its cost on the future generations. This prevents sustainable practices from ever being dominant in a capitalist economy.

[Quail]

My biology is a bit rusty, so please correct me if I'm wrong, by the way.

Deforestation is a problem, especially in the rainforests because the soil there isn't actually that rich in minerals so if rainforests are cut down for land to grow other plants, the soil quickly loses its minerals and becomes useless.
There is also a problem with farming crops and using a lot of artificial fertiliser as this doesn't preserve the richness of the soil (unlike rotating crops) and fertilisers can also cause other environmental problems, especially if they get into water.

[leftace53]

Isn't there also something with concrete, and how the rain water can't properly do what its supposed to, so it often overflows rivers and streams eroding more and more soil into the bodies of water so greenery can't grow nicely... or atleast thats what the environment people told me a while ago