Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

In all fairness "they" have been living in the middle east thousands more years than anglo-saxans have been living in america

They could charter a cruise liner to bring them over here but that would get them to PNG. alternatively if they charted a jumbo that would work just fine.

Surely AP if the best way to grow food in such environments.

WOW -- are these big multi-acre AP systems composed of one single closed-loop system each?? A 5 acre system would be nuts. A 24 acre one would be insane!

And very risky, no?

I am in the (very early) planning phases of a commercial AP farm when I move back to Hawaii next year, but I envision it containing a dozen or so self-contained large (but not gigantic) AP systems -- that way we can have several different aquatic creatures in each tank. Plus if one group of animals or plants get diseases, it would not bring down the entire farm.

Wonder what the other pros or cons are of having a huge AP system versus several AP systems in a huge space?

Don't know about Ryans 5 acre system... most current hobby farm systems are "single closed loop" systems... and indeed risky IMO... as you have little control over either growth systems.... especially if utilising "flawed media".. and/or chop2 hydraulic deliveries....

Standard UVI models... adhered to... aren't single closed loop.. although many might think they are.... and most recent adaptions have (wrongly) interpreted them to be...

The system above is definitely NOT a single closed loop... it's designed and intended to be commercially profitable from both an aquaculture and hydroponic perspective...

Ahh... you have been bitten by the bug... and swept up by the romance...

Having separate systems for separate aquatic species is certainly a good idea... but the question is... are the separate modules each profitable....

Having a huge farm with separate unprofitable modules doesn't suddenly transform the farm into profitability just because it's "huge"...

It just means that you have a big farm with lots of unprofitable modules...

Yea i dont have a problem with people living in deserts, better people live there and leave the green, treed areas of the world alone.
rather than everyone trying to live in green areas where everything then gets wiped out to make room, then we leave the "lifeless" deserts alone.

Sometimes what seems backwards can be the better way.

Thanks for posting Rupe. This will be an interesting one to follow, assuming info is made public.

Not wanting to play devil's advocate but rather wanting to make the point that many of those deserts are not "lifeless" at all.

I sure you appreciate that though otherwise you wouldn't have described the deserts as "lifeless".

Exactly, quotation marks are used in cases like that for a reason.
but either way, as far as pollution mitigation, etc. goes, green areas are much more important to protect than deserts.

This sort of language/statement is a personal bug bear of mine. This post might be better placed in the vent thread...

They are only more valuable subjectively. If you take the view that all species are equal, therefore all ecosystems are equal then deserts and other low biomass habitats need to be protected because of their own unique characteristics, species, interactions and assemblages.

For example, I still have arguments with some so called environmental types wanting to selectively log areas of forest regrowth to "eco thin" trees. The aim of such activities is to thin out forests and so encourage/allow remaining trees to grow faster than they otherwise wood.

If you want to manage such a forest to get saw logs fine, no problem.
If you want to manage such a forest to get big pretty trees, no problem.
If you want to manage such a forest to create an environment that is more attractive to winged arboreal hunters like owls, quolls and the like, no problem.
If you want to manage such a forest to speed up the growth of large trees so that hollows will be created for vertebrate nesting sites sooner (in a hundred years or so) rather than later (much later) then no problem.

If you want to manage such a forest for any of these more subjectively valuable outcomes then say so. Don't say you are doing it because it is more "environmental" or more "eco-friendly" than other ways of managing a forest. Also do it in the knowledge that you will be displacing/destroying an ecosystem and an assemblage of species that only exist in dense sapling regrowth stands and you will be denying the existence of another ecosystem that will form over time as these dense stands of saplings senesce due to mortal competition between saplings for moisture, nutrients and sunlight. If all such regrowth areas are systematically thinned then the species that are adapted to thrive in those habitats will be denied the opportunity of doing so.

Having said all that I think placing AP systems and cities in deserts can be a great idea.

I wasnt discounting the species that live in deserts.
my statement speaks for itself, it has nothing to do with morals.
simply that some areas do more "work" as far as the natural processes go, that is undisputable.
Protecting those areas is more important that areas of less productivity, from a productivity stand point <- not economic productivity.

If you want to argue that no area is less important, i am on your side, i also believe all humans should be wiped out as we do nothing but destroy, no matter where we are.

I think they are building a swimming hole

I like traffic lights..

@everyone in general but Yavimaya in particular...

Many environmentalists take the view that we are no greater than animals and if that is so then it stands we should be equal to animals. If you follow that logic then we are just as entitled to live out our natural desires as caterpillars, locusts, thorn of crowns starfish, foxes or any other animal that depletes its own environment.

My environmentalism mostly stems from self interest and secondly a desire to care for our planet because it is a treasure that I want to preserve. Which really comes down to self interest and self interest.