Article: How an asteroid impact would transform the food we eat

[EBuff75]

Interesting article on the BBC website about how we (humankind) could feed ourselves after an asteroid impact and the ensuing lowered temperatures and significant decrease in sunlight (at least for a period of several years). 

Initial survival would likely require being underground, due to debris raining down all over the planet for days following the impact.  Food/water for that week would need to have been stored ahead of time.  Then we would emerge to skies covered in dust clouds which would take years to dissipate.  Crops would have to migrate south to take advantage of available sunlight, some of which would still require greenhouses.  Additionally, some crops could be grown underground or indoors. 

Some types of manufacturing could be changed over to produce food items (the article goes into some detail about this), but there is also a warning that we'd all have to accept massive changes in our diet in order to survive, referred to as "culinary innovation."  (think manufactured food bars, insects, plants that we're not used to, etc.)

Models for how such an event would affect the ocean aren't very well developed.  Assuming that the impact to the ocean ecosystem is survivable, then the oceans might be able to provide an even greater proportion of our calories than what they do currently.

The article ends with this statement:

Our existing food system is held in place by government subsidies, corporate monopolies, and a cultural bias towards foods we perceive as being natural or traditional. Yet both man-made and natural disasters are inevitable. To prepare, we must reconsider the places and knowledge that may become viable when fields and sunlight no longer are: tunnels, mines, mills, factories and ocean platforms. This might not always seem palatable to some, but our species' survival may depend on it.

Definitely worth the read.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20221013-how-an-asteroid-impact-would-transform-the-food-we-eat

[NapalmMan67]

Mmmmmmmmmm...  Soylent Green.
.

[Raptor]

Good article. Thank you!

Depending upon the size of the asteroid and location of the impact; it could very well be an extinction event at the worst and best, another year without summer like that which occurred in 1816.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

[Mr. E. Monkey]

It is an interesting article.  Unfortunately, there are so many variables in the scenario that it's nigh on impossible to develop a very thorough plan, beyond riding out the initial impact and fallout.  For me, the key takeaway is focus on resiliency and flexibility.

I do appreciate the writer's optimism, though!

The UK will be in a strong position too.

Well, assuming, of course that it's not ground zero, or flooded by massive tsunamis from an ocean impact.  But then, I suppose there wouldn't be any reason to write an article on a British site if they expected to get wiped off the globe, so...

We contact other survivors and agree that all knowledge and technology will be open sourced.

My assless chaps say otherwise.  

Seriously, though, while I would like to believe it could happen that way, my understanding of human nature and history lead me to a more sanguine expectation.  Then again, depending on the size and location of the impact(s?), it's hard to say.

On a positive(?) note, however, it would likely have a pretty significant effect on global warming.


Getting back to the Big Ol' Space Rock of Doom (BOSpaRD?), I would really be interested to see, now that they've taken the first step of crashing a probe into an asteroid, what potential impact a Casaba-Howitzer could have on breaking up/redirecting an asteroid.  I would expect that it might be even more spectacularly put to use on a comet.  That would be neat to watch. 

[NapalmMan67]

My assless chaps say otherwise. 

Assless chaps by any other name would be chaps I believe eh?  
.

[Mr. E. Monkey]

My assless chaps say otherwise. 

Assless chaps by any other name would be chaps I believe eh? 
.

You know, I think we had this conversation, at one point, and I do think the general consensus was yes, because chaps with an ass are called pants.

"Assless chaps" is just more fun to say. 

[NapalmMan67]

My assless chaps say otherwise. 

Assless chaps by any other name would be chaps I believe eh? 
.

You know, I think we had this conversation, at one point, and I do think the general consensus was yes, because chaps with an ass are called pants.

"Assless chaps" is just more fun to say. 

Or 3 or 7 other times me thinks.  I believe this has probably carried over from ZS.  lol
.

[Mr. E. Monkey]

My assless chaps say otherwise. 

Assless chaps by any other name would be chaps I believe eh? 
.

You know, I think we had this conversation, at one point, and I do think the general consensus was yes, because chaps with an ass are called pants.

"Assless chaps" is just more fun to say. 

Or 3 or 7 other times me thinks.  I believe this has probably carried over from ZS.  lol
.

Yeah, it was right up there with the "cake vs pie" discussions, I think.  Good times.

[echo83]

My assless chaps say otherwise. 

Assless chaps by any other name would be chaps I believe eh? 
.

You know, I think we had this conversation, at one point, and I do think the general consensus was yes, because chaps with an ass are called pants.

"Assless chaps" is just more fun to say. 

Or 3 or 7 other times me thinks.  I believe this has probably carried over from ZS.  lol
.

Yeah, it was right up there with the "cake vs pie" discussions, I think.  Good times.

Wrote a reply, but it got wiped. 

I'm just here for the assless chaps. And if that chaps your ass, well, too bad. 

This topic was 100% covered in an overly-descriptive way, in greater depth and a higher frequency than anyone cares to admit, on the other site. If we are in agreement that "assless chaps," is just more fun to say (and we are) then doesn't it behoove us to improve on the definition of pants? 

I submit for your humble review, "assedchaps." 

On topic: what a cool article! Underground farms for the (short term) win!

[EBuff75]

On topic: what a cool article! Underground farms for the (short term) win!

I'm just getting back into growing microgreens and I'm looking at some of the tabletop hydroponics setups to try out as well.  My house isn't well-suited to growing outdoors due to very heavy tree cover (almost no direct sunlight at all), so this is a way to see how green my thumbs are! 

When I initially clicked on the article, I wasn't expecting it to be quite as detailed as it was.  It's a good thought exercise, which is why I put it in the 'What If?' section.

[Mr. E. Monkey]

Wrote a reply, but it got wiped. 

I'm just here for the assless chaps. And if that chaps your ass, well, too bad. 

This topic was 100% covered in an overly-descriptive way, in greater depth and a higher frequency than anyone cares to admit, on the other site. If we are in agreement that "assless chaps," is just more fun to say (and we are) then doesn't it behoove us to improve on the definition of pants? 

I submit for your humble review, "assedchaps." 

On topic: what a cool article! Underground farms for the (short term) win!

I agree.  And you're my favorite human being today. 

Underground farms

Cheech and Chong save the world. 

Seriously, though, power to run the lights (unless they're just growing mushrooms, I guess) would be an issue--obviously, solar would probably not be a viable option, and ventilation would be a major issue with conventional fueled generators.  If it's a large enough impact to cause this kind of preparation, relying on the grid may be out, as well.

Might be a good use for Thorium reactors.

[EBuff75]

Underground farms

Cheech and Chong save the world. 

Seriously, though, power to run the lights (unless they're just growing mushrooms, I guess) would be an issue--obviously, solar would probably not be a viable option, and ventilation would be a major issue with conventional fueled generators.  If it's a large enough impact to cause this kind of preparation, relying on the grid may be out, as well.

Might be a good use for Thorium reactors.

Or geothermal power.  Probably because there are other, cheaper options in warmer areas, it seems like most of the places using geothermal are in cold climates (Alaska, Iceland).  In a situation like this though, where winter would be longer / harsher, I'm not sure that I'd want to be living in those kind of places!

[NapalmMan67]

My assless chaps say otherwise. 

Assless chaps by any other name would be chaps I believe eh? 
.

You know, I think we had this conversation, at one point, and I do think the general consensus was yes, because chaps with an ass are called pants.

"Assless chaps" is just more fun to say. 

Or 3 or 7 other times me thinks.  I believe this has probably carried over from ZS.  lol
.

Yeah, it was right up there with the "cake vs pie" discussions, I think.  Good times.

Wrote a reply, but it got wiped.

I'm just here for the assless chaps. And if that chaps your ass, well, too bad.

This topic was 100% covered in an overly-descriptive way, in greater depth and a higher frequency than anyone cares to admit, on the other site. If we are in agreement that "assless chaps," is just more fun to say (and we are) then doesn't it behoove us to improve on the definition of pants?

I submit for your humble review, "assedchaps."

On topic: what a cool article! Underground farms for the (short term) win!

No chapping here, but I do have chaps. Really burns my ass when I sit on the motorcycle seat in the middle of July though.

And by pants you mean trousers, britches, dungarees etc. I'm sure.   




As for underground gardens, I'm sure they would work similarly to grow houses.  Unfortunately, I think the produce would be similar to hot house varieties and rather bland, but would sustain you anyway.  Hope we never have to find out.
.

[Mr. E. Monkey]

Underground farms

Cheech and Chong save the world. 

Seriously, though, power to run the lights (unless they're just growing mushrooms, I guess) would be an issue--obviously, solar would probably not be a viable option, and ventilation would be a major issue with conventional fueled generators.  If it's a large enough impact to cause this kind of preparation, relying on the grid may be out, as well.

Might be a good use for Thorium reactors.

Or geothermal power.  Probably because there are other, cheaper options in warmer areas, it seems like most of the places using geothermal are in cold climates (Alaska, Iceland).  In a situation like this though, where winter would be longer / harsher, I'm not sure that I'd want to be living in those kind of places!

Yeah, geothermal could probably make a big difference in a lot of places.  Hopefully there would still be enough local infrastructure to be able to tap into that.

[aikorob]

this popped up today:

https://neal.fun/asteroid-launcher/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

drop a rock where you want and see the damage

[flybynight]

Wild A 200 foot  iron dropped into the ocean creates a 367 ft tsunami

[majorhavoc]

Fascinating article and discussion here at UFOZS. My big takeaway: assless chaps really is more fun to say.