It’s agricultural, but is it art?

What connects oats and maize (apart from both being grasses)? Both are the protagonists in an effort to use art to open people’s eyes.

DSC00708.jpg

Maya Weinstein‘s latest food-centred project is a recipe and complete set of ingredients to make your own High Fructose Corn Syrup. Yup, the bad boy of the US military industrial food complex, right there in your own kitchen.

Mix 10 cups of Yellow Dent #2 corn extract with one drop sulfuric acid, one teaspoon Alpha-Amylase, one teaspoon Glucose-Amylase, and one teaspoon Xylose, strain through a cheesecloth, and heat. Then, once the slurry has reached 140 degrees, add Glucose Isomerase, bring to a boil, let cool, and enjoy!

I got the story (and the quote) from bon appétit, which explains that “even though you can find [HFCS] in almost every product on the market, from soda pop to whole wheat bread, you can’t just buy HFCS by itself. Anywhere”.

Weinstein’s project is in some ways the very opposite of industrial HFCS: it is expensive — her kit goes for $70-80 — and kind of artisanal, in that the product actually bears some resemblance to corn.

“I’d like to give this recipe to people and let them do what they will,” Weinstein said. “It’s all about doing it yourself, taking the ideas of open sourcing technology and applying them to food. By taking back these foods that aren’t ours, deconstructing them and reconstructing them, maybe we can disrupt the industry a little bit.”

As for the oats, Benedikt Groß, a “speculative and an interaction designer” has made them the ink droplets in his version of agricultural printing.

Avena_Field.png

We’ve written here before about similar things, including rice art, but to be honest those fields are, to my mind, pretty kitsch. Groß is after something different, a method of growing oats interspersed with wildflowers where the ultimate harvest is feedstock for bioenergy, rather than food for people (in Scotland). Here’s his explanation:

The project uses the idea of “Agricultural Printing” to explore the possibilities of digital fabrication carried over into farming. The experiment applies algorithms to partition and to create an environmentally beneficial structure into a standard biomass/energy production field. These additional areas establish, or improve, the connectivity for fauna and flora between habitats. This increased diversity also eases typical problems of monocultures e.g. less vermin → reduced usage of pesticides. Furthermore a farmer could “rent out” the areas for several months a year as compensatory area in the same fashion like the CO2 emissions trading scheme works (in the EU every new land for building has to be compensated). Hence in the near future a farmer might not just produce oats, peas, beans and barley, but also print “environment compensations areas” into his fields.

Of course you may, like me, feel that pandering to bioenergy is barking up the wrong willow tree. And that disrupting the food system by doing what they do, but at home, is not all that disruptive. Art, though, doesn’t have to make sense. It does have to make you think, and these two projects did just that.

Featured: “To hell with soil and plant biodiversity”

Rahul Goswami likes the idea of calories delivered to the food system as a measure of productivity:

It’s high time we were liberated from that duo of malign trinities – the APY and the NPK. Area production yield is what government servants, accustomed to bland high-handedness, take recourse to when supplying ministers and macro-economists with material for annual planning, hence the longevity of APY. The other one is the close ally of APY, and its credo is “to hell with soil and plant biodiversity”.

With some references on the benefits of eating less meat.

A diverse look at productivity

erl472821f1_hr.png

Take a look at the graphic up there and tell me what you see? If you’re anything like me, you’ll be a bit surprised. In this kind of “heat map” green is usually good and red is usually bad, but what on Earth is good across much of sub-Saharan Africa and Asia and bad just about everywhere else?

Yield — if you think about it properly.

ResearchBlogging.org A recent paper by Emily Cassidy and her colleagues at the University of Minnesota 1 got a lot of press recently focused on the claim that feeding more people a nutritionally sound diet would be a lot easier if we just ate lower on the food chain. That’s an argument that lots of people have made, backed up to varying degrees with good numbers. What’s different this time is that the numbers are a lot more rigorous and, in my opinion, a lot more accessible. That map above, for example, shows the calories delivered to the food system per calorie produced. In other words, crudely, the amount of human food as opposed to animal feed.

Obvious, when you think about it, that the number of people fed per hectare is surely a better measure of agricultural productivity than the simple yield. That’s what underpins the money quote:

We find that, given the current mix of crop uses, growing food exclusively for direct human consumption could, in principle, increase available food calories by as much as 70%, which could feed an additional 4 billion people (more than the projected 2–3 billion people arriving through population growth). Even small shifts in our allocation of crops to animal feed and biofuels could significantly increase global food availability, and could be an instrumental tool in meeting the challenges of ensuring global food security.

There are other eye-opening graphics in the paper, for example a ranking of the major crops based on calories delivered to the food system versus calories lost. As you can imagine, maize doesn’t do well at all. Nor does barley, because so much goes to feed. I highly recommend taking a look at the full paper, which is freely available.

Cassidy et al. are decidedly not calling for everyone to go vegan. For a start, that would leave a lot of grass and other forages uneaten and a lot of nutritional holes in the diet of many people. They are suggesting that the “problem” of feeding future global population may be easier to solve than currently imagined, if people shift their diet. The problem of how to help people shift their diet, they don’t address.

Too hot to think

Synchronicity.png It is hot in Rome at the moment, and hotter still at my desk. In fact, my computer gave up the ghost on Friday and had to have a brain transplant. All back to normal, for now, but not a lot to report, apart from trying to maintain a steady stream of Nibbles. A couple that didn’t fit there. First, the picture: an undoctored image of two consecutive items from my Twitter stream that just happened to take my fancy. Secondly, a trial of pickling cucumber varieties that didn’t even mention asier (about which I too knew nothing until 4 days ago). That post is about a year old, but someone else linked to it in the past couple of days. And, if you’re thinking of something to do with excess cucumbers, and you fancy a touch of the exotic, how about creating a pressure-infused cucumber martini? Sounds like a blast. Cheers!