#553 in History books
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product

Reddit mentions of Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations

Sentiment score: 3
Reddit mentions: 10

We found 10 Reddit mentions of Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations. Here are the top ones.

Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations
Buying options
View on Amazon.com
or
Specs:
Height9.5 Inches
Length6.75 Inches
Number of items1
Weight1.04940036712 Pounds
Width1 Inches

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Found 10 comments on Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations:

u/ShootTheChicken · 28 pointsr/gardening

Is that by the same guy that did this book? Because that book is excellent, I highly recommend it.

u/HippyCapitalist · 22 pointsr/collapse

Plants pull CO2 out of the air and use around half of it to build their bodies. They exude the rest of the carbon into the soil as simple sugars to feed the microbes that live in the soil. The microbes eat the sugar and excrete acids into the soil, breaking down the rock to get the minerals they need in addition to carbon to build their bodies. When the microbes die, the plants can absorb the minerals the microbes collected.

People have degraded topsoil so much that we have a huge opportunity to remove CO2 from the air and store it in soil by restoring soil health, which would happen if we could/would restore the native ecosystems. David Mongomery has some great books and videos explaining where we are and how we got here.

Trees have an enormous amount of solar collecting leaves powering the photosynthetic machinery that converts atmospheric CO2 to wood and carbon in the soil. Compare that to the photosynthesis a lawn cut a few inches high can do. People need to plant as many trees as possible, and even more importantly save every bit of old growth ecosystems we can.

u/pencilears · 16 pointsr/TrueReddit

to be fair, while a giant monocropping farm can produce a shit-ton of corn or soybeans, in terms of efficiency of soil conservation and total possible calories to be derived from that soil, small multi-crop mixed farms do a lot better both over the short and long term.

source

over the next century I expect a return to traditional farming methods as we run out of oil and need to produce more calories per acre as the population continues to grow.

u/patron_vectras · 11 pointsr/teslamotors

Mightaswell reccomend a book while we are off topic.

Dirt: Erosion of Civilizations by David R Montgomery.

The story of humanity and how it has been changing the climate since the dawn of agriculture.

u/Billmarius · 3 pointsr/Futurology

>TIL solar and other progress in reducing CO2 aren't progress.

You claimed that the technological triumph over "Peak Oil" was a good thing. There has been no reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere, and very little reduction in emissions (which continue to rise, year by year.) Meanwhile the growing Chinese and Indian middle classes - hundreds of millions of people - will intensify both CO2 emissions and the over-consumption of natural resources.

http://e360.yale.edu/features/how-the-world-passed-a-carbon-threshold-400ppm-and-why-it-matters

> food security is getting better and better over time.

This is a temporary phenomenon. See the sources I cited, the ones you haven't read yet. 20% of the world's arable cropland has been ruined due to salt degradation. This trend is accelerating due to the pressures posed by exponential population growth.

>I much prefer academics. Please cite those instead.

I did, but you didn't bother to read the multiple sources I cited. You haven't cited a damned thing while making sweeping claims.

Ronald Wright was chosen as the 2004 CBC Massey Lecturer and delivered his lecture series at major universities across Canada. All were sold-out, standing-room only. Here's his introduction written by the former Master of Massey College. He has done graduate-level work in both Archaeology and Anthropology, has published several books, and was awarded an honorary Doctorate by the University of Calgary. I don't have to defend this man; physically half of the print version of A Short History of Progress is bibliography. You can look up the sources by using the citation numbers in the text and finding the corresponding citations in a physical copy of the book.

http://www.bcachievement.com/nonfiction/intro.php?id=4

I can't argue with pie-eyed optimism. Global civilization is lurching from crisis to crisis and will do so until we reach a breaking point (see the Oxford report I provided). The soil is going saline; it's why we have to talk about eating bugs now. It's sad- if we had been conscientious about our reproductive and consumption habits we wouldn't be in this mess, or it would be going a lot slower.

Edit: My sister is a Master's level geologist focused on soil science. Here's a book she recommended to me that corroborates Mr. Wright and the other sources I cited.

https://www.amazon.com/Dirt-Civilizations-David-R-Montgomery/dp/0520248708

u/tilther · 3 pointsr/worldnews

The problem is applying a (albeit excellent) novel to the entire hell that was the dust bowl. I dislike a lack of conversation and it's obvious the above poster read The Grapes of Wrath and is using it as the basis for feeling holier-than-thou. I'm a farmer and I'm passionate about soil fertility and stewardship of the land - to portray the dust bowl as financial genocide is to ignore the giant mismanagement of the midwest loess.

I highly suggest this book - http://www.amazon.com/Dirt-Civilizations-David-R-Montgomery/dp/0520248708 "Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations". It deals partially with the dust bowl, but covers the overall story of our species' mistreatment of our soil and how it ties in to the survival and demise of numerous civilizations.

u/Vailhem · 1 pointr/energy

if Hillary hadn't made corn a product of choice for ethanol, we probably wouldn't have an agriculture industry right now. Or, rather, there would've been an even larger consolidation of the agriculture industry than there has been in the past 10 years to the point that it would become very very difficult to pull it out of that depression.

Switchgrass and other products for ethanol make more sense on a multitude of levels (EROEI, cost, resources, etc) but one of the major, and oft overlooked reasons is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchgrass#Soil_conservation

it would allow for new lands (otherwise not dedicated to farming) to be used, as well as allow lands that have been overworked, over fertilized, and otherwise leading to the death of soil, ( dated, and modern techniques allow it to be rebuilt... read: switchgrass/biochar/etc, but a good example is the first few chapters of this )
Switchgrass can prepare new lands for food-crop growing, it can repair old lands, and it otherwise can be grown on lands that most likely will never be suitable or economical for food-crop growth but perfectly fine (and profitable/sustainable) for switchgrass (or hemp, take your pick, I think switchgrass is more realistic in this environment).

This would allow for lands to be redirected back to their original purposed to begin with: growing crop to export (for profit). US agriculture exports have plateaued and even dropped over the past decade. There was supposed to be a major Gulf port facility upgrade back in 2000 that Bush didn't sign because he only agreed to build it if he got offshore drilling (a few hurricanes and an oil spill later, he got his offshore drilling... though port facilities still haven't been upgraded)

This was going to overhall all the shipping lanes on the major rivers (Ohio, Missouri, Mississippi, etc) as well as increase road width from the southeast to three lanes to allow for the increased trucking as well as rail line upgrades. Also, and the major plug to the whole thing, the port facilities from the Gulf out were supposed to be upgraded to be larger than the LA port upgrades happening just before then (same crews were to move from LA to New Orleans, etc after the LA ports were finished).
When this happened, plus some trade agreements between the US and China, combined with arrangements between US/China/Brazil... we cut our exports at the same time that Brazil was investing heavily in theirs (with money from China... ultimately, from US and Bush investors who'd bought up large swaths of brazilian rainforest and otherwise destroyed it for farmland under Bush-ite control (yes, I'm saying that Bush and friends own and control the Brazilian agriculture industry). Brazil was able to grow well beyond our capacity and to become the major exporter of food-crop to China and Africa (as well as pretty much everywhere else). Essentially, Brazil replaced the US as China/the world's breadbasket.

Now that their industry is up and running, and running strong and profitably, and likely to continue to grow at a controlled rate, I wouldn't be surprised if a major agriculture bill in the US as well as infrastructure projects weren't pushed by Obama/democrats to overhaul and increase our shipping/handling facilities and infrastructures as well as readjust our farm subsidies so that farmers can profitably stop overworking their land, and begin to grow on currently undeveloped land, as well as..... you get the general idea

Then again, with the repub's winning control of the Senate, and ganking so much from the house, it'll prob be a fairly difficult beast to wrestle away from them.... read: we will most likely be locked in stalemate until 2012. Personally, fine with me (i hate neocons, tea party is stupid, Obama is almost as incapable and... Hilary or Ron Paul are my two choices for pres in 2012. And, I'm from KY, I voted for his son... who, despite the rhetoric, is not a (modern incarnation of the) teaparty nut case though he did use them for votes... and I would imagine thinks Sarah Palin is a whore, and used her as such to get votes.). With any luck, a vote of no confidence will come up for Obama forcing him to compete in dem primaries in 2011/12 and Hillary will win. The ag industry has been hers since 2004 anyway, and its only likelyhood of moving forward with any stability or chance for success is by something she proposes (no longer a senator so easier said than done) or, in fact, pushes through as president.....

either way, its form will most likely include a switch of subsidies from corn to switchgrass, at least until the infrastructure for corn export is increased to allow for imports to come back in and help the industry grow w/out them (subsidies).

u/Elukka · 1 pointr/collapse

Different ones but also this: http://www.amazon.com/Dirt-Civilizations-David-R-Montgomery/dp/0520248708

He claimed that Mesopotamia went through cycles of salinification and topsoil loss which coincide with the cultures coming and going. Many cultures in Mesopotamia have collapsed and disappeared, you know. It's not an unbroken chain of culture there.

At least Montgomery makes the point that the Greek valleys went into decline after a few hundred years of farming and took the larger civilization there into decline with them. After about 300-1000 years natural erosion and wildlife would have replenished the soil again enough to restart the civilizational cycle. (The length of the cycle depends on the climate and soil types.) Top soil loss doesn't mean that everyone dies. It just means that a few valleys can no longer sustain a city of 20000 people and the farmers supporting it.

u/eat20hamburgers · 1 pointr/Cascadia

>Do you not believe in human kindness?

Some people are kind, some are not, some are straight up cruel, most are cattle.

>Do you not believe that we actually can create enough resources for all, with all the resources we have on Earth?

No, because resources are finite. For example my house in Seattle cost more than one in say, South Dakota because Seattle only has so much build able land. On a larger scale with rapid population growth we are looking at quickly running out of such simple necessary resources as water and arable land. I suggest reading UW professor David Montgomery's book Dirt: The Erosion of Civilization

>Also, perhaps people are greedy and self-centered because the current political and economic system makes them that way?

Competition and greed are a unfortunate part of human nature, it is part what pushed out ancestors to new lands, and what lead us to invent new technology. There are some tribal civilizations that lack the idea of property and possessions between their immediate social group, but these civilizations also live under a strict hierarchy.

>I believe in restorative justice. Instead of forcing them into slavery, which we call prison, I believe they should still be able to live among us, but also make sure to pay their penitence.

While I agree that more effort should be made towards reform in the criminal justice system, I also do not think you have much experience dealing with criminals. Many are just as brutal and manipulative as any "capitalist" is not more so, many simply lack the mental capacity for empathy. Though Norway's prison system seem promising in the regard of reformation

>we are the working people, your average, everyday, ordinary people.

So you work, what's your skill set?

You seem to want to deny me of my property that I worked for so I do not think we constitute the same "we." Keep in mind that I hate the banks as much as you do, if not more due to owing them a large sum of money.

>So many innocent black people are shot, but the white cops get away with it most every time. Maybe there's a black cop who shoots a white kid, but you know what the difference is? In a majority of the former cases, the white cop is never convicted; in a majority of the latter cases, the black cop is.

Citation needed.

However police do kill a disproportionate amount of white people when compared to murder rate.

Police killings of blacks down 70% in last 50 years

In 2012, 123 blacks were killed by police with a gun

In 2012, 326 whites were killed with a gun

(Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, CDC)

In 2013, blacks committed 5,375 murders

In 2013, whites committed 4,396 murders

Whites are 63% of the population blacks are 13%

(FBI, Census Bureau)

>The politicians and the capitalists are never hungry. But many of us get to starve to death.

In the US one must want to starve to death. Again who is "us?"

>Fortunately, I'm not starving. But millions die from that every day.

This has more to do with weather patterns than capitalism. Also food aid breeds dependence because populations quit growing their own food.

> I believe it's that power corrupts.

And the corrupt seek power.

EDIT:Hit send too early