Rice isn't a very profitable crop unless you either have super cheap labour (not in the UK) or massive fields and lots of automation.
The UK has small fields and complex land ownership arrangements which mean the 100,000 acre farms of the USA won't happen there.
Overall, I think that unless the UK wants to subsidize rice production or use big Japan-like rice import tariffs, the rice industry is dead-in-the-water.
Maybe there's a little market for restaurants and high value products which want to advertise 'under 100 food miles' or similar. But such things tend to be very economically inefficient, so the government would be wise to discourage such production.
The UK is trying to reestablish tidal marshes to control storm surges which will only get worse with climate change.
I’m sure there are some scenarios where rice fields could be added as additional depth to this buffer, via farm subsidies. It doesn’t matter if it’s profitable, if it’s nearly profitable and it reduces damage from ten, twenty, or even fifty year storms. You can divert money from remediation into prevention.
> But such things tend to be very economically inefficient, so the government would be wise to discourage such production.
Absurd comment. Governments should subsidise local food production to whatever extent necessary, especially when it's economically inefficient, because stable staple food supplies should not be external dependencies.
No they should really really be discussing things like this.
This is like trying to claim bioethanol is somehow carbon negative.
It's broken from a farming standpoint (and we're a nation starting to face issues with production. Notice how I say starting not we're starving there's several world's of different yet)
It's broken from an economic standpoint because you're going to try and take on the whole of Asia who could crush you in a single shipment.
It's broken from a mindset perspective. British wine may be one that grabs interest over here like British vodka. But people will not pay 10x or more for British rice. It will be seen as a stupid concept or idea.
It's broken because again... Who in Britain is clamouring for more rice options? This is a product type which is already over saturated at the normal supermarket, let alone the choices when you're willing to shop online.
If there's no discouragement to projects like this idiots will run the land into ruin, lose a lot of money. Drive away needed capital from farms looking to turn around their fortunes and damage the sector.
I'm not saying British farms are about to collapse and we're all about to starve here, but the sector is struggling.
It's wild that you got downvoted for this reasonable take.
Right next door, Ireland had a little problem with potatoes and a massive famine resulted from it. Had the island had a more diverse mix of crops, things probably would've been a little less severe.
There are currently pests and infections spreading around the world and destroying crops. Bananas are undergoing a repeat of their last global crop failure and isolated pockets of uninfected bananas are becoming more valuable. Natural rubber had a disease that wiped out most rubber trees. It's not impossible for wheat in Europe to be hit with a plague in the near future and absolutely wipe out crops and food sources for hundreds of millions. There's war in Eastern Europe that risks spreading, and if it does, embargoes are possible. Investing now in alternative local food sources is simply smart.
Profit now isn't everything. The problem that's gutting the west now is how countries shipped off every industry to other cheaper countries because it was "more profitable and nothing bad will happen." Now the youth are left with less than their parents had.
Plus the article addresses this being done as a climate change-proofing measure. With the UK getting hotter, rice grows better and better. Other crops may not.
Ely (a few miles south of this project) used to be an island with a large eel fishing industry, from which it derives it's name. The Fens were drained in the 17th century with help from Dutch engineers, and I believe much of the area is now below sea level; the river Ouse is raised above the surrounding land with embankments. I've ran past some of the pumping stations on the Roman lodes myself: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/125065713
I wonder what the risk is of rising sea levels to this project?
Paddy fields aren't the only way to grow rice, you can do rows and flood soil alongside, you can do upland style dry fields rice planting.
I guess the point of the experiment was with climate and increasing flooded landscape (like the fens?) But the risk would be salt incursion as much as anything else.
If it's climate (temperature) alone, it didn't need paddy fields. I think a lot of Australian rice is irrigated but not full flooded fields, or a reduced flood compared to traditional approaches. More amenable to massive fields and a water storage system. Recently saw a cotton farm at St George and the (huge!) fields are groomed with a laser level to control for irrigation flow, I think they do the same for rice, when it makes sense.
It's just a climate issue to grow rice outdoor in England.
Rice is grown in Southern France and Northern Italy. So it is unsurprising that this may be moving North, as summers het warmer, and this summer was almost Mediterranean in England.
Rice crop requires climate, soil, water, fertilizers, good seeds and machinery. In India, the second crop for rice is grown through the winter which is not much warmer than British summer. Also England has black soils with less sand, which are good for rice. Looks like all conditions are met.
Recent advances in farm machinery reduced dependency on labour significantly, even in Asian villages. I was shocked to see drones doing fertilizer and pesticide spraying in the remote villages that do not even have proper roads and drinking water.
Why is this a surprise? I think people have forgotten that the First Nations people near Lake Superior had rice as their staple crop. Growing wild in the shallows of lakes and ponds. Reseeded by being intentionally sloppy with the harvest.
If it can grow in Minnesota it sure as fuck can grow in the UK.
The wild rice grown near the Great Lakes (Zizania palustris) is an entirely different species than the rice typically eaten elsewhere (Oryza sativa). There is no particular reason to presume that both can be grown in the same environment.
It’s been a bit since I was offered wild rice in a dish but is out there in the culinary repertoire. Not going to be used for making sushi or curry of course, but it has a place, and could have more.
50% more protein, but unfortunately still 0% vitamin A.
Readit News
The UK has small fields and complex land ownership arrangements which mean the 100,000 acre farms of the USA won't happen there.
Overall, I think that unless the UK wants to subsidize rice production or use big Japan-like rice import tariffs, the rice industry is dead-in-the-water.
Maybe there's a little market for restaurants and high value products which want to advertise 'under 100 food miles' or similar. But such things tend to be very economically inefficient, so the government would be wise to discourage such production.
I’m sure there are some scenarios where rice fields could be added as additional depth to this buffer, via farm subsidies. It doesn’t matter if it’s profitable, if it’s nearly profitable and it reduces damage from ten, twenty, or even fifty year storms. You can divert money from remediation into prevention.
I agree it shouldn't be "discouraged" (as a private enterprise) but it seems reasonable to debate whether they should receive subsidies or grants etc.
EDIT: this looks more like research than production, so I think it makes sense for it to be supported by grants.
>Why should the goverment discourage
These are government measures to encourage rice production, not discourage it.
Absurd comment. Governments should subsidise local food production to whatever extent necessary, especially when it's economically inefficient, because stable staple food supplies should not be external dependencies.
And you can still have efficient food production in the UK, it's just that small artisanal "under 100 food-miles" farming is inefficient.
This is like trying to claim bioethanol is somehow carbon negative.
It's broken from a farming standpoint (and we're a nation starting to face issues with production. Notice how I say starting not we're starving there's several world's of different yet)
It's broken from an economic standpoint because you're going to try and take on the whole of Asia who could crush you in a single shipment.
It's broken from a mindset perspective. British wine may be one that grabs interest over here like British vodka. But people will not pay 10x or more for British rice. It will be seen as a stupid concept or idea.
It's broken because again... Who in Britain is clamouring for more rice options? This is a product type which is already over saturated at the normal supermarket, let alone the choices when you're willing to shop online.
If there's no discouragement to projects like this idiots will run the land into ruin, lose a lot of money. Drive away needed capital from farms looking to turn around their fortunes and damage the sector.
I'm not saying British farms are about to collapse and we're all about to starve here, but the sector is struggling.
Right next door, Ireland had a little problem with potatoes and a massive famine resulted from it. Had the island had a more diverse mix of crops, things probably would've been a little less severe.
There are currently pests and infections spreading around the world and destroying crops. Bananas are undergoing a repeat of their last global crop failure and isolated pockets of uninfected bananas are becoming more valuable. Natural rubber had a disease that wiped out most rubber trees. It's not impossible for wheat in Europe to be hit with a plague in the near future and absolutely wipe out crops and food sources for hundreds of millions. There's war in Eastern Europe that risks spreading, and if it does, embargoes are possible. Investing now in alternative local food sources is simply smart.
Profit now isn't everything. The problem that's gutting the west now is how countries shipped off every industry to other cheaper countries because it was "more profitable and nothing bad will happen." Now the youth are left with less than their parents had.
Plus the article addresses this being done as a climate change-proofing measure. With the UK getting hotter, rice grows better and better. Other crops may not.
If your climate is suitable, you can have multiple rice crops per year on the same field. Eg 3 crops per year is common in Thailand.
[1] Which California Crop Yields the Most Calories?
https://agdatanews.substack.com/p/which-california-crop-yiel...
I wonder what the risk is of rising sea levels to this project?
Fun fact: the English tried to drain the fens a few times on their own, but only succeeded once someone had the bright idea to involve the Dutch.
Deleted Comment
I guess the point of the experiment was with climate and increasing flooded landscape (like the fens?) But the risk would be salt incursion as much as anything else.
If it's climate (temperature) alone, it didn't need paddy fields. I think a lot of Australian rice is irrigated but not full flooded fields, or a reduced flood compared to traditional approaches. More amenable to massive fields and a water storage system. Recently saw a cotton farm at St George and the (huge!) fields are groomed with a laser level to control for irrigation flow, I think they do the same for rice, when it makes sense.
If it dries out it shrinks, and the organic content is consumed generating CO₂
K₂SO₄ - not the imperial droid
Rice is grown in Southern France and Northern Italy. So it is unsurprising that this may be moving North, as summers het warmer, and this summer was almost Mediterranean in England.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UklW0ELgaME
Also apparently in New York: https://cals.cornell.edu/news/2019/10/can-rice-be-grown-new-...
If it can grow in Minnesota it sure as fuck can grow in the UK.
I wonder whether that might grow well in the UK.
50% more protein, but unfortunately still 0% vitamin A.