Hacker News Reader

Probably companies like Bayer and Yara. I'm aware that chemicals like glyphosate are detrimental to fungi and soil bacteria. But I don't think regenerative farming with no mineral inputs is sustainable either. As this story shows there isn't always enough PK to pull out of the soil https://www.newsroom.co.nz/green-dream-pushes-farmers-into-r...

View on HN

"Abundant" != "ubiquitous," but I see your point. There are always exceptions, but in aggregate (no pun intended...) the world's agricultural soils have no shortage of minerals.

Ultimately, this might be a simple story of "better soil outcompetes lower quality soil." Stop the presses! :) But I don't see how one exceptional case invalidates the use of soil biology to break down in-situ minerals.

I haven't evaluated their property, but they may benefit from relatively inexpensive glacial rock dust amendment. Sounds like their system could be rate-limited in the rock weathering step, not the biological activity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com