“The Big Idea” In the world of Big Farm, nutrient pollution is a big problem, particularly near farms where fertilizers and manure release excess phosphorus and nitrogen into the environment. This leads to issues like eutrophication, dead zones, and human health impacts. This also leads to losses in other industries such as fishing or recreational activity. Paradoxically, we also frequently see cases of nutrient depletion, particularly in the context of agriculture. Monocropping and poor agricultural practices has led to the depletion of topsoil, making it one of the scarcest resources in the world. According to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, 90% of our world’s topsoil is at risk by 2050. To combat this, I’m interested in seeing if a circular nutrient economy is possible:
In the world of Big Farm, nutrient pollution is a big problem, particularly near farms where fertilizers and manure release excess phosphorus and nitrogen into the environment. This leads to issues like eutrophication, dead zones, and human health impacts. This also leads to losses in other industries such as fishing or recreational activity. Paradoxically, we also frequently see cases of nutrient depletion, particularly in the context of agriculture. Monocropping and poor agricultural practices has led to the depletion of topsoil, making it one of the scarcest resources in the world. According to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, 90% of our world’s topsoil is at risk by 2050. To combat this, I’m interested in seeing if a circular nutrient economy is possible:
A. Capture nitrogen & phosphorus from the water
B. Convert them to stable bioproducts
C. Capsulize them to regenerate soil
Phase 1 would involve pulling the nitrate and phosphate from the environment. There’s plenty of natural phenomenon that I can take inspiratino from in order to do so, but for this aspect I think I would have ot do more research. Some examples I can think of are just creating microbial biofilms on 3D-printed lattices, or mimicking natural filters.
Phase 2 would involve locking this biomass into soil-safe carriers, which would almost certainly involve microbiome engineering as well. Possible options include simple alginate/cellulose pellets, biopolymer beads, mycelium composites or mineralized granules. These would have to be designed to be slow release so that run-off is minimized and we don’t face the issue that inspired this project. One thing to note is that good soil is not just a few nutrients, and requires a balance of other factors, including microorganism diversity and organic matter. It might be possible that the final product is some sort of mixture rather than a homogeneous assortment of pellets.
I believe the development of Phase 2 would increase agricultural diversity across the globe and could also potentially allow for at-home growth in areas where soil generally is not necessarily suitable for doing so. This could reduce traditional lawns and increase area for people to garden in their yards, which is another added benefit for the environment.
2. Governing “The Big Idea”
There are a few goals I would want to target with this project. They can be further broken down into sub-components.
Environmental Protection The most optimistic outcome of the project is the hope that there is a beneficial environmental impact, and close to no environmental harm. To achieve this, there needs to be a couple of considerations:
Adequate testing
There should be field pilots and monitoring over multiple seasons before consideration for deployment
Protect biodiversity
Installation should not affect sensitive habitats, and any scenario where this could occur, impact assessments should be done
Chemicals and components used should not pose a risk to the environment
Environmental Justice & Transparency Potential risks should be addressed prior to the experiment. The project and its applications should also be placed in the correct cultural and social context.
Equitable access for all areas
Small farms and low-income areas need to be considered. In that case, affordability is also a concern
Transparency in historically polluted areas
Communities should be consulted on consent and opinions
Purpose Rather than self-reporting nutrient removal and soil impacts, minimum thresholds should be required with regards to things like nutrient capture efficiency, runoff/leaching rates, carbon footprint, etc.
Design
Federal & state regulators set standards
Companies certify products before sale
Universities and other R&D groups test prototypes under common protocols
Independent parties audit field trials This scenario could be analogous to emissions standards for vehicles
Assumptions
Metrics are measurable and cheap to do so
Lab results translate to real watersheds
Regulators can keep up with new designs
Risks of Failure & “Success”
“Success”:
Firms would try to optimize only for regulated metrics, rather than ecosystem complexity
Start-ups are crowded out by compliance costs
Failure:
Innovation is bottlenecked by strict rules
Loopholes leads to greenwashing
Slow approvals delay overall benefits
Scenario 2: Transparency & Public Accountability
Purpose There would likely be limited visisbility into field performance, thus it may be possible to create open data platforms and certification schemes that let different members of the community to evaluate systems
Design
Univerities publish standard test protocols
NGOs run registries
Firms disclose performance data
Local governments host dashboards
Assumptions
Transparency will deter bad practice
Communities are interested in engaging with data
Transparency puts pressure on firms to improve
Risks of Failure & “Success”
“Success”:
Pressure of reputation stifles experimentation
Surveillance burdens small operaors
Politicization of environmental metrics
Failure:
Data mishandling or misinterpretation
Firms selectively report
Continued public mistrust
Scenario 3: Market-Driven Scaling
Purpose Nurient recovery would probably struggle economically. To counteract this, there could be subsidies provided, nutrient-credit markets and public procruement to accelerate deployment once systems meet safety threshoulds.
Design
Governments pay for nutrient removal
Farmers get rebates for recycled fertilizers
Cities host infrastructure for the capure
community boards approve projects This system could be analogous to current renewable energy tax credits.
Assumptions
Price signals will drive adoption
Farmers would accept the recyled inputs
Monitoring would prevent abuse of the system
Risks of Failure & “Success”
“Success”:
Dependence on incentives
Nutrient extraction from ecologically sensitive waters
I believe the most important to value here would be the environmental performance standards. It seems that none of the other strategies quite work without solid thresholds and protocols. It also most supports my idea of aligning innovation with environmental protection rather than letting it fall into the hands of the market and the public. By requiring these thresholds, regulators can ensure these technologies genuinely make a beneficial impact in reducing pollution instead of just shifting risks from waterways to soils or communities.
