Aquaponics – Ideas on Global Impact

Many begin their aquaponics journey with a narrow vision: to harvest their own food supply. Whether new aquaponics gardeners realize it or not, however, they are actually a part of a large global movement aiming to combat the many complex factors that lead to food insecurity across the globe.

Aquaponics is a design based on sustainability. Its design allows larger yields with less or no land, reduced harvesting time and reduced susceptibility to natural disasters such as drought. It allows plants to multiply, fish to breed, and an entire ecosystem to grow before your very eyes. In addition, once the initial set up costs are addressed, it costs very little to maintain an aquaponics system in comparison to a small soil farming system.

You may be asking yourself, “Why are these things so important?” After all, you are likely food secure and are fortunate enough to start an aquaponics system as a hobby or as a supplemental food source. If this is the case, you likely don’t realize just how much positive impact your system is about to produce. 

In this section, we will not only discuss the dangers that exist for our current food supply, but also how aquaponics can be a real solution for populations everywhere.

Our Relationship with Food – A Brief History

If you’ve ever sat around the Thanksgiving table with a group of older relatives, you’ve likely heard stories about how cooking was once so different. Not only were frozen meals like Lean Cuisines unheard of, but the shelves were filled with options for baking from scratch. An entire grocery store aisle could house several types of flour, not just one generic self-rising brand. Shoppers also likely knew exactly where the meat was sourced at the butcher counter, and most produce was grown by a local farmer, likely someone you knew by name.

It is widely hypothesized that the onset of the World Wars is what greatly changed our relationship with food. Once men were deployed, women were forced into the workplace, reshaping our family dynamics. Gone were the days of spending hours in the kitchen to prepare fresh, locally sourced meals. Women were now working mothers, often acting as single parents while their husbands were away at war. 

Manufacturers saw a golden opportunity here. They could produce more ready-made items, whether in a can, a frozen package or freeze dried, that would drastically reduce meal prep time for women. In addition, they could add a fee for convenience that women would gladly pay, and the rest was basically history. Women continued to stay in the workplace, family dynamics continued to shift, and so did our attitudes toward food.

This began the days of us being comfortable with food, even when we didn’t know its source. Gone were the days of preferring your neighbor’s heirloom tomatoes when a can of something almost identical to them was quickly available and would never go bad.

This shift, however, opened the doors to many issues we have with our food supply today. While it most definitely made lives easier for most, companies quickly found the price we were willing to pay for convenience was strikingly high, and not just monetarily.

Problems in Our Food Supply

This shift caused a major change, causing large scale manufacturing to boom while the smaller farms suffered. After all, these large farms soon found they could cover hundreds of acres with one crop, cover it in pesticides to prevent infestations, water it on a commercial scale, and wait on the giant harvests. Little care was taken to ensure that each row was walked like on a traditional farm, and problems were often unnoticed until the food was harvested.

This movement also changed the way we treat the animals we farm. These large scale farms soon found that when cattle, pigs or chickens were placed in tight conditions, they became much more likely to get sick. Instead of providing more space for them, they began injecting the animals with antibiotics in order to keep them healthier. Soon, they realized they could also use products similar to steroids and hormones in order to produce larger livestock, which could be “harvested” at younger ages, eliminating much of the waiting time required on a smaller, more natural farm.

Back then, these ideas were touted as ground breaking and were accepted as time saving necessities. After all, who had the time to visit the butcher when ready-made burger patties were in the freezer section, right next to frozen corn? Who had time to plan meals around what was in season? It is now clear that the convenience we longed for so dearly was creating problems, including terrible impacts on our environment from pesticide contaminated water supplies to large carbon footprints from animal over-breeding.

While all of these transitions led to more problems in our food supply and a severe disconnect between ourselves and our food sources, perhaps one of the most detrimental transitions made during this time was to our precious seed supply.

Seed Troubles

The easiest way to begin discussing the complexities behind the current problems regarding our seeds, is to introduce a famous company named Monsanto. The U.S. Patent company keeps a database of patents listed by owner. Though the numbers change frequently, particularly for larger corporations with ongoing research, the last reported number of patents held by Monsanto at the time of publishing was almost 7600. While it’s undoubtedly common for companies to invest in multiple avenues simultaneously, Monsanto’s investing patterns and patent applications are incredibly alarming.

It is widely reported that Monsanto owns a patent on almost 90% of all genetically modified seeds. The Organic Consumer Organization cautions against this, saying, “There is a direct correlation between our genetically engineered food supply and the $2 trillion the U.S. spends annually on medical care, namely an epidemic of diet-related chronic illnesses.” Put simply, these giant factory farms are not growing what your grandmother used to grow, but rather, genetically engineered junk food that can cause assorted problems such as cancer, diabetes, strokes and more.

Perhaps most alarming, however, is that Monsanto was granted these patents to begin with. 

Brief History of Monsanto

A small town in Alabama came into the spotlight briefly after an incident regarding Monsanto resulted in a payout of $600 million to Anniston residents, more than double the famous Pacific & Electric award in the famous case of “Erin Brockovich.”

A reporter local to Anniston, Ala., published a shocking tale of the company’s history, but it was almost 100 years after the company’s initial offense. Below, we’ve detailed some of the reporting done by Wilson, as it was published by the World Pundit in 2014.

“In 1929, a now well-known company called Monsanto opened one of its first plants in the small city of Anniston, Alabama. The plant, which operated until 1971, produced chemicals called polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs. Now illegal, 70% of all PCBs previously produced are still in the environment. In the 1990’s, residents of the city began to have a surge in cancer rates, diabetes, autoimmune disorders and other major health issues. Fish in the local creek began to appear with blistered scales. It became apparent: Monsanto had allowed dangerous chemicals, most likely knowingly, into the area’s soil and water supply,” Wilson detailed.

The small town Monsanto had contaminated was known for its family crops. To this day, there is no way to know just how many people were affected by the food they ate, or the water they drank. In 1990, decades after the plant closed, there was still an 80 to 90 percent added cancer risk to the entire county of Calhoun, just for air pollutants. This is not accounting for the potentially harmful effects to the soil and water surrounding the city’s food and water supply. 

The lawsuit, which was resolved in 2003, left taxed settlements to those who would never be able to farm their land again, likely could never sell it, and were basically left stuck to breathe and live among Monsanto’s catastrophe. Even by then, residents were still experiencing neurological disorders, cancer and liver disease. In fact, at least two former residents of the relatively small town were diagnosed, and later died from, an extremely rare form of cancer expected to affect less than one in a million. According to Wilson, who interviewed them after diagnosis, the two lived together and had relocated from the Atlanta, Georgia about 10 years before the diagnosis, and doctors could provide no explanation for the mystery surrounding the diagnosis of the two individuals.

It’s worth noting as well that internal company memos surfaced, showing that Monsanto knew of the dangers of PCBs from early on, at least prior to 1956. After Monsanto knew of these dangers, they continued to not only operate in Anniston until legal action was taken, but they also opened manufacturing plants abroad, allowing them to continue the harmful practices in some areas until 2001, when the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants banned PCBs globally. 

Modern Day Consequences of Monsanto

Now that Monsanto no longer operates plants that produce PCB’s, their history should still be carefully remembered when examining their current role in our food supply. It’s worth noting that this company also began with its production of Saccharin, the artificial sweetener found to cause cancer. They then went on to produce Polystyrene, a product used for food packaging, that is ranked 5^th in the EPA’s 1980’s listing of chemicals whose production created the most hazardous waste. Between 1943 and 1945, the company had a department that actually assisted with the Manhattan Project, including plutonium production, and in 1944, they became one of the first manufacturers of DDT, which was banned throughout the United States in 1972 after toxicity findings were released. The company went on to produce a precursor to the deadly and well known Agent Orange, as well as producing Agent Orange, which led to severe birth defects and up to one million people becoming disabled as a result of the chemical.

Most notably, the company produced RoundUp in the 1970s. This popular chemical could eliminate weeds literally overnight, and the company soon began producing seeds that could be essentially saturated in pesticides without dying. This meant that food could now have higher levels of pesticides than ever before, and no labeling was required for warning. According to gmo-awareness.com, who cite several findings regarding the effects, studies in rats have shown consistent negative effects from RoundUp, such as altered organ function, premature death, infertility, tumors, and other problems that showed up in frogs and fish in Anniston when the PCB’s began leaking into the groundwater. RoundUp itself has been found in groundwater in study after study, and it appears that history is repeating itself. 

To make matters worse, one of Monsanto’s most recent investments is the Bovine Growth Hormone, commonly called rBGH, which is an injection causing cows to produce more milk. The effects are often excruciating for the livestock and often leads to a need for more antibiotics. Milk produced with rBGH has been linked to several types of cancers in humans, ranging from colon cancer and prostate cancer to breast cancer. 

These reasons alone should be enough to convince anyone that knowing your food supply is more important now than ever before, but unfortunately, the effects of Monsanto don’t just stop with health effects. Their “war on seeds,” is affecting farmers everywhere, and it’s just one more reason for those of us who can to begin our own crops in the most sustainable way possible.

Monsanto’s “Seed War”

Wilson’s reporting in Anniston didn’t just tell us how local residents were affected; she went on to describe Monsanto’s relentless war against modern day agriculture. In the United States, as well as countries who face high famine risk, a majority of the food is genetically modified. As Wilson stated, “Governments across the globe from New Zealand to Pakistan have allowed Monsanto to use publically owned land for their crops.” Most concerning, perhaps, is that Monsanto isn’t just concerned with seeds that produce our food, but they also seek to control the modified cotton seeds producing a large volume of our clothing today. It appears they seek to control the entire farming industry.

As Wilson stated, “Clearly, there are dangers to a food supply monopoly. However, these genetically modified seeds, unlike traditional seeds, do not reproduce. This means a farmer who traditionally farmed cotton, with seeds generated repeatedly since the Civil War, would have to purchase seeds year after year, long before any crops sprout to produce an income. This creates horrendous financial hurdles for those in famished areas who depend on crops for their survival.”

If you are just now learning about these terrible practices, you are likely simply wondering, “Why don’t farmers just buy traditional seeds?” While that is a perfect solution to combatting Monsanto and their risk for food monopoly, Monsanto is one step ahead of us. Traditional farms, becoming more and more rare, are easily and often contaminated by nearby GMO crops. While this impacts how the farmer can label his crops (for example, if he had been farming organically, he would have to remove organic labels and likely take a loss), it actually opens the farmer to claims from Monsanto for patent infringement, because the seeds are patented.

Several countries in the European Union have banned products resulting from GMOs. Meanwhile, many in the United States continue to trust a company who poisoned countless numbers of people across the globe, often admittedly, with their food supply. 

Am I Consuming Monsanto Products?

The answer here is sadly, most likely yes. Most popular brands of processed foods have been reported to contain GMO ingredients produced from Monsanto crops, or have reported an affiliation with the company. Those brands likely include some of your favorites, such as Betty Crocker, Minute Maid, Banquet, Chef Boyardee, Coca-Cola, V8, Duncan Hines, General Mills, Heinz, Nestle, Frito Lay, Kellogs, Kraft, Lipton, Nature Valley, Pillsbury, Stouffers and many more. It’s worth noting that political pressure continues to change the corporate environment for some of these companies, so it’s best to do research regularly if you want to ensure you are up to date and consuming as few GMO products as possible. 

Monsanto Isn’t Alone – And This is Why We Need to Act

While these stories about Monsanto’s impact on our food supply are scary and concerning, Monsanto isn’t alone in its quest to “take over” farming. Other companies have shown similar behaviors indicating that a giant attempt to privatize farming and move toward genetic engineering is underway. Companies such as Bayer Cropscience, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Syngenta AG and BASF are all companies listed on biofortified.org as those doing genetic engineering. Of course, many of these companies, like Monsanto, began as chemical companies. 

Furthermore, on the note of privatization, some companies not affiliated with genetic engineering are still making moves for the rights to certain natural processes. For example, both Coca-Cola and Dasani have come under fire in recent years for attempting to privatize the water supplies of underprivileged areas. At one point, Fortune Magazine actually predicted that water would soon be “what oil was to the 20^th century.” In fact, the United Nations estimates that by 2025, 66% of the globe will not have enough access to water. This statistic appears to only account for shortages and privatization, not the full extent of potential contamination risks. 

In addition, allowing Monsanto to win their seed war sets us up for a lifetime of harmful effects. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine urges doctors to tell patients to avoid GMOs, citing animal studies that show organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system disorders, infertility and even accelerated aging.

As evidence and local reporting shows, this is not a conspiracy theory or merely a scare tactic: real people are suffering real consequences as big corporations move to profit off of our very lifeblood – our food and water supply. In fact, it’s now been happening slowly for almost 100 years as we simply watch. Without drastic action, we could lose access to the ability to farm the way nature intended, with seeds that rejuvenate each year just as they did for hundreds of years prior. Systems such as aquaponics allow us not only to farm in conditions that may otherwise be unsuitable (heavy droughts, extreme temperature fluctuations), but they also allow us to farm in a sustainable way without worrying about soil contamination from nearby pollutants, cross pollination from genetically modified organisms or other harmful effects that can be present in traditional farming today.

Why is Aquaponics the Solution?

While an entire book could be written on these topics alone, there are key elements of aquaponics that make it an ideal solution for combatting the many problems that exist today in farming. First, it’s worth noting that the “goal” for companies like Monsanto, who use genetic engineering and irresponsible practices, is to combat world hunger. They claim that more food can be produced using their methods, practices and seeds, and many even go as far as to say that it is the only solution. However, there are many holes in these theories, many of which suggest that their motive is purely profit, and not to solve world hunger at all.

1. The most responsible farming practices are always sustainable. Forcing people who are food insecure to purchase new seeds annually is not only unsustainable, but it is not possible for some to afford this cost.
2. These seeds and practices rely heavily on pesticides that do not occur naturally, making the process much less sustainable than organic farming. 
3. The practices do not account for drought stricken areas, meaning the technology is virtually useless in certain weather conditions. Considering that the Population Reference Bureau’s 2009 World Population Data Sheet showed that 97% of global growth over the next 40 years will occur in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, this means we should quickly figure out solutions for sustainable farming in those areas.
4. Monsanto’s many lawsuits against farmers whose crops become accidentally cross pollinated suggest that global hunger solutions are not at the heart of Monsanto’s business model, but rather, to create a seed monopoly. 
5. Once our heirloom seeds (natural seeds that return for harvest each year) are gone, there is likely no way to bring them back, making us forever reliant on unsustainable practices and risky product consumption for survival.
6. The practices do very little to account for shortages of space, such as areas where extra land is scarce, non-existent or not fertile. For example, these practices do not account for the expected population growth in areas such as Asia, where a large amount of the remaining land is not able to be farmed.  
7. The practices leave climate change virtually unaddressed, which could mean all future engineered crops are at risk.

It goes without saying that political pressure is not solving this problem, and it is best to take matters into our own hands if possible. However, population growth in relation to the amount of food we produce is a real problem. According to the World Wildlife Fund’s “Living Planet Report 2008,” “humanity’s demand on the planet’s living resources, its Ecological Footprint, now exceeds the planet’s regenerative capacity by about 30 percent,” further clarifying “The resulting deforestation, water shortages, declining biodiversity and climate change are putting the well-being and development of all nations at increasing risk.” 

For far too long, we have simply banked on having cheap fossil fuels to power our equipment, unlimited water supplies and a stable climate. However, these things are changing quickly, and if we do not account for these changes, the consequences will be wide spread hunger, among other catastrophes including the collapse of multiple ecosystems. In fact, we are at a larger risk since these three factors can all impact each other. For example, in 2009, the United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro stated that in just 20 years, two out of three individuals on the earth will face a lack of water, if current trends in climate change continue. 

While farming in “greener” ways, such as recycling water, using heirloom seeds and fewer pesticides, is certainly a move in the right direction, it stops short of solving the same problems that aquaponics does. After all, the area to be farmed is still releasing waste, contributes to deforestation and uses fossil fuels, even if in small amounts.

Aquaponics Solutions

Aquaponics consistently recycles water, as all water that does not evaporate is returned to grow beds or fish tanks, to be used again another day. Aquaponics systems also have the advantage of water that runs fairly consistently, rinsing off bugs or larvae, which normally require soil to breed anyway. This eliminates the need for pesticides, leaving your system virtually chemical free.

Because aquaponics relies on a self-contained system of water, you have complete control over its contaminants, and can ensure that any water going into your system is healthy for your plants and fish. Because it is completely soil free, contaminated soil like that found in Anniston, Alabama is not a factor for the health of your harvest or for your consumption. This, of course, is not to say that with aquaponics, we can ignore how our soil is treated. Rather, we have a system independent of our soil in case something does go wrong. 

Aquaponics also allows us to set up an entire eco-system without using fossil fuels at all. In fact, some systems run on solar power with battery backups, while others may use limited electricity from a local municipality, consuming limited amounts of fossil fuels. 

Of course, these systems also help prevent the overfishing of our oceans, as the systems allow us to breed our own fish for consumption. According to “The End of the Line,” produced in 2009, we now know of at least 2,048 different species of fish that will never return, as a result of our overfishing the oceans. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations reported in 2009 that over 70 percent if all fish species were endangered. Most concerning of all, however, was the study performed at the National Center of Ecological Analysis and Synthesis at the University of California. This study showed that without significant changes, our oceans would be completely void of fish before the year 2048. The worst part of all is that despite these terrible numbers, we only end up consuming a mere 10 percent of the marine life killed for food, according to Backyard Aquaponics Magazine (2009). 

Aquaponics can effectively insure that we consume almost all of the marine life caught for feeding, allowing us to preserve our beautiful oceans for generations to come. Furthermore, by consuming more marine life rather than animals, such as cattle, that require large plots of land for grazing, we are making our carbon footprint just a bit smaller, as cattle and other similar animals release methane gasses into our atmosphere, further contributing to global warming.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the world’s food supply is in great danger. Population increases are steadily surpassing food production, leaving far too many food insecure. Companies like Monsanto have moved to take advantage of this, seeking to patent seed technology and using genetically modified organisms and heavy pesticide usage in order to increase production. These practices are not only not sustainable, but they are costly in initial setup. Furthermore, the practices can lead to contamination of the soil, taking years for the ground to return to its organic state. In cases like those in Anniston, Alabama, a simple leak from a pesticide factory can turn an entire town into a barren land that produces nothing more than cancerous crops with little to no nutritional value.

Aquaponics is a real solution to the problems that genetic engineering claims to be solving. When the area experiences drought, an aquaponics system can still thrive without consuming noticeable amounts of water beyond initial setup. When there is no land available for planting, an aquaponics system can be placed inside a home or in a small greenhouse. When there is famine, plants in an aquaponics system can grow more quickly and in harsher conditions than their soil grown counterparts. When climate change causes the weather to be too harsh for harvesting, solar power can regulate the temperature of an entire eco-system. When the soil is contaminated with leakages from nearby factories or local pesticide usage, an aquaponics system requires no soil at all. When an insect outbreak occurs, an aquaponics system requires little effort to control the problem, and never requires pesticides. Put simply, an aquaponics system evolves into its very own environment, quite independent from the chaotic one around us. Best of all, it gives back to us with each harvest, with each new fish hatched, as we did not have to remove anything from our precious earth in order to enjoy the harvest. 

​