Crops can blight, animals can get diseases. I don't know much about hydroponics but I know that bacteria are a concern. What food source is the most reliable, the least likely to produce less food than expected?

  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not what I heard from an Irishman…

    But jokes in poor taste aside, yeah. I'd have to agree. A lot of grains can also do really well, but potatoes are hearty, have a lot of what you need to live, and require no attraction work to make into food after you dig them out of the ground. Onions would also be high on the list, but aren't as viable for keeping you alive as long when eating them, nutritionally.

    • cnnrduncan@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Kinda hard to have a stable food system when an imperial power is stealing most of your food in a rather genocidal fashion!

    • Alexander The 1st@mstdn.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      @ColeSloth @IzzyData As I recall, the issue with the potato famine was more that, if you're *only* growing potatoes, while they grow just about anywhere, they'll also get diseases really easily.

      Which is why on the Lemmy instance linked to, people mentioned a variety of crops is the trick.

      So, potatoes, but *also* onions, and *also* wheat, and *also* corn is the true answer, as I understand.