Lettuce Fields, Salinas California

From Sri Lanka to Salinas

Reposted from The Point

thomas buckley

Ah, Sri Lanka. 

In 2020: a beautiful, agriculturally self-sufficient island nation full of tea and tourists and holder of the highest “Environmental, Social, and Governance” (ESG) investor rating in the world.

And then, as part of the larger “green” effort spurred on by international Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), woke capital, and, seemingly, a desire to sit at the big table at the various and sundry global initiative conferences, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa banned the use of manufactured fertilizer in order to create a more climate-friendly sustainable farming sector.  In April, 2021, the country went all-organic overnight.

What could possibly go wrong?

By the end of last year, Sri Lanka became unable to feed itself, prices for food (especially rice) and fuel and other daily basics skyrocketed, the tea crop – and the hundreds of millions it earns in international trade – was decimated.  The nation defaulted on its foreign debt, had rolling power blackouts, the tourists are staying away in droves, and Sri Lanka,  already wracked by corruption and COVID, spiraled out of control.

The public’s response?  Even though the fertilizer ban had already been partially rolled back, just last month Rajapaksa’s presidential palace was stormed by thousands of everyday Sri Lankans and he had to flee the country – last word was that he was holed up in Singapore.

(Side note to Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney – this is what an actual insurrection looks like:)

It seems Kermit was right – it ain’t easy being green.

But, considering the state’s claim to be the global leader in fighting climate change, can California – with its extremely powerful “climate lobby” that was able to ban the future sales of new gas-powered vehicles, a concept that would have been unthinkable a very few years ago –  be far behind?

California’s commitment to confronting climate change cannot be underestimated., as proven by the 86 different climate partnerships, or “bilateral and multilateral agreements with national and subnational leaders” the state as entered into.  (The list can be found here:  https://www.energy.ca.gov/about/campaigns/international-cooperation/climate-change-partnerships .)

Additionally, a quick tour of state department websites finds numerous examples of “green,” “sustainability,” and “climate” pages and plans; even the state’s prisons get into the act with its climate change plan: https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/green/cdcr-green/climate-change-adaptation/ .

It should be stressed that California is not above shooting itself in the foot when it comes to climate issues. Thursday, the legislature passed a bill mandating 3,200-foot “buffer zones” around all – new and existing – oil and gas wells, a move which would practically eliminate the industry – and its 13,000 jobs – in the state.   

And last week, the plan to completely ban the sale of gas-powered vehicles by 2035 was approved by the state’s Air Resources Board.  Yesterday, with the already strained power grid facing massive heat-related shortfalls, Californians were asked, among other things, to not charge their electric cars (about 11 percent of the cars in the state) when they got home from work.

A fertilizer ban could have similar severe knock-on impacts, and massive unemployment and other serious disruptions akin to those Sri Lanka experienced could follow.

While there is no specific proposed legislation currently, Governor Gavin Newsom often touts his climate bona fides which could leave the door open to future efforts.  “No challenge poses a greater threat to our way of life, prosperity, and future as a state than climate change,” said Newsom on Earth Day in April, more than a year into the Sri Lanka debacle.  “With our rich natural heritage on the front lines of this crisis, California is building on our global climate leadership with bold strategies that harness the power of nature to fight climate change and protect our communities and ecosystems.”

Considering the state’s political landscape, it appears the unthinkable could already starting to be thought.

For background, the push to ban or restrict the use of manufactured fertilizers (in other words, not compost or manure) was formerly mostly tied to waterway protection (as the former Mayor of Lake Elsinore, Cal. I can personally attest to the kind of rapid growth – in our case sadly algae – nitrogen and phosphorus can spur in plants.  PS – since the city and other agencies started large-scale remediation efforts, the lake has been wonderfully clear).

The current push, however, revolves around climate change and is based on the claim that nitrogen is a greenhouse gas so farmers should stop putting it on their plants.  While this claim is misleading – defining nitrogen as a greenhouse gas is rather new and shaky itself, the overwhelming majority of nitrogen in fertilizers is captured by the plant itself or the soil, and modern farming techniques have greatly reduced the problem of “over fertilizing” –  it has not stopped climate change activists from pushing massive restrictions and, in Sri Lanka’s case, outright bans.

It is true, however, that nitrous dioxide – not that stuff you inhale at the dentist’s office – is considered a greenhouse gas and that it can be produced by fertilizer application.  However, since the crops and soil capture so much, it only is produced in significant quantity if far too much fertilizer is used, a practice the majority of farmers eschew because it is usually unnecessary and always more expensive – fertilizer isn’t free and can add up to about 5 percent of a farm’s expenses.  Here is a graph showing the impacts of over-fertilization and the minimal emissions (essentially indistinguishable from the “background noise”) when used typically and properly:

(From the University of California’s Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources and can be found here: https://ucanr.edu/sites/Nutrient_Management_Solutions/stateofscience/Nitrous_Oxide__In_focus/ ).

In the Netherlands, farmers have taken to the streets to protest planned government (and European Union) mandated nitrogen use cuts of up to 70 percent.  Such cuts would devastate the agricultural sector, which currently makes the tiny country the second largest exporter of farm products in the world (only the United States exports more food).  Due to the impact on livestock feed costs and availability, it is estimated that – in addition to massive crop losses – about 30 percent of Dutch farm animals would have to be killed to meet the climate change target.

Canada is also proposing nationwide nitrogen cuts of up to 30 percent, leaving farmers there worried about their futures and the continued assurance of the nation’s food supply.

The impact nitrogen fertilizers have on the atmosphere – which is already about 78 percent nitrogen – is so small it cannot be accurately measured (see graph above), said Dr. Jay Lehr, environmental scientist and agricultural economist.

“I can see why certain politicians are attracted to the idea, but it’s just too crazy,” Lehr said, adding that if the United States and/or California were to mimic Sri Lanka it would lead to “starvation and desperation” and the bankrupting of the majority of farmers.  “This movement is trying to roll-back the green revolution.”

The green revolution Lehr referred to has nothing to do with the current political meaning of the term “green,” but the post-World War II movement to increase yields through improved crops, fertilizer use, technological enhancements, irrigation, and scientifically-sound farming practices.  The movement is credited with literally saving more than a billion lives around the globe in the past 70 years and led to one of its chief architects, Norman Borlaug – who famously said “You can’t build a peaceful world on empty stomachs” – to being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Borlaug’s revolution is a very specific target of many climate activists and the various international government agencies and NGOs that support them. 

In its position paper entitled “Strengthening agroecology for a fundamental Transformation of agri-food systems,” the World Future Council – a German-based NGO/think tank –  states: “The message has now gotten through: the negative effects of industrial agriculture have long been clear; they include water shortages, species extinction, high greenhouse-gas emissions, soil degradation, and land grabbing. They cause social, economic and ecological damage that harms the livelihoods of peasants.”   (You can visit the website at: https://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/ )

Borlaug may have passed away in 2009, but his quote regarding such groups seems apropos:

“Some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They’ve never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they’d be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things.”

Another international group, the Global Green Growth Initiative (the GGGI, a treaty-based organization that works with the UN where it has “Observer” status, like the Red Cross) praised Sri Lanka two years before its ban went into place for its three-year climate change plan.  To quote the GGGI:

“GGGI welcomed the Government of Sri Lanka as its thirtieth Member in January 2019, committing to support the country as it asserts its commitment to achieving its sustainable development and NDC goals. As Sri Lanka’s delivery partner for the 3-year GCF-National Adaptation Planning (NAP) Readiness Support Program, GGGI will support Sri Lanka’s NDC on adaptation by further strengthening its adaptation planning process and capacity to implement NAP.  It also aims to enhance the country’s access to climate finance for the implementation of its national adaptation plan. Working towards 6 sub-outcomes through 20 key outputs, the project’s target impact is a built resilience of the most vulnerable sectors and communities in Sri Lanka to adverse effects of Climate Change through Sri Lanka’s strengthened capacity to implement National Adaptation Planning.” (note – this quote is repeated in its entirety to give the reader a better flavor of the incomprehensible “citizen of the world/corporate speak” most of these endeavors evince.  For more on the GGGI, you can read its “gender and inclusive development” policy statement here: https://gggi.org/theme/gender-and-inclusive-development/ ).

The GGGI, like many other NGOs and government agencies – and some very major financial players like BlackRock (the $10 trillion asset management fund) – see “sustainability” and its related ESG rating (like a bond rating except for non-financial aspects of a company or country) as integral components of investing strategies, grant and credit worthiness, and the like.  This pressure to please the international money (and government) people is a significant driver of initiatives such as Sri Lanka undertook and the Netherlands and Canada are currently considering.

‘If the goal is to kill California agriculture, ESG is a very effective way to do it,” said James Taylor, president of the Heartland Institute.

Despite the obvious catastrophe, even Sri Lankan activists are not giving up.  The Green Movement of Sri Lanka – supported internationally by the European Union, etc. – seems to embody much of movement’s zeitgeist and remains committed to the cause, with the website reading, in part:  “Friends, sustainability is complex and requires a fundamental kindness and empathy among its proponents. Therefore, let us not work with the stupidity of industrial age mindsets in our ongoing effort to shift to sustainability.  We do not have to agree but at the very least, let us agree not to disagree.”  This debate-shuttering “agreeing to not disagree” idea is a sentiment shared by much of the activist movement, no matter the country.  (note – you can find out more at:  https://gmsl.lk/ )

Back in the United States, American Farm Bureau Federation Chief Economist Dr. Roger Cryan estimates that a Sri Lank-style move would cut domestic grain crop production by about 50 percent within two to four years of implementation, leading to massive price hikes and acute shortages of basic commodities.

“Feeding the world is not an easy thing to do,” Cryan said.  “Sri Lanka was clearly a failure.”

After re-iterating the fact that, given its uptake into plants and the soil “nitrogen and phosphorus do not represent a greenhouse gas problem, Cryan also noted that if Sri Lanka’s overnight organic model were followed that  there is simply “not enough manure and compost on the planet” to make up the difference to keep crop yields steady.

“I’d hate to see something done if they don’t do the math,” Cryan said.  “We shouldn’t be talking about farming less – it can’t be a trade-off.”

The impact in California, home to $50 billion agricultural industry and about 12 percent of the nation’s entire farming output, would be devastating.

A.G. Kawamura, an Orange County farmer, former Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, and co-chair of Solutions From the Land, an international, UN-backed group dedicated to “increasing agricultural productivity (including ecosystem services and societal benefits) and incomes; adapting and building resilience; and reducing and removing greenhouse gas emissions” expressed doubt that many climate activists truly comprehend the complexities of farming.

“It’s the nightmare of the good intentions of the activists who don’t understand how the food supply system works,” Kawamura said.  “They either can’t understand or will not understand because it doesn’t play with the people who pay them.”

Eliminating manufactured fertilizers from the agriculture equation removes a “tool to keep the system robust and when you start taking away tools it becomes challenging if not impractical to continue,” Kawamura said.

With the world’s eight billionth person expected to be born in November, Kawamura strongly believes that protecting the capacity to feed people is paramount.

“Abundance allows for choices,” said Kawamura.  “It allows for organic farming, it allows for ‘laboratory meat,’ it creates the space to innovate.”  But scarcity leads to a mere state of survival, effectively closing off those avenues, he warned.

Kawamura added that a fertilizer ban would  “collapse the production curve” in California within about three years of implementation.

As for the possibility of the enactment of severe restrictions, while Lehr believes California farmers are likely politically powerful enough (unlike Sri Lankan farmers) to forestall such a move, Kawamura is less sanguine.

“The legislature and this governor do not appear to prioritize agriculture,” Kawamura said.  “For years, farmers haven’t been negotiating (in Sacramento) to get more, but just to lose less.”

California growers harvest more than 400 different types of crops – many what are referred to as specialty – that each have differing fertilizer needs and protocols so the impacts of its loss would vary widely, though a flat statewide ban would be catastrophic no matter the crop.  Farmers in other states that concentrate on grain and other staple crops would face yield losses of up to 60 percent across the board if draconian fertilizer restrictions or bans were put in place.

The dream of an organic-only farming world is a chimera anyway, said Bjorn Lomborg, President of the Copenhagen Consensus (a group that acknowledges anthropogenic climate change but believes the approaches being currently taken to combat it are misguided) and Visiting Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution.

“Long simply a fashionable trend for the world’s 1%, environmental activists have increasingly peddled the beguiling idea that organic farming can solve hunger,” Lomborg said.  “However, research conclusively shows that organic farming produces much less food than conventional farming per hectare. Moreover, organic farming requires farmers to rotate soil out of production for pasture, fallow or cover crops, reducing its effectiveness. In total, organic approaches produce between a quarter and half less food than conventional, scientific-driven agriculture.”

Lomborg added that these facts “not only makes organic food more expensive, but it means that organic farmers would need much more land to feed the same number of people as today – possibly almost twice the area. Given that agriculture currently uses 40% of Earth’s ice-free land, switching to organics would mean destroying large swathes of nature for less effective production.”

Should California – or the nation –  take the path of most destruction and implement restrictions or even fertilizer bans, the social and economic impacts would be catastrophic and could hearken back to the conditions during the Great Depression of the 1930s – except this time there wouldn’t be any bread lines because there wouldn’t be any bread.

5 34 votes
Article Rating
89 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 3, 2022 10:12 pm

But, considering the state’s claim to be the global leader in fighting climate change, can California – with its extremely powerful “climate lobby” that was able to ban the future sales of new gas-powered vehicles, a concept that would have been unthinkable a very few years ago – be far behind?”

The fallacy here is thinking that Sri Lanka’s ban was anything to do with climate. It wasn’t. It was just the usual notion of organic farming. Nor was the action in Netherlands, which was concerned with local eutrophication, not climate. It’s true that there has been some muddled talk in Canada about fertilizing increasing NO production, but nothing has happened, and I expect that the science will be sorted out before anything does.

But anyway, there isn’t even talk in California, at least not by government. This article just has ill-based speculation. No facts at all.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 3, 2022 10:31 pm

The article discusses that latest trend in insanity, and it is spot on.

Reply to  Pat from kerbob
September 3, 2022 10:41 pm

It says The current push, however, revolves around climate change” and it doesn’t. Neither his case of Sri Lanka or Netherlands involved climate change.


Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 3, 2022 11:38 pm

But they are both woke. Ie insane.

buggs
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 12:05 am

Trudeau and his ilk have directly linked the 30% reduction in allowable fertilizer directly to climate change. You’re either stupid or flat out lying.

Reply to  buggs
September 4, 2022 12:10 am

Please quote what I have said that you consider to be wrong.

HotScot
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 1:59 am

Everything.

Eutrophication was a problem emerging from early fertiliser over use. It was recognised and farmers largely eradicated it decades ago by analysing their use of fertilisers and adjusting them to reduce the amount they used and the money they spent.

The problem is, of course, most apparent in government supported farming environments where cost isn’t an issue. Farmers over use products because if they don’t exhaust their annual budgets they are cut.

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 9:06 am

No facts at all.”

HotScot
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 1:51 am

That’s either blind stupidity or deliberate malice.
Everything today across most of the civilised world revolves around climate change.
Working with one of the worlds most prominent universities I have just applied for a government grant to develop a life saving product.
The central themes are, in no particular order, ‘save the planet’, ‘diversity and inclusion’ and ‘woke terminology’ amongst a few other things ‘feeling’ related.
No matter how good your proposition if you don’t use the correct language to address these central themes a grant is simply out of reach.
One might say ‘well of course these are things we need to think about’ however, in 30 years working in the business environment and a number of years working for the state, every reputable business addresses these subjects as a matter of common sense.
They don’t need to be told to manage resources, that’s inherent within good business practice. Diversity and inclusion is adequately addressed by seeking the most capable people for the job and not by practicing inverted racism or sexism.
You are an ideological fool and by encouraging other ideologues you have brought the world to the place we are right now, allowing people to die for the sake of your untested beliefs.
In fact, even that’s wrong because all your idiotic schemes have been tried throughout history and they have all failed, frequently at the cost of millions of lives.
Right wing views may not be the solution to all problems, but left wing ideologies are the source of all of them.

Reply to  HotScot
September 5, 2022 9:54 am

either blind stupidity or deliberate malice.”

Nick isn’t stupid.

Editor
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 3:20 am

Of course climate is involved –

Netherlands:
Why Dutch farmers are protesting over emissions cuts
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62335287

Sri Lanka:
SRI LANKA BRINGS THE IMPORTANCE OF SUSTAINABLE NITROGEN MANAGEMENT TO THE CLIMATE CHANGE DISCOURSE
https://mfa.gov.lk/sl-nitrogen4netzero/

David A
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 3:47 am

The Paris accord also had zero to do with CAGW right Nick?  And yes, as far as having any discernible affect on the GMT, that’s correct. Nick, you are off the rails lately. Did you recently get a booster? 

2hotel9
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 4:12 am

Yes, it does revolve around the lie of human caused Globall Warmining, you lie spewing liar.

effinayright
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 6, 2022 8:43 pm

“The usual notion of organic farming” in Sri Lanka, you say.

Whose “notion” ? Perhaps a “notion” of an autocratic elite mesemrized by nonsense, or even maybe threatened with ESG-style retaliation if it didn’t play along?

Certainly NOT the “usual notion” among the farmers this nonsense was imposed on.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 3, 2022 10:48 pm

“but nothing has happened, and I expect that the science will be sorted out before anything does”. 
They blow up power stations don’t they?

Last edited 21 days ago by Rod Evans
Lewis P Buckingham
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 3, 2022 10:58 pm

The article is clear that it was about obtaining finance.
‘adaptation planning process and capacity to implement NAP. It also aims to enhance the country’s access to climate finance for the implementation of its national adaptation plan.’
Back in the 80 ‘s Sri Lanka was an exporting economy, but slowly things shut down as it became cheaper to import.
It was self sufficient in clothing manufacture, that shut with cheap imports, the plywood manufacturer went then the cement works. Agriculture, the backbone of exports, relied on tea,
which formed 70%.
They tried high producing , butterfat, dairy cows given as aid form Australia.
These Northern European breeds died from still birth, heat exhaustion and poor nutrition.
As in the clip it was ‘fashionable’ in the West to promote agriculture that was organic, but that they were ‘living in the clouds’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G73j8kxtHJ8
One way of looking at this is that Sri Lanka has been going bankrupt for a long time.
‘Climate Finance’ could have pulled them out and put them in the big seat.
After a pilot study they say they found that if applied properly, organic farming works.
The corollary was then that it was the farmers who failed to implement the proper organic farming that caused the crisis and crop failure.
If you looked at a virtual Venn diagram there is a big overlap between those who advocate organic farming and fear of human caused climate change, particularly in the West.
A lot of Aussies are quite phobic.
Its a reasonable hypotheses that the movers and shakers in Sri Lanka, watching the economy tank, thought they could game the system and borrow cheap money, after all everyone was printing it.
After all, that’s how the game can be played, just create an artificial scarcity and the price goes up, say natural gas or electricity, however if you have no produce to sell, somebody will spit the dummy.

Reply to  Lewis P Buckingham
September 3, 2022 11:19 pm

‘Climate Finance’ could have pulled them out”
There is nothing there to connect the organic farming notion with climate finance. That text by the GGGI came two years earlier, and was in praise of some other climate gestures.

Back in the 80 ‘s Sri Lanka was an exporting economy, but slowly things shut down as it became cheaper to import.”
Don’t mention the war

Lewis P Buckingham
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 2:40 am

Yes a number of my acquaintances have brought me up to date.
Sri Lanka has tried to go down
the green road and reduce its dependence on imported fuel.
So it borrowed heavily.
https://www.adb.org/results/helping-sri-lanka-go-green
A year ago it looked good
https://www.adb.org/countries/sri-lanka/economy
Incidentally the Asian Development Bank describes itself as the bank to mitigate the effects of climate change.
It just loaned Sri Lanka so they could buy food.
A laudable goal.
The problem is the total mentality.
You can’t manufacture refine or create export markets on solar and wind.
Sure you can keep coffee shops and hopefully schools running during the day.
But all the jobs have gone overseas for the educated children.
The smart ones are here in Australia.
They develop land and build McMansions and send their children to Uni to be doctors.
Some work as immigration agents, others trained in the PRC in STEM subjects, came to Australia to work professionally, some, young and multi lingual in English /Tamil, were paid $5000 a week to go to Christmas island to interpret when the boating disaster happened after the war you mention.

There is no foreign exchange to buy petrol for the transport and tractors and irrigation.
They don’t refine their own.
Organic farming is just part of the narrative of ‘sustainable development’.
But then, so is starvation.

Drake
Reply to  Lewis P Buckingham
September 4, 2022 9:24 am

Incidentally the Asian Development Bank describes itself as the bank to mitigate the effects of climate change.
It just loaned Sri Lanka so they could buy food.

Wow, what a way to go, a country with NO income needs to borrow just to feed itself. How long can that go on?

Pflashgordon
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 9:18 am

Nick
Every (for the math challenged, that is 100%) “sustainability” office, director or coordinator at the hundreds of U.S. universities who have them operate under the same platform. They are, first and foremost, climate alarmists. They then uniformly advocate for rapid elimination of fossil fuel use, rapid expansion of wind, solar and biofuels power, eating only local, organically grown foods (i.e., locavores), elimination of animal-based foods, elimination of all manufactured fertilizers and biocides, “re-wilding” of the landscape, elimination of chlorine in all it uses, electrification of the transportation and industrial equipment fleet, minimizing the use of anesthetics in hospitals, banning of plastic containers, and list goes on. They attempt to force faculty to include “sustainability” topics in all of their curricula, even for courses having little or no connection to climate or sustainability. They actively attempt to indoctrinate residence hall students into their philosophies, some even coercing students to sign “sustainability” pledges. They push their teacher education programs to advocate for climate and “sustainability” to be included in K-12 public education.

They measure and score their universities on a bizarre, biased and highly subjective STARS sustainability rating scale, proud of their silver, gold or platinum ratings. They lobby their university endowments to eliminate fossil fuels from their investments. They lobby/coerce their presidents into making extreme climate and aggressive net-zero commitments. They convince students to vote for “green” fees (btw, the environment is not green), which they then squander on a repetitive menu of worthless projects. Busybodies, they ignore the good work and environmental stewardship of the many departments and ancillary enterprises that keep the university functioning (facilities design, construction, maintenance, foodservice, grounds, etc.), treating them as a bunch of rubes out to destroy the planet; yet they are more than willing to take credit for the good work that those people are doing.

Whilst advocating these things, they are enthralled with indigenous shamanism, gender confusion, preferred pronouns, alleged “systemic racism”, white guilt, micro-aggressions, BLM, CRT, repeating their diversity-inclusion-equity mantra in religious fashion. Yet, rather than inclusive, they actively exclude other voices, disenfranchising large portions if not majorities of their student bodies. They disinvite conservative speakers, or attempt to disrupt their events.

They are also approximately 97% leftist democrats and proponents of big-government, socialist control.

So it is ALL connected, with “climate change” being the banner under which they operate. University “sustainists” would be entirely lost and aimlessly wandering if climate proves to be a minor issue with little to no urgency.

How do I know this? I have been lurking and reading as a member of their nationwide Listserve for about 15 years. I have attended their regional and national conferences and even made session presentations, after which I was called a “denier” for even raising questions or doubts in a balanced, reasoned way and making no bold or provocative statements. I have read their notices and invitations for upcoming speakers and events. I have seen what speakers and movies they promote. I have seen their reading lists.

In all of this, there is no denying that there is often a skin of truth in “sustainists’” pronouncements, and they have managed to raise legitimate issues of efficiency, resource conservation and waste reduction. However, this is all from a decidedly extremist point of view, always viewing the world as a glass half empty rather than half full, failing to acknowledge the positives and benefits of fossil-fuel based energy systems and mildly warmer weather compared to the Little Ice Age.

So, Nick, as much as you may try to parcel out and separate these issues, they are all intricately entwined.

Mr.
Reply to  Pflashgordon
September 4, 2022 9:50 am

Bullseye!.

It’s always the big picture view that exposes ALL the story, and you nailed it.

I’m bookmarking your comment.

otropogo
Reply to  Pflashgordon
September 4, 2022 10:04 pm

“…They are also approximately  97% leftist democrats and proponents of big-government, socialist control…”

Oh, good one! Sooo scientific-sounding…

Rod Evans
Reply to  Pflashgordon
September 5, 2022 1:26 am

The ‘Long Marchers through the institutions’ have achieved their goal. They  are no longer marching. They are now at the stamping on the face of democracy stage at all the institutions they have marched into. One wonders what comes next now they have control?

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Lewis P Buckingham
September 3, 2022 11:39 pm

Organic = 1/2 the yield. Local organic farmer.

buggs
Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
September 4, 2022 12:11 am

Not sure it’s half, but depends as much on the year as much as anything.

For us locally, on average, it’s two thirds. Some years good, some years bad. Ironically, some years catastrophically bad as in zero yield. I’ve seen the same in conventional fields but under exceptional circumstances.

The first lie of organic production is no pesticides (reality is no synthetic pesticides unless you’re talking primary screwworm fly in UK). Second lie is yields are similar. That’s without ever discussing that many synthetic pesticides are lower toxicity than organic options. Oh, and the increased labor involved. But hey, that’s ok, let’s get folks back to the 1930s and have 9/10 working the fields.

As for the connection between organic farming and climate, take a look at the penetration of the green lobby in Europe and tell me it’s not the same people.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  buggs
September 4, 2022 1:14 am

“increased labor involved”

That often means operating equipment which burns fuel => much larger carbon footprint. It’s almost as if
anything said about green/organic should begin with
“Once upon a time”, as they have little experience in
whatever they’re discussing. Borlaug said it best:

“If they lived just one month amid the
misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they’d be crying out for
tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals
and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things.”

Last edited 21 days ago by Old Man Winter
Ben Vorlich
Reply to  Old Man Winter
September 4, 2022 2:13 am

Borlaug was spot on.
I grew up in a house without any mains services, it wasn’t a life choice by my parents it’s just how it was.
This was in Perthshire Scotland 700feet/210m above sea level. Winters in 1950s and 1960s were hard work. Keeping warm, living in the gloom of gas light (bottled), Paraffin lamps, and candles, no really hot water or hot food until the Rayburn was well alight. Fuel was conserved by letting it go out on all but the very coldest nights. One warmish room.
I thank the Lord every day for cheap 24/7 gas and electricity. All my life I’ve had enough candles, oil lamps and a camping stove to ensure I can cope with another Miner’s Strike. I purchased a couple of modern LED lights and several months worth of batteries for last winter in anticipation of Net Zero doing the Zero part very successfully within a year or two.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
September 4, 2022 6:59 am

Ben, as much as we didn’t like the adversities
when we faced them, it definitely gave us the
knowledge & common sense the elitists sorely
lack. The sad part is that they will have
learned nothing from the failure of Nut Zero
& will only look for ways to blame us & tighten
the screws down even more. They’re bound &
determined to create “Hell on Earth”!

BTW, 40 yrs ago this November, I made my only
trip into Scotland, taking a flight from East
Anglia to RAF Leuchars, assisting the RAF as
they still had to support the post-Falklands
operation. It was a foggy & rainy night so
besides the air base, all I got to see of
Scotland was the lights of Edinburgh.

H.R.
Reply to  Old Man Winter
September 4, 2022 9:12 am

Old Man Winter: ” The sad part is that they will have
learned nothing from the failure of Nut Zero
& will only look for ways to blame us & tighten
the screws down even more. ”

👍👍 for you and Ben Vorlich

The GEBs (Globalist Elite Bastards) will, after everything crashes and burns, blame us for “not doing it right.”

The GEBs will say that what they told us to do was 100% correct, but that we screwed up the implementation of their perfect plans.

Restating your point, they will double down and tell us to keep doing all of the ‘Nut Zero’ things but this time, “do it right, you idiot peons.”

After all, they have a piece of paper that says they are smart, so they cannot possibly be wrong.

The Sri Lankans got it right. They educated their elites about the error of their ways.

Pflashgordon
Reply to  buggs
September 4, 2022 9:26 am

They advocate for this to be the new normal.

4968C826-8986-4A30-A06B-5572FE3092DA.jpeg
Pflashgordon
Reply to  Pflashgordon
September 4, 2022 9:28 am

Or this. (Photos of 1930s-40s U.S. agriculture)

D1797AC4-942F-4851-B4DA-CEEB65459BE8.jpeg
otropogo
Reply to  buggs
September 4, 2022 10:05 pm

Approximately half then?

StephenP
Reply to  otropogo
September 6, 2022 11:43 pm

The sheer drudgery involved is always ignored by the proponents of ‘ sustainable ‘ practices.
Who among them volunteers to go out in all weathers, to do the sowing, weeding and harvesting?
The amount of heavy lifting involved, (who still has experience of handling 1 cwt sacks?) is back-breaking work.
Spreading animal manures by hand is hardly mind-enhancing work, assuming we are still allowed animals in farming!
All this work to be done by people in well-paid, unionised jobs??!
I dread to think the effect on the cost of food with the lower yields and higher labour costs.
These proponents need to get a dose of the realities of life in the countryside.
Maybe switching off the heating in winter and air-con in summer would be a start.

Last edited 18 days ago by StephenP
PCman999
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 12:41 am

How can you breathe Nick with your head so far up your own….

Canadian farmers know Trudeau and the rest of the clown show have no respect for people’s lives and are expecting the worst.

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 1:41 am

One thing that puzzles me about Organic Vegatarian/Vegan living is the fertilizer that’s going to be used. I think that fertilizer will be needed. Traditionally on a mixed farm animal manure would be used to fertilize arable fields, But in a meat free country where we live on Quorn, nuts, and vegetables where’s the fertilizer going to come from? Night Soil would be the only solution but that’s not entirely free from risk as recent issues in London show

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
September 4, 2022 9:12 am

In crop rotation there is also “green manure” which is growing a crop to be plowed under which replenishes soil productivity. But in my own case we would plant alfalfa, which produced hay, then as the alfalfa crop grew more “senile” we would plow it under to grow a crop in the following year of something that required a lot of nitrogen — corn. It reduced over all productivity compared to synthetic fertizer and the imapct on revenues would depend on current markets.

otropogo
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
September 4, 2022 10:31 pm

“One thing that puzzles me about Organic Vegatarian/Vegan living”

What’s your rationale for lumping these three things together and then calling your monster “living”?

I’ve been a vegan and a vegetarian before I ever heard of ‘organic’. I’ve been eating organic food for almost two decades now, but not exclusively, as it’s often too hard to access or too expensive. And I’m neither a Vegan nor a Vegetarian, but I appreciate the fact that organic poultry, dairy, and cattle producers are required, at least in Canada, to treat their animals less cruelly. And I wish I could hunt for my own larder as I used to and avoid supporting the slaughterhouses and related abuses of animals.

The recurring argument here against organic farming essentially comes down to the view that organic farming can’t feed this overpopulated human species. Well, wake up, no matter what you can devise to increase crop yields, it will never keep up with the population.

And even if it could, the position is perverse. Imagine wanting to ban the practice and further development of high tech medicine because only the rich can afford it now and for the foreseeable future. The fact that probably (or should I say “approximately”?) everyone posting here belongs to the richest one percent of the global population would also make such a position rather hypocritical. So why thumbs up to expensive medicine but thumbs down to expensive food?

Oh wait! I just remembered – nobody here (approximately) is calling for a ban on organic food, they just want to defame it out of existence….Never mind..

Last edited 20 days ago by otropogo
effinayright
Reply to  otropogo
September 6, 2022 9:11 pm

“Well, wake up, no matter what you can devise to increase crop yields, it will never keep up with the population.”
Oh yeah? Then explain why there have been no major natural famines for the past 50 years.

Being a Malthusian is a really tough sell in the 21st century, especially after so much of the world has embraced scientific agricultural practices.

Explain Norman Borlaug. Also explain why India, of all places, was *exporting* wheat (until covid hit).

Apparently you have not heard of the impending retreat, then possible collapse, of global population. It’s happening all around the world.

If that happens, and the economics of EVERYTHING undergo crises, disruptions and unwanted transformations, we might see Malthus stood on his head: his early 19th cent. dire predictions will have come true—but because there will be too few people to maintain robust economies—and not too many to be kept alive..

But…Enjoy your virtue signaling while you can. It’s kinda hard to figure out why you would reveal you miss hunting down and killing animals to eat, but condemn third parties doing the same, even on an industrial scale.

Essentially, you are saying “I’m filled with nostalgia about being only a serial killer—but goddamn those evil people who do it for a living.”

SNORT

Climate believer
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 2:42 am

“The fallacy here is thinking that Sri Lanka’s ban was anything to do with climate. It wasn’t. It was just the usual notion of organic farming. ”

Absolute nonsense.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s speech at COP26 was themed:

“Rediscovering Nitrogen: Solutions and Synergies for Climate Change, Health, Biodiversity and Circular Economy”.

Graham
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 3:37 am

You have not got a clue Nick Stokes .
Billions will die of starvation if severe restrictions are enforced on fertilizer usage.
Already we have seen nitrogenous fertilizers more than triple in price in the last 12 months so that alone will cut back usage and eventually crop yields .
Shipping freight rates around the world have increased by 600% and this is impacting every commodity imported or exported .
Goverments around the world are walking blind folded into chaos and when it happens they will say they never saw it coming.
The sooner this absolute obsession with climate change is put aside and politicians and leaders start concentrating on the far more important issues , every person on this planet will be better off.
Man cannot control the weather now or in the future but the stupidity that is happening now with crazy decisions of going carbon neutral will affect the population of this earth for many years and it will not be good .

2hotel9
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 4:11 am

You spew lies as ably as grifftard does.

fretslider
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 4:31 am

The fallacy here is thinking that Sri Lanka’s ban was anything to do with climate. 

If we take your claim seriously, why haven’t you complained about the media as a whole?

Climate crisis
Single-use plastics a serious climate change hazard

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/15/single-use-plastics-a-serious-climate-change-hazard-study-warns

Climate crisis
World’s most popular weed-killer linked to convulsions in animals”

https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/climate-crisis

Ad nauseam.

Everything is a serious climate change hazard now, Nick; even the carbon footprint of what you post.. 

Last edited 21 days ago by fretslider
c1ue
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 5:14 am

SriLankawasbecauseofitsforeigndebtissues.Theyhavetoimportfertilizer,weremassivelyindebtandwerefacingtheproblemofhavingtopayforfertilizerwithforeigncurrencywhichwasinshortsupply.Sothefertilizerbanwastheirgovernment’sbrightideatobothsavemoneybynotbuyingfertilizersandtocurryfavorwiththeIMF.

c1ue
Reply to  c1ue
September 4, 2022 5:16 am

SomethingwrongwithWUWTwebpage:commentareaisnotacceptingspacesandfontoptionsarelike100pointfont.

Reply to  c1ue
September 4, 2022 7:54 am

re: Something wrong with WUWT webpage: comment are a is not accepting spaces and font options are like 100 point font.
Testonetwothree.I’mseeingthesamething.Mustbebrowserspecific.
_Jim

TonyG
Reply to  _Jim
September 5, 2022 7:22 am

The latest Firefox on Win10 seems fine. Firefox on Mac (not sure which version) has problems. At least that’s how it is for me.

I.put.dots.between.words.to.get.around.that.problem..

Gene
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 8:25 am

I just realized… Nick must be Dyslexic… He needs the specialized tutoring to overcome his inability to read and understand that children need to be able to understand basic language!!

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 9:04 am

You are only half-right Nick. And you are dead wrong about there being no facts at all. The ban was partially a hare-brained attempt to balance a current account deficit. However, the political powers thought that banning industrial fertilizers would have no effects down the line because agricultural fertilizers are available. It is the thinking of all political elites who have never turned a plowshare’s worth of dirt in thier lives — including our very own Jennifer Granholm.

Pat from kerbob
September 3, 2022 10:28 pm

Given that agriculture currently uses 40% of Earth’s ice-free land, switching to organics would mean destroying large swathes of nature for less effective production.”

But all that land has already been earmarked for renewables?

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
September 3, 2022 11:40 pm

Good job we have the extra fertiliser as CO2 greens the planet.

buggs
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
September 4, 2022 12:12 am

1/3 to 1/2 as much land to produce organically. That’s with completely ignoring marginal agricultural lands that are used for livestock and forage production. Lots of ag land is utterly unsuitable for production of high value crops.

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  buggs
September 4, 2022 2:14 am

That livestock providing the organic fertilizer

Brad-DXT
September 3, 2022 10:56 pm

Like the Great Depression of the 1930s – except this time there wouldn’t be any bread lines because there wouldn’t be any bread.
That’s the probable future if we follow the green loonies.

Millions perhaps billions dead is their goal. These morons spewing the climate change rhetoric just want to erase the advances we’ve made over the centuries and devolve into a dystopian future with a few elites and short, brutal lives for most of us “useless eaters”.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Brad-DXT
September 3, 2022 11:41 pm

The funny thing is is that they are the useless eaters.

RickWill
September 3, 2022 11:50 pm

If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they’d be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things.

Brussels could well be facing that situation this year.

When the power goes off large buildings will not be habitable; the water supply, if any, runs the risk of contamination and toilets back up. If on low ground, toilets can create their own nightmare.

Reality is a tough master. And Europe is shaping up for a solid dose of reality by the end of the year.

Editor
Reply to  RickWill
September 4, 2022 3:42 am

Sorry but the idea that it will be a dose of reality may be wrong. To you and me it would be a dose of reality, but if the media don’t change their tune then the public will not get any notion of their experiences being reality. They will be told that they haven’t done enough green madness yet and they have to do more. (It won’t be called green madness of course).

Peta of Newark
September 4, 2022 12:23 am

I’m with Nick on this one, no surprise.
Sri Lanka was bankrupt and cutting foreign espenditure was a final last-dith attempt by a corrupt/incompetatnt leader to save his own neck
He thought that he could get away with it by Copy/Pasting a shedload of green bollox into the national and international media. That The World would side with him.
It is a measure of his incompetence that he actually thought it would work.

That Sri Lanka depended on rice is also a measure – of starvation. People only eat rice when they are absolutely despearte for ‘something/anything to fill their bellies – also when they have an urgent need to acquire Type 2 Diabetes. As all the world’s rice-eaters have.

As for lettuce in Salinas – there are hardly the words. Nobody eats that much, which is actually a great shame.
Because the lovely green colour, as any farmer will tell you, is a measure of how much Nitrogen fertiliser it’s been given. Take the Nirogen out of lettuce and is is yellow, soggy and limp. No-one would even look at it let alone buy it and use for garnish

The Great Shame comes in that the Nitrate in the (bright green) lettuce has immense power over your blood pressure. We need Nitrate and (normally) we have bacteria in our mouths actually making the stuff from the air we breathe.
(Also the effective/active ingredient of Viagra)
Ain’t it bizarre that we’re told to eat lettuce but not bacon – primarily because ‘Bacon is made with and thus contains cancer-causing Nitrate/Nitrite’
Gotta love it haven’t ya

Then why anyone would grow such a water and fertiliser-hungry plant in a desert is madness itself. Likewise tomatoes. Nutrient free blobs of (96%) water that are only made edible via the addition of refined sugar. While the Alkaloid poisons in there do just as much damage as Glyphosate.
But they Make $$Money$$ and are thus: Healthy

Further madness ensues when ‘the piss is taken out of organic farming’
Fine, why not just pop down the local agricultural merchant, bring home some Roundup and drink it.
Save the farmer-middle-man going to all the trouble/expense he does injecting it into the food he grows. Then you too can have an entire family of Autistic children, cognitive decline from age 11 onwards and the last 10 years at least of your life being a cabbage/lettuce sitting in a desert. Also myriad afflictions brought on by micro-nutrient deficiencies (about 95% of all disease)
nice

The clue about organics is here:
Quote:”organic farming requires farmers to rotate soil out of production for pasture, fallow or cover crops

That statement is an admission of the reality that is Soil Erosion
(All artificial fertilisers, also irrigation, are also admissions of same)

It (the madness also) goes on:
Quote:”organic approaches produce between a quarter and half less food than conventional, scientific-driven agriculture
There are 2 significant madnesses in there…

  1. The confusion of Quantity with Quality
  2. The blind and trusting faith in Science (in agriculture) while holding Climate Science in disdain

IOW: Those he would destroy, he first makes mad

Part One of that plan is now complete – the axe is on its way down

and for the most part (e.g. California, Gemany, UK), we are actually racing to meet it.

Editor
Reply to  Peta of Newark
September 4, 2022 3:46 am

Peta – as I replied to Nick Stokes:
Reply to
Nick Stokes
September 4, 2022 3:20 am
Of course climate is involved –

Netherlands:
Why Dutch farmers are protesting over emissions cuts
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62335287

Sri Lanka:
SRI LANKA BRINGS THE IMPORTANCE OF SUSTAINABLE NITROGEN MANAGEMENT TO THE CLIMATE CHANGE DISCOURSE
https://mfa.gov.lk/sl-nitrogen4netzero/

Gene
Reply to  Peta of Newark
September 4, 2022 9:03 am

Tomatoes are nutrient poor? Not according to the many health sites I checked! Perhaps you should re-assess your statement!

H.R.
Reply to  Gene
September 4, 2022 10:18 pm

Tomatoes are a good source of malic acid and ascorbic acid.

They are also a key ingredient in BLT sandwiches. Mmmmmm….!

Rxc
Reply to  Peta of Newark
September 5, 2022 7:28 am

“People only eat rice when they are absolutely despearte for ‘something/anything to fill their bellies – also when they have an urgent need to acquire Type 2 Diabetes. As all the world’s rice-eaters have.”

So all of the Chinese and Japanese have Type 2 diabetes? Please provide a citation for this “fact”.

effinayright
Reply to  Peta of Newark
September 6, 2022 9:26 pm

Puta of Newark said:

“That Sri Lanka depended on rice is also a measure – of starvation. People only eat rice when they are absolutely despearte for ‘something/anything to fill their bellies – also when they have an urgent need to acquire Type 2 Diabetes. As all the world’s rice-eaters have.”

****************

Yeah, that’s why humans have been eating rice all over the freakin world for thousands of years.

That’s why rice is STILL eaten today. And in rich countries.

That stupid comment was all I needed to put you down as “Crazy as a s#t house rat”

p.s. the diabetes conjecture is just more “bullshit”. No doctor will tell you that rice “causes” diabetes.

Your claim that people who eat rice have an “urgent need to acquire Type 2 diabetes reveals you to be a misanthropic KOOK

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/symptoms-causes/syc-20371444#:~:text=The%20exact%20cause%20of%20most,of%20genetic%20or%20environmental%20factors.

“The exact cause of most types of diabetes is unknown. In all cases, sugar builds up in the bloodstream. This is because the pancreas doesn’t produce enough insulin. Both type 1 and type 2 diabetes may be caused by a combination of genetic or environmental factors. It is unclear what those factors may be.”

You, sir, are an Encyclopedia of Errant Nonsense.

.

Vuk
September 4, 2022 12:28 am

Moderate strength G2 solar storm originated from a coronal hole is currently under way, follow here:
http://www.n3kl.org/sun/images/noaa_kp_3d.gif

fretslider
September 4, 2022 2:00 am

“China’s tea production amounted to 3.18 million metric tons, a record high volume. “

https://www.statista.com/statistics/275639/tea-production-in-china/

Presumably China ignored the memo

Last edited 21 days ago by fretslider
ozspeaksup
September 4, 2022 3:05 am

most of aus broadacre only manages because of superphosphate our soils are crap. seth borenstein was on ABC this week saying how banning coal/gas would pretty much stop access to manmade super
we DO have a huge phosphate rock area up nth apparently BUT try n get it in production? green/aboriginals will be screaming blue murder asap
he also wants farm animals banned so there goes natural sourced fertilisers too
not sure what meds theyre on but they need to stop it

Last edited 21 days ago by ozspeaksup
Richard from Brooklyn (south)
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 4, 2022 3:10 pm

The missing point is that the need for organic fertiliser CAN be met from animal dung. Everyone has forgotten that when fossil fuel powered cars are banned, when electric cars do not operate because renewable power has not the capacity to supply the increased demand, the only choice will be horses, mules, donkeys and oxen to ride on and pull carts and carriages.
The Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894 with 9 foot high manure piles in the streets would not come to pass as the horse manure will replace the nasty nitrogen based fertiliser by being scooped up and placed on farmland.
Problem solved!!

On a side note, of the main components of the air we breathe, we have CO2 (bad and must go), Nitrogen (now bad and must go) and all we have left is oxygen. How long before that is deemed bad?? We are all doomed, doomed I say.

H.R.
Reply to  Richard from Brooklyn (south)
September 4, 2022 10:37 pm

Do they say “Hey, y’all!” in South Brooklyn, Richard, or is that only in the Deep South Brooklyn? 😉

With no electricity, no fossil fuels, and no animals, that just leaves the Aztec solution of appeasing the agricultural gods by ripping out the still-beating hearts of their sacrificial victims. I could be OK with that if they start with the unreliables advocates and then move on to the politicians.

It can’t work out to be any worse than trying to run a grid with wind and solar.

Richard from Brooklyn (south)
Reply to  H.R.
September 5, 2022 1:13 pm

H. R. My Brooklyn (south) is south of the equator. We have a North Island, a South Island and also a West Island where the inhabitants call it Australia.
BTW we say ‘Kia ora’.

H.R.
Reply to  Richard from Brooklyn (south)
September 6, 2022 10:21 am

👍 😁 I did not know about that Brooklyn.

Live and learn. Thanks, Richard.

2hotel9
September 4, 2022 4:18 am

Oh, it will collapse far faster than that, Newsom has said he is going to totally end use of “fossil fuels” in agriculture in Cali. THAT will kill ag faster than lack of fertilizer. Guess he plans on using slave labor to farm, how very Democrat Party of him.

Pflashgordon
Reply to  2hotel9
September 4, 2022 9:47 am

Gotta have something for those millions of Biden illegals to do.

Barnes Moore
September 4, 2022 4:41 am

“A.G. Kawamura, an Orange County farmer, former Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, and co-chair of Solutions From the Land, an international, UN-backed group dedicated to “increasing agricultural productivity (including ecosystem services and societal benefits) and incomes; adapting and building resilience; and reducing and removing greenhouse gas emissions” expressed doubt that many climate activists truly comprehend the complexities of farming”.

Wait just a minute, didn’t mini-Mike Bloomberg assure us that all it takes is digging a small hole, planting a seed, then watering it? I thought farming was so simple, even mini-Mike could do it.

Reply to  Barnes Moore
September 4, 2022 8:03 am

He was thinking “NYC roof-top gardens” …

September 4, 2022 4:52 am

In Indonesia Organik food and fruits very very expensive, price of watermelon start from $50 USD

Pete Bonk
September 4, 2022 6:14 am

Let’s just say it: Starvation is a time tested way of getting rid of a lot of people without actually going out and killing them with hanging, bullets, swords, bombs, etc. At its core, the greens/progressives/save the earth crowd thinks there are too many people. Lower that by a billion or so, and the problems of resource depletion, overfishing etc., etc. are solved. Elites have been screaming “too many people” for decades, and they mean to do something about it.

Slash and burn primitive farming recognizes that the land can get depleted; adding fertilizer is the answer to ongoing productivity on farms. Why else make farms less productive unless you want fewer food available?? The Greens are trying to make Genocide acceptable, for “a higher cause”. NO.

September 4, 2022 7:59 am

Testonetwothree.
Stillhavingtheissue.
Browser – Pale Moon derivative (“Mypal”)
OS – Win Xp SP3
Note:Spaces added AFTER typing in this text. Spaces within text get eaten as next word is typed.

Reply to  _Jim
September 4, 2022 8:56 am

Brother Dinosaur, welcome!

Reply to  Curious George
September 4, 2022 10:48 am

Heh. Thanks bother dino. Running on a 2008 era Dell Optiplex 755 Core2Duo E8400 processor too. Only failure so far has been a power supply (knock on wood!) The 2010 vintage Dell ST2010f monitor I’m using was fished out of a dumpster awhile back.

Insufficiently Sensitive
September 4, 2022 8:47 am

The current push, however, revolves around climate change 

Actually not. The climate is nowhere near out of bounds for historic world cycles.

The current PUSH (see the volume knob up to 11?) is a politically manufactured stampede by too many power centers to frighten the world population into a terrorized run off of an economic cliff.

Just as our environmentally sensitive Indians used to do when they wanted a lot of buffalo on the table. Only in this case it’s various profiteers who can become plutocrats by rakeoffs from cynical, shortsighted political measures taken to abolish cheap energy.

Mike Harker
September 4, 2022 11:08 am

In my local supermarket, organic products are roughly twice the price of their conventional equivalents.
So, either organic farming is less productive than conventional farming, or organic farmers are ripping us off.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Mike Harker
September 4, 2022 1:14 pm

I saw a bag of Ice Melt where I worked that said it was “Organic” on the label.
I also saw a tube of toothpaste at the store that said it was “Gluten Free”.
Phrases abused to sell a product.
(“Going Organic” might have a place in your backyard garden. Or even a small farm. But to feed a country? The world? Not yet. Still too many of us two-legged “Carbon Pollution” beings walking around for it to work.)

Last edited 20 days ago by Gunga Din
Doonman
September 4, 2022 1:34 pm

California is a one party state. The legislature has been in democrat hands since 1959. There is no opposition to the democrat agenda, so what you get will be what they propose.

Since today’s California democrats are predisposed to save the earth and redistribute wealth, that’s exactly what you will get. Of course, California is not a country, so you still can move out, which is why the population is decreasing. You would think that would be a big clue about policy, but no, it is completely ignored.

Michael S. Kelly
September 4, 2022 3:09 pm

“It is true, however, that nitrous dioxide – that stuff you inhale at the dentist’s office – is considered a greenhouse gas…”

You’ve got your chemistry a bit wrong. Nitrous oxide (not “dioxide”), or N₂O, is the stuff you inhale at the dentist’s office. There isn’t any such thing as “nitrous” dioxide, though if you inhaled nitrogen dioxide at your dentist’s office, or anywhere else, it would be the last breath you ever took.

As for N₂O being a greenhouse gas, I think people should look at its absorption spectrum a little more closely. Same with methane, which is also a rotten infrared absorber.

Last edited 20 days ago by Michael S. Kelly
Reply to  Michael S. Kelly
September 4, 2022 5:56 pm

thomasbuckleyhere-opps-editingporblem-theword”not”was left out
thanks for noticing and meaculpa

otropogo
September 4, 2022 9:50 pm

“…prices for food (especially rice) and fuel and other daily basics skyrocketed, the tea crop – and the hundreds of millions it earns in international trade – was decimated…”

I don’t see what skyrocketing costs of fuel and “other daily basics” has to do with banning artificial fertilizers. As for the rest, I think Occam’s Razor suggests that garden variety incompetence and corruption (excuse the pun) adequately accounts for the Sri Lankan economic disaster.

While I applauded Angela Merkel’s retreat from nuclear power in view of Fukushima, I didn’t mean she should take Germany over a cliff. She erred not as a physicist, but in accepting poor economic advice on the implementation of her decision.

Drastic changes in agricultural management, as in energy management, must be planned and implemented carefully. And when we see scientifically and technologically advanced countries such as Britain and Germany jumping blindly off a cliff, we shouldn’t be surprised that Sri Lanka is capable of similar folly, nor that it has far fewer resources to soften the fall.
  

Gordon A. Dressler
September 5, 2022 10:00 am

From the above article:

“California’s commitment to confronting climate change cannot be underestimated., as proven by the 86 different climate partnerships, or “bilateral and multilateral agreements with national and subnational leaders” the state as entered into.”

In response, I’ll just offer up that it is being grossly overestimated with California (government/bureaucracy) having no idea whatsoever at just how INEFFECTIVE their effort to “confront climate change” will be.

To wit:
— California currently emits about 360 million metric tons of CO2 into Earth’s atmosphere.
— Meanwhile, according to the IEA, global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions rose by 6% in 2021 to 36.3 billion metric tons.

Therefore, if California stopped ALL CO2 emissions from ALL sources, it would account for only 0.36/36.6 = .01 = 1% of global CO2 emissions into the atmospheric.  There you have it, 1% tops.

Now, put that 1% reduction—accomplished at the expense of devastating the economy of California and its food production for the rest of the US and, indeed, the world—against the above-stated fact that worldwide CO2 emissions rose 6% in 2021 alone.

This is “confronting climate change”??? . . .give me an effing break, will you.

effinayright
September 6, 2022 8:39 pm

Nothing in this article about the allegedly wide-spread spraying of anhydrous ammonia on crops.

It would seem that this very toxic chemical’s use should be tightly controlled, since its vapors supposedly can spread by wind into populated areas.

But…how wide is its use? What damage has it caused? Is it already highly regulated?

Is it even an issue in the Netherlands or Sri Lanka?

StephenP
Reply to  effinayright
September 7, 2022 12:47 am

I don’t know of any spraying of anhydrous ammonia on crops in the UK.
In the 1970s aqueous solutions of ammonia were a by-product of town gas production and it was injected into , not sprayed on, grassland as a fertiliser.
It was relatively cheap to use and helped to keep the grass growing well for the first part of the growing season.
The introduction of North Sea gas resulted in the closure of the town gas plants.
Do many people remember the gas-holders that were part of every townscape?

Old Cocky
Reply to  effinayright
September 7, 2022 3:59 pm

As far as I know, anhydrous ammonia is always applied sub-soil.

%d bloggers like this: