3 ms·

I see your position, and I agree that the problem is more complex than just pesticides are bad, but it's also more complex than saving sugar beets. If this were

by kurthr 6y ago

I see your position, and I agree that the problem is more complex than just pesticides are bad, but it's also more complex than saving sugar beets. If this were an invasive species (like murder hornets or malarial mosquitos) problem that could be stopped before it started or a temporary measure to prevent life and death (rather than wealth accumulation) for a significant number of people, I'd have more sympathy. Application to sugar beets is expected to increase crop yields 13% on a non-critical crop, for a commodity (sugar) that can be easily imported. The virus problem won't ever go away. So this just sounds like subsidizing a particular local agricultural industry, because it's having a hard time competing right now. Will that ever change, why not choose bees or wildflowers over sugar beet farmers? Is it just because they can pay for lobbyists or positive news coverage? Furthermore, it sounds an awful lot like the massive use of (the most advanced) anti-biotics in cattle feed lots to increase meat yield. That builds up immunity so that those last line of defense drugs are no longer useful to treat humans with deadly diseases. The key here is that there will be a state of permanent emergency where some new poison is always needed to keep profits at their previous artificially high level. If the local industry can't compete, and it's not necessary other than for a small group's continued profit, maybe it's time to move on. The alternative is a possibly long term loss of pollinators (because the insecticide goes down streams) and the development of stronger/larger reservoirs of mites, moths, molds that could permanently affect all pollinators in England.

martinald 6y ago
But what percentage of UK land is used for growing sugar beet? It must be a small fraction. How many bees are actually going to be in the vicinity of this? I can't see it being a large amount. Regarding "we can just import it", well yes, but if everyone took that opinion then there wouldn't be any farming anywhere eventually.
- kurthr 6y ago
  Sugar beets are only grown where cane is not a viable crop, but end-end they are typically about 2-3x the cost of production. Beet sugar is an awful ecological and economic choice created by putting taxes on the importation of cane sugar. To the extent that it is pure sucrose (and I'm not aware of any alcohols made from beets like rum is from molasses) there isn't any difference in the product either. The US pioneered the protection of the sugar industry with >100% tariffs (EU has followed) and thus they have the world's largest sugar beet industry... for little political reason other than protectionism for a Florida (or German dominated) industry. don't know if you should trust this link, but it's a decent paper: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7000/files/cp02zi02.pdf https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7000/files/cp02zi02.pdf p.s. The paper ends in the late 90s although little has changed other than the closing of the US cane industry in Hawaii.
  - choeger 6y ago
    I might be wrong about this, as I don't work in the agrarian industry, but I think where I come from, beets were grown as an alternative to wheat, etc., to replenish the soil.
  - vcdimension 6y ago
    The U.K. recently dropped tariffs from half of it's sugar imports as part of its post brexit, more outward looking trading policy: http://reut.rs/3s7MBYZ http://reut.rs/3s7MBYZ The countries that export sugar to the UK (including E.U. ones) use neonicotinoids, so I guess this emergency measure is to soften the blow to UK farmers, and give them some breathing space while they transition to other crops. It makes sense for the UK to import sugar rather than produce it locally since extracting sugar from beet is far less efficient than extracting it from cane.
thebudgie 6y ago
"If this were an invasive species (like murder hornets or malarial mosquitos) problem that could be stopped before it started or a temporary measure to prevent life and death (rather than wealth accumulation) for a significant number of people" I wonder what recent event governments could have used to show that this was a reasonable course of action to take. One that they could manage easily when it is in its early stages, having been warned about it. Perhaps one that affects humnans? What thing could they have managed better that would make us trust our government in the UK to be using this known bee killer to manage a disease for a greater good later on?
40four 6y ago
Fair point, they are calling it 'temporary' for now. But that's not going to make the diseases they are battling go away in a few years.

by kurthr 6y ago

martinald 6y ago

But what percentage of UK land is used for growing sugar beet? It must be a small fraction. How many bees are actually going to be in the vicinity of this? I can't see it being a large amount. Regarding "we can just import it", well yes, but if everyone took that opinion then there wouldn't be any farming anywhere eventually.

kurthr 6y ago
Sugar beets are only grown where cane is not a viable crop, but end-end they are typically about 2-3x the cost of production. Beet sugar is an awful ecological and economic choice created by putting taxes on the importation of cane sugar. To the extent that it is pure sucrose (and I'm not aware of any alcohols made from beets like rum is from molasses) there isn't any difference in the product either. The US pioneered the protection of the sugar industry with >100% tariffs (EU has followed) and thus they have the world's largest sugar beet industry... for little political reason other than protectionism for a Florida (or German dominated) industry. don't know if you should trust this link, but it's a decent paper: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7000/files/cp02zi02.pdf https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7000/files/cp02zi02.pdf p.s. The paper ends in the late 90s although little has changed other than the closing of the US cane industry in Hawaii.
- choeger 6y ago
  I might be wrong about this, as I don't work in the agrarian industry, but I think where I come from, beets were grown as an alternative to wheat, etc., to replenish the soil.
- vcdimension 6y ago
  The U.K. recently dropped tariffs from half of it's sugar imports as part of its post brexit, more outward looking trading policy: http://reut.rs/3s7MBYZ http://reut.rs/3s7MBYZ The countries that export sugar to the UK (including E.U. ones) use neonicotinoids, so I guess this emergency measure is to soften the blow to UK farmers, and give them some breathing space while they transition to other crops. It makes sense for the UK to import sugar rather than produce it locally since extracting sugar from beet is far less efficient than extracting it from cane.

thebudgie 6y ago

"If this were an invasive species (like murder hornets or malarial mosquitos) problem that could be stopped before it started or a temporary measure to prevent life and death (rather than wealth accumulation) for a significant number of people" I wonder what recent event governments could have used to show that this was a reasonable course of action to take. One that they could manage easily when it is in its early stages, having been warned about it. Perhaps one that affects humnans? What thing could they have managed better that would make us trust our government in the UK to be using this known bee killer to manage a disease for a greater good later on?

40four 6y ago

Fair point, they are calling it 'temporary' for now. But that's not going to make the diseases they are battling go away in a few years.