11 ms·
Trudeau pushes ahead on fertilizer reduction as provinces and farmers cry foul
- jleyank 4y agoAs expected, there is a significant fraction of the population that won’t change their behaviour no matter what situation presents itself. Hopefully, this can be managed by the rest of the population…. Otherwise, “gee, nobody said that would happen” or “why wasn’t this avoided/prevented” will be the cries. Call it head in the sand, or a lack of care about the future or other less nice descriptions but it’s there. People will just have to route around the damage or accept that it’s going to be bad.
- soupbowl 4y agoYeah, the farmers worried about crop yields are some really bad people.
- throwaway5959 4y agoHow shitty will their crop yields be when temps are 2 or 3 degrees C higher and there’s less water?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Ferrotin 4y agoThey’ll be a lot higher.
- cato_the_elder 4y agoAnd here's a paper [1] corroborating that, at least for Canadian crop yields: > Canola and wheat yields were projected to increase with global warming, while maize yield was simulated to increase or slightly decrease depending on the characteristics of the currently grown cultivar and differences among the crop models. It appears that future warming accompanied by increased CO2 concentration will remain beneficial to crop yields at the global warming level of 2.0 °C for Canada. [1]: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab17fb https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab17fb
- throwaway5959 4y agoAh no wonder farmers there want to support climate change.
- cute_boi 4y agoThen how are we going to solve climate issue? I don't think there is magic wand that can fix it? What ever policy you introduce there will always be minority of people that are going to suffer. Change is inevitable. Even if they don't face yeild issue today, I think with the advent of climate change and water crisis they are going to face same trouble in future. How about moving towards sustainable solution with slow changes.
- cato_the_elder 4y ago> I think with the advent of climate change and water crisis they are going to face same trouble in future. That's not true, at least about global warming (which is the relevant issue here) and for Canada. See my other comment below (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32205121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32205121).
- joemazerino 4y agoI don't know Canada's nitrogen/carbon output offhand but I am certain it is less than India or China.
- inglor_cz 4y agoMedical doctors have a maxim "primum non nocere" = "first, do no harm". Don't assume that the farmers are the only ones hit and that they can be simply waved away as a minority that has to yield to progress. Destabilizing agriculture in food exporting countries is a potential threat to consumers of those calories worldwide. Humanity consists of 8 billion people, most of them living in countries that are barely self-sufficient in terms of food production or not sufficient at all. Net exporters are an important player in fight against hunger. Canada itself feeds two other Canadas abroad. If countries like Egypt or Iraq or Nigeria go off the rails because of food insecurity, there will be political instability much worse than during the War on Terror. Canada may be insulated from the consequences, Europe will definitely be not.
- hotpotamus 4y agoGotta keep up those KPIs.
- ribeyes 4y agotypical privileged western "humanist" demanding people die to save the climate. never a thought about second-order effects, only emotional appeals to boogeymen.
- MuchoMaas 4y agoMaybe we could start with reducing emissions by the military, one of the absolute largest sources on earth? And after that maybe ban private jets and 100,000 sq ft mansions?
- kspacewalk2 4y agoLet's reduce emissions by the military. Which country should go first?
- MuchoMaas 4y agoProbably the one that spends more on its military than the next six countries combined? The vast majority of which is dedicated to far-flung imperial projects benefitting only a tiny sliver of its populace? Why should we go first in eliminating fertilizer?
- zosima 4y agoScrewing up food production can have massive, very immediate effects that surpass even the most wildly imaginative climate change scenarios. I think a benefit/risk calculation is in order here.
- mr_cyborg 4y agoThis sounds a little too much like what happened in Sri Lanka[0]. Is now a great time to go messing with food supply anywhere? Pricing and availability is VERY out of wack in my part of the US still. 0: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/18/a-food-crisis-looms-in-sri-lanka-as-farmers-give-up-on-planting https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/18/a-food-crisis-looms...
- zitsarethecure 4y agoNo it doesn't. Working towards a modest reduction in emissions is massively different than banning fertilizer use overnight.
- origin_path 4y agoThe problems of doing so don't change depending on how fast you do it, in this case.
- gumby 4y agoWell, doing over time means you can steer (i.e. adapt to new situations and learning). Among the problems with Sri Lanka's decree is there was no time to adapt. For example, it takes time to switch a field over to organic, and who will pay for the more expensive yet not yet qualified organic crop? Where are the distribution chains (never mind the supply chains). I don't know enough about Canada's plan (only this article) to criticize or praise it. But I do know that your criticism, on its face, is not appropriate.
- Moldoteck 4y agoI think it is different. One thing is banning immediately all fertilizers and tell people "we just grow everything organic way, but you should figure out how... Now". And another thing is reducing their quantity so that farmers adapt by learning techniques to optimize the growth and (maybe) they'll start producing more compost to compensate deficit of 'classic' fertilizer
- cato_the_elder 4y ago
- zosima 4y agoIs this coordinated with the efforts in Netherlands to also reduce the amount of fertilizer use? https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/dutch-farmers-protest-by-blocking-supermarket-distribution-centres-2022-07-04/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/dutch-farmers-protest-b... And what are the scientific rationales for these policies? It seems evident that food prizes will be adversely affected, and that without artificial fertilizers there is a large risk of starvation in many places.
- varispeed 4y agoBoth countries are governed by WEF members and that's just a part of 2030 agenda. They want to bankrupt private farmers and then people like Bill Gates will buy up their farms for peanuts and they will be able to control the population through artificial food scarcity. You know the famous "you vil eet ze bugz" from the WEF mastermind.
- cato_the_elder 4y agoI don't think it's that, as we aren't ruled by very competent people capable of such conspiracies. It's just that the western ruling class lives in a bubble in which policies like this seem like a good idea. Their disdain for kulaks [1] probably contributes to their blindness to views outside the bubble. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak
- GenerocUsername 4y agoEh, just because the rulers are incompetent doesn't exclude the possibility that their actions are coordinated for larger goals... Even if those goals don't go 100% to plan. Look it up. Trudou and the Netherlands leader are both WEF members and both acting in similar ways despite the obvious red flags of doing so.
- cato_the_elder 4y agoI'm assuming you are referring to the WEF "Young Global Leaders". If you look at the members and alumni for that [1], you'll find many politicians who oppose things like this. A relevant example would be Andrew Scheer, the former leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, who opposes even the carbon tax. [2] The thing probably serves a function similar to "honorary" doctorates: it pads the resumes and boosts the egos of politicians, and extends the network of influential people who are friendly towards WEF. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Global_Leaders#Members_and_alumni https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Global_Leaders#Members... [2]: https://globalnews.ca/news/6265202/scheer-vows-to-never-support-carbon-tax-blames-trudeau-for-national-unity-crisis/ https://globalnews.ca/news/6265202/scheer-vows-to-never-supp...
- pseudo0 4y agoDoesn't Canada already have a carbon tax? I thought the whole point of that approach was that it set a price for carbon across all segments of the economy, and then let the market figure out the most efficient way to function under that new constraint. Adding in bureaucratic micromanagement seems counterproductive, particularly amidst a global food crisis.
- zosima 4y agoThis is apparently not directed against carbon, but N2O, which is another greenhouse gas. It's something I've heard preciously little about, and therefore I'm surprised that many countries suddenly are seeing this as an extremely urgent problem almost simultaneously.
- hotpotamus 4y agoPerhaps you’ve heard of smog? Clouds of which used to linger over Las Angeles and at some points even became concentrated enough to kill some sensitive folks?
- zosima 4y agoDoes the smog in LA consist of N2O from farms?
- hotpotamus 4y agoIt doesn’t consist of anything because of strict air quality standards started in the 60’s. N2O was in fact one of the constituents of smog, and while it might be one of the more fun ones, chemically/recreationally speaking, it’s not great for the atmosphere.
- amir734jj 4y agoDidn't Siri Lanka do the same and it caused food shortage/crisis?
- dsq 4y agoAt least the US founding fathers had the foresight to put in the emoluments clause: "...no Person holding any Office...shall...accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.” WEF Global Leader sounds like a title to me.
- olliej 4y agoIt’s not the Sri Lanka “ban all fertilizer” approach, and North American farmers use far too much fertilizer anyway, but any mandated reduction in fertilizer use (directly or indirectly as in this case - the farmers aren’t the ones designing or creating fertilizer) needs to include mandatory production tracking to verify it hasn’t caused any significant reduction - although who knows how you fix that retroactively
- Proven 4y ago