The fertilizer shortage is putting the livelihood of farmers in developing countries — already troubled by rising temperatures and erratic weather systems — further at risk, and could lead to people everywhere paying more for food.
We can’t grow them fast enough to feed everyone without fertiliser. Unless capitalism and supply chain issues were resolved in the meantime this means starvation for many.
I’m sorry but how is this level of response is warranted? Do you realize in a lot of areas of the world, farming landmass can be increased by significant amounts. How is this not even in the discussion if lack of fertilizer is not an option? What are we supposed to do, nothing and just die off as a civilization? Humanity has existed for an extremely long period of time without them. Modern chemical fertilizers are an extremely recent invention in the time scale of humanity. Maybe you are the one who is genuinely stupid for not even considering other options to try to survive.
How quickly do you think that will happen? Who do you think owns that land? Who is going to work that land suddenly? Where are the tools to do it? Where is the water for those plants, as in many areas you need extensive irrigation networks for that? Industrialized farming is the method that we have been feeding billions, and if you suddenly turn off one of the inputs, MANY MANY POOR PEOPLE WILL DIE. You can’t just DOUBLE THE ARABLE LAND COVERAGE in a few months.
I expect that many people will try to do what you suggest and it will be woefully inadequate and there will remain a devastating famine.
I mean you are talking about fertilizer availability drying up. How quickly do you think that will happen? It’s not going to stop overnight or possibly even in a season. Local stock piles, other production facilities in the world, etc. the whole world doesn’t stop due to this specifically right now. The impact this has doesn’t destroy the entire food growing ecosystem, I think you maybe making it sound beyond the end of the world. It’s not great I agree, especially for regions that serves but is it world famine causing? Most likely not. Countries can also import food stuffs from neighbors or other areas. This can be done in much shorter order than growing seasons. I mean shit, hydroponic farming is becoming rapidly increasing useful tool that can supplant a lot of outdoor farming. And there are fertilizer less options for hydroponics.
There’s definitely options here. Especially when combining capacity using numerous means for total aggregate output.
And when there is a massive global heat wave this summer, as seems likely with an unusually large el nino, and there are crop failures the world over, after they have used a lot of their stockpiles, what happens then? It seems unlikely that the global oil economy will return to a stable rate any time soon.
Every fertilizer plant in Bangladesh is closed. Many in India are. I’m sure you can find further examples, or will in the next week. I agree that there are ways to mitigate this, but there are going to be famines in entire regions.
Based on this information you should understand that it is critical to the food supply. Yields are kind of important.
Based on this information, you should then understand that your original objection is incorrect, as what I objected to, and what you said, was
We can’t grow them fast enough to feed everyone without fertiliser.
Fertilizer increases yields, but we are in a system that struggles with overproduction and poor distribution, not underproduction. It is a issue regarding the long-term financial health of farming firms (ie including and especially smallholders who are at risk of being bought out by large landowners), just not the one being asserted.
That’s all cool but have you wondered how would such a change get implemented overnight? You guys are all dreaming of solarpunk while the reality is much more immediate.
That’s all cool but have you wondered how would such a change get implemented overnight? You guys are all dreaming of solarpunk while the reality is much more immediate.
… what change did I propose to be implemented overnight? The core of my point is that reduced yields for a single year from expensive fertilizer is damaging to the financial health of firms, but not an actual famine-causing incident.
I reiterate, since you apparently didn’t read closely:
Fertilizer increases yields, but we are in a system that struggles with overproduction and poor distribution, not underproduction.
Food production and distribution system remains the same as it was, the ownership didn’t change, and so we will bear consequences of not having enough fertiliser that will be amplified by inefficient system. It doesn’t matter that it can be solved by more forward thinking because there are no functioning adults in power that would actually implement it.
We can’t grow them fast enough to feed everyone without fertiliser. Unless capitalism and supply chain issues were resolved in the meantime this means starvation for many.
If it’s that big of a problem, alot of areas can increase land usage to help.
Are you deranged? Genuinely, are you stupid?
I’m sorry but how is this level of response is warranted? Do you realize in a lot of areas of the world, farming landmass can be increased by significant amounts. How is this not even in the discussion if lack of fertilizer is not an option? What are we supposed to do, nothing and just die off as a civilization? Humanity has existed for an extremely long period of time without them. Modern chemical fertilizers are an extremely recent invention in the time scale of humanity. Maybe you are the one who is genuinely stupid for not even considering other options to try to survive.
How quickly do you think that will happen? Who do you think owns that land? Who is going to work that land suddenly? Where are the tools to do it? Where is the water for those plants, as in many areas you need extensive irrigation networks for that? Industrialized farming is the method that we have been feeding billions, and if you suddenly turn off one of the inputs, MANY MANY POOR PEOPLE WILL DIE. You can’t just DOUBLE THE ARABLE LAND COVERAGE in a few months.
I expect that many people will try to do what you suggest and it will be woefully inadequate and there will remain a devastating famine.
And your response was “eh it’ll be fine.”
I mean you are talking about fertilizer availability drying up. How quickly do you think that will happen? It’s not going to stop overnight or possibly even in a season. Local stock piles, other production facilities in the world, etc. the whole world doesn’t stop due to this specifically right now. The impact this has doesn’t destroy the entire food growing ecosystem, I think you maybe making it sound beyond the end of the world. It’s not great I agree, especially for regions that serves but is it world famine causing? Most likely not. Countries can also import food stuffs from neighbors or other areas. This can be done in much shorter order than growing seasons. I mean shit, hydroponic farming is becoming rapidly increasing useful tool that can supplant a lot of outdoor farming. And there are fertilizer less options for hydroponics.
There’s definitely options here. Especially when combining capacity using numerous means for total aggregate output.
And when there is a massive global heat wave this summer, as seems likely with an unusually large el nino, and there are crop failures the world over, after they have used a lot of their stockpiles, what happens then? It seems unlikely that the global oil economy will return to a stable rate any time soon.
Every fertilizer plant in Bangladesh is closed. Many in India are. I’m sure you can find further examples, or will in the next week. I agree that there are ways to mitigate this, but there are going to be famines in entire regions.
To my knowledge, fertilizer largely increases yields rather than significantly speeding up the harvest cycle.
Based on this information you should understand that it is critical to the food supply. Yields are kind of important.
Mike Judge was a prophet.
Based on this information, you should then understand that your original objection is incorrect, as what I objected to, and what you said, was
Fertilizer increases yields, but we are in a system that struggles with overproduction and poor distribution, not underproduction. It is a issue regarding the long-term financial health of farming firms (ie including and especially smallholders who are at risk of being bought out by large landowners), just not the one being asserted.
That’s all cool but have you wondered how would such a change get implemented overnight? You guys are all dreaming of solarpunk while the reality is much more immediate.
… what change did I propose to be implemented overnight? The core of my point is that reduced yields for a single year from expensive fertilizer is damaging to the financial health of firms, but not an actual famine-causing incident.
I reiterate, since you apparently didn’t read closely:
Food production and distribution system remains the same as it was, the ownership didn’t change, and so we will bear consequences of not having enough fertiliser that will be amplified by inefficient system. It doesn’t matter that it can be solved by more forward thinking because there are no functioning adults in power that would actually implement it.