Thanks, Doug – you’ve summarized my position nicely. It’s interesting that some people – when they hear ZPG – immediately jump to conclusions and falsely ascribe to the speaker the advocacy of artificial contraception, abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, etc. I was getting a bit tired of hearing the false witness of those who repeatedly pasted those labels on me, even though I had never given reason to believe I advocated them.And false witness is lying but one that goes beyond the self and is direct to the other. Petrus has never ever (do I need to say that more forcefully) argued for **artificial **birth control…not once. That is a false label you, Al, and Vern? have ascribed to him…and to me. Generally, I only argue to a coming energy crises. Climate change I don’t get too involved in because I haven’t spent much time looking at the professional arguments. For population it’s a fact that the world will reach a point of zero population growth. It’s up to humanity’s choices to determine how that will happen. Will it be by lack of food and starvation? Petrus believes the Vatican should be at the front of that discussion theologically as to how zero population growth comes about. Do you beg to differ with that positon?
…
But much of this was futile. The land had been drained of nutrients and if sufficient yields were to be maintained fertilizer needed to be applied on a massive scale. It is estimated that North Korea’s fertilizer requirements are 700,000 metric tons which is what they manufactured in 1989. By 1998 they were only able to manufacture 18% of their need. Crop yields plummeted over this period by 60%. Thus causing severe famine throughout the land. It is estimated that without an (name removed by moderator)ut of chemical fertilizers (meaning hydrocarbon based energy (name removed by moderator)ut), there is little way that the food production can increase. The population of North Korea will decline until it reaches the level present crop yields can sustain.
You believe that across the board, Al? Does that apply to America’s military, too? Does that apply to NASA? Does that apply to the interstate highway system? Does that apply to nuclear technology? The Manhattan project didn’t just give us the A-bomb it also gave us the knowledge of how to do nulcear generation.The government screws things up worse … everywhere it has been tried.
I’ve read the average Cuba lost 20 lbs of weight and there were even reports of blindness due to poor nutrition before they got their act together (they instituted a freer maket system for food production). But as fertilizers get more expensive (or hard to get) what other choice is there, scrubbing ammonia from seawater?Thanks Doug,
I imagine that the farmland in the USA is in the same situation as North Korea, in that it is has been overfarmed to the point where it has no nutrients left and needs fertilizer to produce. But surely if fertilizer is phased out slowly this could be corrected by allowing fields time to replenish themselves between uses and by slowly reducing the amount of fertilizer.
I’d still like to know how much food can be produced without any fertilizer. I think the Cuba story is a good example of how things could go well without oil. It wouldn’t be all that bad if everyone had to start using their yards for growing crops.
Losing 20 pounds wouldn’t be so bad for the average north american.I’ve read the average Cuba lost 20 lbs of weight and there were even reports of blindness due to poor nutrition before they got their act together (they instituted a freer maket system for food production). But as fertilizers get more expensive (or hard to get) what other choice is there, scrubbing ammonia from seawater?
Mexico’s oil production is owned by the state and their oil production has gone into a step decline, esp. form Cantarell which was the seconded largest oilfield ever discoverd.I don’t think there’s much doubt anymore that the Mexican birth rate in Mexico is at or around 2.1 per woman. (Some say 2.3, though there may be other guesses…have to be careful here. Don’t want to “bear false witness” against Mexicans.) Mexico has plenty of oil. Obviously, though, that combination has not ensured even a reasonably decent economy, as Mexico exports both oil and people to the U.S. There have been protests in Mexico recently because of the increasing price of corn. Also, there have been protests claiming that relatively inexpensive U.S. corn is “crowding out” Mexican corn producers because of NAFTA, notwithstanding that fuel is much cheaper in Mexico than it is in the U.S.
Not owning any oil wells myself, I have to go to work now. Have a good day, gentlemen.
I was chopping my garden yesterday. For my yard I quit using fertalizers just because I don’t want to pay for it. I also started replacing my plants with more natives since they don’t have to be watered once establised. For the garden I’ve gone to a local dairy to buy their composted manure. The Co-op needed a place to dump tree chippings so we let them use a spot on our farm. It makes great compost and mulch. All this is very labor intensive and I can see how far the products will go by bulk volume. I don’t know if the bulk material is available to do this on a large farming scale. I highly doubt it. Cuba has the advantage of a year round growing season.Losing 20 pounds wouldn’t be so bad for the average north american.
Of course, you realize that plants can grow without fertilizer, right?
I guess you haven’t investigated how much food could be grown in the USA without using fertilizer?
Cuba has 101 people per square kilometer, while the USA has 31 people per square kilometer. So the USA should be a lot better off than Cuba was without fertilizer. I suspect we would have to adjust our lifestyles, but I don’t think there would be a major die-off of human beings if we had to stop using artificial fertilizer.
As for using tractors… if food becomes scarce, people will be more than happy to farm their own little plots. No recreational activity is more important than growing food. And gardening can be a fun activity, at least some people enjoy it.
The global food crisis is a monetary phenomenon, an unintended consequence of America's attempt to inflate its way out of a market failure. There are long-term reasons for food prices to rise, but the unprecedented spike in grain prices during the past year stems from the weakness of the American dollar. Washington's economic misery now threatens to become a geopolitical catastrophe.What was the average weight before the weight loss? (Not that Cuban data are reliable data.)I’ve read the average Cuba lost 20 lbs of weight and there were even reports of blindness due to poor nutrition before they got their act together (they instituted a freer maket system for food production). But as fertilizers get more expensive (or hard to get) what other choice is there, scrubbing ammonia from seawater?
why is any of that even relevant?What was the average weight before the weight loss? (Not that Cuban data are reliable data.)
One indicator is that Cubans vote with their feet. Whenever possible. And very few people migrate TO Cuba.
Gee – because weight loss is relevant, and the amount is also relevant. Particularly when we’re talking about a nation’s ability to feed its people.why is any of that even relevant?
You and Al can go rant somewhere else for all I care. Go tell it to someone who cares about that. The whole point of the Cuba example was about food production, not anyone wanting to get into Cuba.Gee – because weight loss is relevant, and the amount is also relevant. Particularly when we’re talking about a nation’s ability to feed its people.
And because people who live in bad conditions tend to vote with their feet by leaving. On the other hand, when people live in better-than-average conditions, other people tend to vote with their feet by coming to that better-than-average place.
The fact that when people get a chance they leave Cuba, and that not only Cubans but many others come to the US should tell us something about the relative quality of life in those two countries.