Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Global Agriculture: An immediate call to action?  (Read 2217 times)


  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Global Agriculture: An immediate call to action?
« on: February 24, 2017, 09:45:25 PM »
Am I not mistaken in believing that, given Aslans recent work on the reversal of temperature inversion and the consequence of jet stream instability, combined with rising water vapour concentrations, that perhaps the most immediate and glaring risk to human civilization in the near term is crop failure?

Shouldn't it be time to direct serious energy towards prevention of crop failure worldwide? I realize famine is on the rise worldwide and that it was time long ago... However recent developments make it appear as if massively disruptive crop failures may lead to partial collapse. Is it fair to say that billions may be gravely affected by the abrupt changes on the horizon, as in within months or years?

Shouldn't there be a global call to action for prevention RIGHT NOW, as this seems to be (and correct me if I'm wrong) the most likely, very near term scenario that will manifest into widespread collapse?

I imagine we need to wait and see the effects of jet stream disruption.. as far as I can tell this is a very, very recent development, the ramifications of which are foggy?

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: Global Agriculture: An immediate call to action?
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2017, 03:57:29 AM »
We already had a sufficient global crop failure in 2010: Drought in USA, fires in Russia. Russia stopped export. Global grain prices skyrocketed. Result: The Arab Spring. (The average Egyptian spends a major part of income on bread. They need to import a lot, given their overpopulation, but no longer have enough oil to export to finance bread price subventions.)

I actually think (but have no proof resp. sufficient knowledge) that such large scale consistent crop failures will get less probable in the future: 2010 the jet stream got stuck over USA and Russia. I expect the jet stream to get more chaotic, if not dissolve, at least during summer. So, less of these blocking patterns.

Anyhow, some hunger doesn't hurt. How will they ever learn? You can't overpopulate arid regions like Egypt or Yemen forever. I would of course prefer to starve the Mullahs and old Pope Ratzinger. They are guilty of incitement to suigenocide.

Another destabilizing factor is industrial agriculture itself. As it depletes soil organic carbon, it is selfdestructive long-term even without climate change. The agriculture of the future is small-scale diversified family farm agriculture, together with some networking and subventions and insurance against crop failure. This can not only provide enough food for 8bn people but also jobs, plus carbon sequestration, water retention and other ecosystem services.

Forget rocket science, study the soil cosmos below your feet.
Short video excerpts from longer ones by John D Liu:

First thing everybody can do: Don't eat beef.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2017, 04:06:31 AM by Martin Gisser »


  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 895
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Global Agriculture: An immediate call to action?
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2017, 11:31:58 AM »

First thing everybody can do: Don't eat beef.


A Pastafarian blessing from the FSM

John Batteen

  • New ice
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Global Agriculture: An immediate call to action?
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2017, 04:54:56 PM »
Beef is tricky. Beef raised out on open pasture, not fed grain, is one of the better ways to produce good food from grasslands that are too dry to permit much other agriculture without irrigation. However, world beef demand far outstrips the ability of our grasslands to provide, thus we feed them grain. Pasture raised grass fed beef is A-OK in my book. It's the current corn nightmare that really has to stop.


  • Guest
Re: Global Agriculture: An immediate call to action?
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2017, 04:58:26 PM »
all extremes should be avoide, they will raise too much hard core opposition and ultimately let all attempts fail.

a) less beef ( a lot less )

b) only beef from anyimals that are fed outdoor by natural nutrition like grass etc. ( no artificial "human" fodder )


that would be my approach but then imagine the industry and their lobbyist in parliaments, uhhh..... that will be a hard and long way but ultimately must be taken.

i'm down from 600g meat per day to 30g and i would never let my wife avoid meat entirely during pregnancy to make sure for Vitamine B12 and the likes, no risk is acceptable IMO when it comes to minimize risks for
our unborn kidds. there is much more to this but would fill entire libraries LOL so let me leave it at "a" and "b"

nice sunday @all