Ecological land grab: food vs fuel vs forests

Posted: August 5, 2019 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, IPCC, media, propaganda, sea levels
Tags: , , ,


This is a prelude to a new IPCC report. It’s an exercise in mixing problems that do exist, like biofuels using too much land, with ones that don’t, like excess trace gases in the atmosphere. The end product is the usual alarm-and-confusion brand of propaganda for man-made warming believers, with wild talk of meltdowns, deadly extremes and so forth. More like a Hollywood script than anything resembling reality – but over-the-top stuff like this seems to be standard fare in much of the media nowadays.

The overlapping crises of climate change, mass species extinction, and an unsustainable global food system are on a collision course towards what might best be called an ecological land grab, says Phys.org.

Coping with each of these problems will require a different way of using of Earth’s lands, and as experts crunch the numbers it is becoming unnervingly clear that there may not be enough terra firma to go around.

A world of narrowing options threatens to pit biofuels, forests and food production against each other.

Experts who once touted “win-win” scenarios for the environment now talk about “trade-offs”.

This looming clash is front-and-centre in the most comprehensive scientific assessment ever compiled of how global warming and land use interact, to be released by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on Thursday

Proposals to convert areas the size of India and the United States to biofuel crops or CO2-absorbing trees, for example, “could compromise sustainable development with increased risks—and potentially irreversible consequences—for food security, desertification and land degradation,” a draft summary of the 1,000-page report warns.

Meanwhile, the fundamental drivers of Earth’s environmental meltdown—CO2 and methane emissions, nitrogen and plastics pollution, human population, unbridled consumption—continue to expand at record rates, further reducing our margin for manoeuvre.

Case in point: to have at least a 50/50 chance of capping global warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) -– the temperature guardrail laid down in a landmark IPCC report last year -– civilisation must be “carbon neutral” within three decades.

Earth’s surface temperature has already risen one degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels, enough to trigger deadly extreme weather and sea level rise that could swamp coastal megacities by 2100.

Full article here.

Comments
  1. craigm350 says:

    Reblogged this on WeatherAction News and commented:

    The scientists will warn of a battle for land between multiple competing demands: biofuels, plant material for plastics and fibres, timber, wildlife, paper and pulp – and food for a growing population.

    Their report will say we need to make hard choices about how we use the world’s soil.

    And it will offer another warning that our hunger for red meat is putting huge stress on the land to produce animal feed, as well as contributing to half of the world’s emissions of methane – another greenhouse gas.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49149761

    So the secondary problems – land use for biofuels and meat – are all predicated by a non existent primary problem – climate change. Of course scientists will never identify the bigger problem – their insatiable desire to deprive everyone of their liberty and cash 🤔

  2. Phoenix44 says:

    Once again we have “climate scientists” pontificating about fields that have nothing to do with climate science. Economics, population, ecology, agriculture, politics – these have nothing do with the physics of climate.

    It’s about time these pseudo-experts were called on this.

  3. Gamecock says:

    ‘Coping with each of these problems will require a different way of using of Earth’s lands’

    Your rights must be subordinated to a global government which has declared that its prime interest is in the planet, not humans.

  4. ivan says:

    It appears they are trying to get UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 30 up and running by moving people into slave camps sustainable cities by the simple expedient of changing land use.

    It is about time these Climate Alchemists were shown to be the useless anti science grant grabbing front line troops of the UN New World Marxist Government that they are. It is also time the the UN is disbanded for being well past its use by date.

  5. JB says:

    I would think that it is only those scientists who have been politicized, infected by infiltration of politicians run by the world’s most wealthy, who are interested in removing common liberty and cash. Just who among the population are they who have “unbridled consumption?” The majority of the population who is subsisting one notch above government standards of poverty? Let’s see, who among them have two houses, vehicles less than 3 years old, passports loaded with visas, private land sanctuaries, business investments that are acreage intensive. The greedy will always claim the less affluent are consuming limited resources they want. Clinically, this is called projection, and it is one of the basic tools of propaganda.

    As for running out of land…
    “All discussions of ‘over-population’ from Malthus down, are based on the premise of legal occupancy instead of actual occupancy, and are therefore utterly incompetent and worthless. Oppenheimer’s calculation made in 1912, to which I have already referred, shows that if legal occupation were abolished, every family of five persons could possess nearly twenty acres of land, and still leave about two-thirds of the planet unoccupied. Henry George’s examination of Malthus’s theory of population is well known, or at least, easily available. It is perhaps worth mention in passing that exaggerated rental-values are responsible for the perennial troubles of the American single-crop farmer. Curiously, one finds this fact set forth in the report of a farm-survey, published by the Department of Agriculture about fifty years ago.” p66 Our Enemy the State, Nock, 1935

    An honest review of land use/ownership is in order.

  6. stpaulchuck says:

    too damn many media outlets competing for advertising dollars combined with way too many PhD’s all needing Mo’ Money, Mo’ Money! They all discovered that the sheeple can be stampeded into coughing up money and freedom with a big enough scare story. The pols suddenly figured it out too and now they are on the parade wagon.

    I’ve said it before, when this is all over this scam will go down as way bigger than anything else in history including the Piltdown Man.

  7. oldbrew says:

    Anyone who thinks the world is over-populated should visit Western Australia. Pop. density = one person per square kilometre. But 4/5ths of them live in the Perth area, so the rest of WA’s 2.5 million sq.km. is very sparsely populated.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Australia

  8. Paul Vaughan says:

    “over-the-top stuff like this seems to be standard fare in much of the media nowadays”

    may be fine ally Eur. wake kin up
    devil’s tool-kit
    squeaky logic wheels greece o’well

  9. oldbrew says:

    Then there’s soil respiration…

    Throughout the past 160 years, humans have changed land use and industrial practices, which have altered the climate and global biogeochemical cycles. These changes have affected the rate of soil respiration around the planet.
    . . .
    Researchers have estimated that soil respiration accounts for 77 Pg of carbon released to the atmosphere each year. This level of release is one order of magnitude greater than the carbon release due to anthropogenic sources (6 Pg per year) such as fossil fuel burning.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_respiration#Responses_to_human_disturbance
    – – –
    So how much (little) effect are expensive EVs and renewable energy contraptions likely to have, when this single other variable is 13 times more significant?

    BBC report yesterday: Between a quarter and a third of all greenhouse gas emissions are now estimated to come from land use.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49149761

  10. Gamecock says:

    Over 96% of CO2 emissions are natural. UK’s 1% of <4% is 0.04% of CO2 emissions.

    So you should destroy your economy.

  11. oldbrew says:

    The BBC joins the warm-up publicity for Thursday’s IPCC report. All part of the next alarm-athon.

    Between a quarter and a third of all greenhouse gas emissions are now estimated to come from land use.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49149761

    There goes ‘net zero’ then. Some of that land use is for biofuels.

  12. stpaulchuck says:

    oldbrew says:
    August 5, 2019 at 9:47 pm
    —————————
    I don’t know how old the stat is oldbrew, but in the US 96% of the people live on just 6% of the land. Granted, a huge chunck of the empty space is not arable land due to mountains, deserts, etc, but the Canadian and American Great Plains are H.U.G.E. and can sustain amazing numbers of people with food. Then there’s Russia, South America, etc.

    Agricultural advances in techniques and seeds keep coming and we now gather an order of magnitude more per acre than we did as little as 50 years ago. I expect even more advances in seafood. Miracle Rice was invented in the Philippines and Asian rice production is more than enough to feed them (if peace and order are maintained).

  13. oldbrew says:

    ‘ In 1999, total U.S. fuel ethanol production stood at approximately 1.5 billion gallons. By 2018, this amount increased to over 16 billion gallons’

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/281494/us-fuel-ethanol-production/

    Instead of food…

  14. stpaulchuck says:

    oldbrew says:
    August 6, 2019 at 3:10 pm
    ——————————
    then they pulled the dirty trick of mandating the required GALLONS of ethanol per year. Due to the electric cars and high mileage regular and hybrid vehicles the total gasoline consumption has leveled off while the per annum legislated addition of ethanol has climbed leaving the refiners in a quandary. The law says they’ve got to use X gallons a year but the public is not using enough gasoline to use that many gallons.

    Thus! the advent of 15% ethanol fuel! Which is sure to wreck more engines. Heaven forbid they just legislate the mix rate (say 10%). Oh no, their buddies at ADM and Cenex need that income for their new mansion and the extra Mercedes 600 for the kids.

  15. MrGrimNasty says:

    Surely windmills and solar are the biggest land wasters?

  16. E.M.Smith says:

    Simple fix for this non-problem:

    Eliminate biofuels requirements.

    One third of USA corn is fed to cars for no net gain. Just stop it.

    There, problem solved…

  17. oldbrew says:

    Here it is…

    Plant-based diet can fight climate change – UN

    By Roger Harrabin
    BBC environment analyst, Geneva
    44 minutes ago

    A major report on land use and climate change says the West’s high consumption of meat and dairy produce is fuelling global warming.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49238749
    – – –
    Add diet to the propaganda list of things that can be invoked to ‘fight climate change’ :/

  18. oldbrew says:

    Other issues for eco-dreamers…

    ‘What if alternative energy isn’t all it’s cracked up to be? That’s the provocative question explored in the documentary “Planet of the Humans,” which is backed and promoted by filmmaker Michael Moore and directed by one of his longtime collaborators. It premiered last week at his Traverse City Film Festival.’

    https://www.thegwpf.com/is-the-left-beginning-to-abandon-renewable-energy/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s