# 20 Signs of a Global Food Crisis



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

A contributing writer to Blacklisted News spells it out for us ...

http://www.blacklistednews.com/20_S...l_Food_Crisis_Is_Coming_/13521/0/0/0/Y/M.html

Here's the top five:

*#1 According to the World Bank, 44 million people around the globe have been pushed into extreme poverty since last June because of rising food prices.

#2 The world is losing topsoil at an astounding rate. In fact, according to Lester Brown, âone third of the worldâs cropland is losing topsoil faster than new soil is forming through natural processesâ.

#3 Due to U.S. ethanol subsidies, almost a third of all corn grown in the United States is now used for fuel. This is putting a lot of stress on the price of corn.

#4 Due to a lack of water, some countries in the Middle East find themselves forced to almost totally rely on other nations for basic food staples. For example, it is being projected that there will be no more wheat production in Saudi Arabia by the year 2012.

#5 Water tables all over the globe are being depleted at an alarming rate due to âoverpumpingâ. According to the World Bank, there are 130 million people in China and 175 million people in India that are being fed with grain with water that is being pumped out of aquifers faster than it can be replaced. So what happens once all of that water is gone?
*


----------



## unregistered29228 (Jan 9, 2008)

Where does topsoil go? Even if it's washed away or blown away, it has to go someplace. Same with water - there's exactly the same amount of water on this earth as there was a million years ago. It might not be in places where people need it, but it's still around. 

Now, the ethanol and food prices bullets I can agree with.


----------



## cnichols (Jan 5, 2010)

Good article Ernie. The part that I just have to shake my head at though is this ...



> For years, many âdoom and gloomersâ have been yelling and screaming that a food crisis is coming.
> 
> Well, up to this point there hasnât been much to get alarmed about.


For a couple of years now I haven't considered myself a "doom and gloomer" although I know that there are plenty out there who think I am. I consider myself a realist.


----------



## francismilker (Jan 12, 2006)

Topsoil blows away in the wind to be deposited elsewhere and is washed down stream to be deposited in lakes and seas. Once it's gone from the place it was organically formed or mechanically deposited, it's GONE!

As for the water crisis, we need to start trading the Saudis oil for water. Then, we can afford to research a cheaper way to build desalinization plants. Just my opinion!


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Mom_of_Four said:


> Where does topsoil go? Even if it's washed away or blown away, it has to go someplace. Same with water - there's exactly the same amount of water on this earth as there was a million years ago. It might not be in places where people need it, but it's still around.
> 
> Now, the ethanol and food prices bullets I can agree with.


Topsoil erosion is a pretty big problem here in the United States as well.

If it's not on your field than it's pretty much useless to you. Much of it sits on the bottom of rivers and forms sandbars, or it simply blows around and gets dispersed to the point where it's unusable. It's not like they take 6" of topsoil and move it from point A to B. That 6" of topsoil on an acre field will suddenly be blown by the wind and dispersed out over 100 square miles where it might be nothing more than a fine layer of dust on someone's windows.

There may be exactly the same amount of water now as there was a million years ago, but now a lot more of it is tied up inside living human bodies and is unavailable elsewhere. In addition, a lot of water in the past few decades has been pumped underground and has now sank below our technical ability to retrieve. That's the oil and gas industry doing that. And finally, that water just isn't being distributed like it used to which is causing some problems. People settled in specific regions of the world because of the availability of fresh water, and if that fresh water is consumed and relocated then those people either have to do a massive migration or die.


----------



## julieq (Oct 12, 2008)

francismilker said:


> As for the water crisis, we need to start trading the Saudis oil for water. Then, we can afford to research a cheaper way to build desalinization plants. Just my opinion!


:smiley-laughing013:ound: The thought of the U.S. exporting something = priceless!


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

I remember reading about wheat production in Saudi Arabia about 20 years ago. It was heavily government subsidized. They were irrigating with water that had to be desalinated, from wells with depths would compare to oil wells.

I feel this is another news story with out a solid set of legs. Some facts are correct, but is the whole story of those facts being told.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Good topic Ernie, thanks for posting.



Mom_of_Four said:


> ... Same with water - there's exactly the same amount of water on this earth as there was a million years ago. It might not be in places where people need it, but it's still around.


See the picture below. Only 1% of earth's water is usable by humans. A lot of earth's usable water is already inside the bodies of 7 billion people.



francismilker said:


> ... As for the water crisis, we need to start trading the Saudis oil for water. Then, we can afford to research a cheaper way to build desalinization plants. Just my opinion!


You can't. You don't have enough water to use for trade and soon there won't be enough left for your own domestic uses. Besides which, the Saudis have enough oil and enough money they can develop their own desalinization plants so they won't need to import water from other places. 




Ernie said:


> There may be exactly the same amount of water now as there was a million years ago, but now a lot more of it is tied up inside living human bodies and is unavailable elsewhere. In addition, a lot of water in the past few decades has been pumped underground and has now sank below our technical ability to retrieve. That's the oil and gas industry doing that. And finally, that water just isn't being distributed like it used to which is causing some problems. People settled in specific regions of the world because of the availability of fresh water, and if that fresh water is consumed and relocated then those people either have to do a massive migration or die.


What Ernie says is correct. I just want to add this extra bit of information.

The Ogallala, which is the largest fresh water aquifer in the world and feeds the middle third of the USA (the bread basket of USA), took millions of years to become the aquifer it is and has already become depeleted by human use in a short 100 years. Conservative estimates are that it will be completely depleted by 2020 (9 years from now). Less conservative estimates are that it will be completely depleted in 5 years from now. Once it's gone, it's gone. It is not being refreshed fast enough to keep up with human use and once it's gone it will take millions of years again to become refreshed again, if at all.

http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/earthwherewater.html

http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/2010/gallery/global-water-volume.html

This picture shows the size of a sphere that would contain all of Earth's water in comparison to the size of the Earth. The blue sphere sitting on the United States, reaching from about Salt Lake City, Utah to Topeka, Kansas, has a diameter of about 860 miles (about 1,385 kilometers) , with a volume of about 332,500,000 cubic miles (1,386,000,000 cubic kilometers). The sphere includes all the water in the oceans, seas, ice caps, lakes and rivers as well as groundwater, atmospheric water, and even the water in you, your dog, and your tomato plant.













.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

I do think food and water will become a crisis. It's already a problem that most people don't know about.


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

The earth's population has already exceeded the earth's ability to support it. There are places right now where people are starving to death.

Water is more of an issue than topsoil. Without water, nothing grows. Food can be grown without any soil at all, albeit, expensive food. 

The earth has a process to move water around, but people are using the water much faster than it is being moved. Some areas (Southern Spain, Northern Africa) that were once agricultural land have turned into deserts. Without water, no food can grow,


----------



## francismilker (Jan 12, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Good topic Ernie, thanks for posting.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Got to question that one.......... I'm not sure I can believe that's "ALL" the water considering the vast oceans that encompass the world.


----------



## kirkmcquest (Oct 21, 2010)

Bottom line is that there are too many people. Of course we're all free to check out and lighten the load at any time! 

Another approach might be to get away from the conditioning that the purpose of life is to carp out a litter.


----------



## ne prairiemama (Jan 30, 2010)

kirkmcquest said:


> Bottom line is that there are too many people. Of course we're all free to check out and lighten the load at any time!
> 
> Another approach might be to get away from the conditioning that the purpose of life is to carp out a litter.


It's not too many people. It's too many STUPID people. If everyone were treating the earth with respect in the 1st place it would be in alot better shape. Sustainable farming instead of the cruddy farming that happens now...I see piles and piles of corn sit and rot here in Nebraska. The land that is used for that could have been used for edible grain instead.

People always want to blame it on us big familes, but that shouldn't be the case. I bet our family makes less garbage ect. than most. My family goes to town 2x a month in our big van and dh drives to work, but there are people in cities that sit in rush hour traffic for hours a day using more gas than we do! We usually aren't the ones buying single serving foods/fast food ect. 

If people want to help then quit buying things from companies that polute so much and food so processed it's not food anymore! How are YOU helping if you are concerned?

As to the meaning of life, out of all the things the Lord has blessed us with our children have been the best beside life it's self. I don't think God makes accidents. I also don't think he blames the kids or parents with lot of kids for ruining everything! In addition my kids aren't "a litter" they are each very different individuals with a purpose. And birth isn't carp, thats like equating the kids to being [email protected]@p. Not nice at all  

I don't know where you get that people are conditioned to have lots of kids either. Having a big family gets frowned upon ALOT. It's usually the older people whoo are encouraging. The younger people often see it as a burden instead of a blessing. 
There are some pretty important people in history that came from large families too....

Ernie thanks for the info.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

The average suburban lawn would support half of the families on that block if it were converted to garden space.

I don't think we've actually reached the point of failure for sustainability on this planet, but I think if we don't change our ways we're going to reach it faster than we think. For the past 400 years we've been in a "boom", fueled by the discovery of a relatively empty continent that was full of resources. Now we're reaching the depletion of those resources and it's going to throw us for a loop. All of our concepts, our notions, or institutions, and our ways of life are based on that plentitude. Your very concept of individual freedom was shaped by the frontier and was completely unknown before 1492.


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

ne prairiemama said:


> It's not too many people. It's too many STUPID people. If everyone were treating the earth with respect in the 1st place it would be in alot better shape. Sustainable farming instead of the cruddy farming that happens now...I see piles and piles of corn sit and rot here in Nebraska. The land that is used for that could have been used for edible grain instead.


Little bit of both... too many people, and the el stupidos (or more nicely called, ignorant).

We can wish about how nice things could be, but the sad fact of the matter is, there'll be no Big Rock Candy Mountain utopia, until the great masses are gone. I feel we do have too many people. Vast portions of the planet are incapable of supporting even a fraction of the human population that resides there. With the "Age of Oil" humans could live anywhere they wanted, and have food/supplies delivered magically to their doorstep, for next to nothing. Farmers could 'force feed' crops massive quantities of oil, work the fields with cheap oil, and grow enough for 200 people (or more)... allowing most folks to leave the farms forever.

Most people have zero concept of biological carrying capacity.... why worry? when someone else fulfills all your needs? Land everywhere has a maximum theoretical carrying capacity... when it's breached, it declines, and ends up as deserts... Deserts have almost zero carrying capacity... yet we have massive populations in this country and around the world, living in them. History (and nature) says these people are doomed.

I have nothing against large families, if the family is rich enough to provide for them. I am against those that can't support theirselves, and none of their children. If the shtf, the "rich" family will survive, the "poor" will die. By 'rich' I don't mean money, although that helps... Rich is having enough land to support their family... gardens, fields, orchards, greenhouses, ponds/lakes, livestock, infrastructure. Of course, by my def., all city folks are poor.... if the shtf, they'd all starve, within a year.

??? What am I doing on this soapbox? I've got two bulk diesel tanks to look at/pick up today, to irrigate the garden/orchard/berry patch, and drive the other way to go look for some replacement trees for the orchard... thinking asian persimmons???


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> This picture shows *the size of a sphere that would contain all of Earth's water *in comparison to the size of the Earth. The blue sphere sitting on the United States, reaching from about Salt Lake City, Utah to Topeka, Kansas, has a diameter of about 860 miles (about 1,385 kilometers) , with a volume of about 332,500,000 cubic miles (1,386,000,000 cubic kilometers). The sphere includes all the water in the oceans, seas, ice caps, lakes and rivers as well as groundwater, atmospheric water, and even the water in you, your dog, and your tomato plant.



I find that extremely hard to believe

It's based on "data" presented by a Russian scientist working *for the UN*, and we "know" they have no agendas 



> The database is also *aimed to initiate a dialogue *among those concerned with freshwater resources assessment and monitoring


http://webworld.unesco.org/water/ihp/db/shiklomanov/


http://webworld.unesco.org/water/ihp/db/shiklomanov/


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Well, it's also a meaningless conceptualization. How big of a sphere would all of the world's peanut butter make? 860 miles is big honkin' sphere. It's not quite a third the size of the moon. In fact, that giant ball of water would BE a small moon.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

The crimminal Greed Corporation Nestle at its plant in central lower Michigan pumps a million gallons a day to be "bottled" and spread all over.
They will tell you with a straight face that that is not effecting the water table.........
The local gobermint folks were happy as heck to grant "permits" and such so that the greedy corp. would locate there and provide a whopping 37 jobs.
To heck with the surounding wide area peoples and farms loosing the water table

Corporate Greed and Profit wins against the natural countryside.


----------



## Astrid (Nov 13, 2010)

texican said:


> Little bit of both... too many people, and the el stupidos (or more nicely called, ignorant).
> 
> We can wish about how nice things could be, but the sad fact of the matter is, there'll be no Big Rock Candy Mountain utopia, until the great masses are gone. I feel we do have too many people. Vast portions of the planet are incapable of supporting even a fraction of the human population that resides there. With the "Age of Oil" humans could live anywhere they wanted, and have food/supplies delivered magically to their doorstep, for next to nothing. Farmers could 'force feed' crops massive quantities of oil, work the fields with cheap oil, and grow enough for 200 people (or more)... allowing most folks to leave the farms forever.
> 
> ...



You guys should read the "Story of B" by Daniel Quinn.


----------



## gunseller (Feb 20, 2010)

I like number 3. So what if a fuel input is removed from the corn. The rest of the corn is not gone. It used for livestock feed just like it would have been without the sugars being removed. When someone that is supposed to know what they are talking about misses this there is only two reasons. They are lying or ingonant. As to the subsoil water level going down it has and has been going down for over 50 years. Is it something to worry abput? Yes. Where is the water now? It is the soil level, ponds, lakes or ice. For soil going away the midwest was increasing soil depth until the last few years. Lots of rain has moved a lot of soil. 20 years ago there was always a net loss of topsoil but farming has changed. I thought the sphere was to show the amount of water that was fit for human consumption as it is. Ocean water would not be in the sphere as it is not fit for human consumption.
Steve


----------



## francismilker (Jan 12, 2006)

I wish the ethanol thing would go away. $9.00 for a bag of cracked corn at the feed mill is a little too much!


----------



## marinemomtatt (Oct 8, 2006)

Was watching a show on the Documentary channel, the subject was Bahrain and its battle with a vanishing Aquafer. Wells have dried up, crops aren't being watered, canals are dry. Where there used to be fresh water moving towards the sea, the sea is now replacing the fresh water. Bahrain has several Desalinization plants, the complaint is that they are VERY expensive to run (Natural Gas and Bahrain has very little Natural gas reserves). At one point I swear it was said that the available fresh water was going to detoured towards tourist locations...Hmmm what good is tourism/money if theres no more water?


----------



## ne prairiemama (Jan 30, 2010)

Cows weren't really meant to eat corn anyway...grasses ect. yes corn no, if our friend grew veggies ect. on the 80 acres around the house here to feed people it would produce alot more food food for human consumption than the corn that goes into the cow and turns into steaks. 
Texican we are working on the rich thing


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

francismilker said:


> Got to question that one.......... I'm not sure I can believe that's "ALL" the water considering the vast oceans that encompass the world.





Bearfootfarm said:


> I find that extremely hard to believe
> 
> It's based on "data" presented by a Russian scientist working for the UN, and we "know" they have no agendas


If you find that unbelievable then here is something you may find even more unbelievable. 

The data that naturelover posted about the total amount of earth's water - diameter of *860* miles and with a volume of *332.5 *million cubic miles - is on the generous side. 

Other independent scientific sources are not so generous, putting it at considerably less with a diameter of *840* miles and volume of *310* million cubic miles.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

francismilker said:


> I wish the ethanol thing would go away. $9.00 for a bag of cracked corn at the feed mill is a little too much!


I agree. I add corn oil to the racehorse feed. The price for corn oil has gone up dramaticly since the ethanol thing. Also cracked corn and COB feed. 

I also agree with others. There ARE too many people. As the huge population of people continue to make more people the problem continues to grow. We will run out of resources.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> If you find that unbelievable then here is something you may find even more unbelievable.
> 
> The data that naturelover posted about the total amount of earth's water - diameter of 860 miles and with a volume of 332.5 million cubic miles - is on the generous side.
> 
> Other independent scientific sources are not so generous, putting it at considerably less with a diameter of 840 miles and volume of 310 million cubic miles.


So they are just guessing.

Either way, there's plenty of water available and the picture was only meant to instill panic


----------



## NewGround (Dec 19, 2010)

First it is stupid to burn food in our cars... We were given plenty of oil reserves, let's use every last drop before we go burning corn in our cars. 

Second, go forth and multiply did not come with any strings that I'm aware of. Every child is a gift from the Creator. All will be provided for the faithful...

I seem to remember (could be oldtimers...) a story about Australia being nearly out of water but then they miraculously found a giant aquifer that will provide all their needs for hundreds of years. Maybe not a miracle, if you don't believe but all we need do is act responsibly, with faith in God and we will be provided for.

Lean on Him. For He that could create all this would you think this was unforeseen? Everything, everything has a purpose... We may not seem to understand but what is faith?


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

NewGround said:


> Second, go forth and multiply did not come with any strings that I'm aware of.


That was something said to TWO people at a particular time in history, not to ALL people who would ever live. It goes on to say, "fill the earth." Maybe that's been done, depending on how you understand the word "fill." Maybe now it's time to responsibly manage the earth without adding more to the population. Sorry, I don't mean to jump all over one little thing you said, but that's a big problem I have with simplistic interpretation of the Bible. Much of it is not directed to each one of us, it's more like we're eavesdropping on what God said to others. Some principles are applicable to all always, but not everything is.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

ryanthomas said:


> That was something said to TWO people at a particular time in history, not to ALL people who would ever live. It goes on to say, "fill the earth." Maybe that's been done, depending on how you understand the word "fill." Maybe now it's time to responsibly manage the earth without adding more to the population. Sorry, I don't mean to jump all over one little thing you said, but that's a big problem I have with simplistic interpretation of the Bible. Much of it is not directed to each one of us, it's more like we're eavesdropping on what God said to others. Some principles are applicable to all always, but not everything is.


Are you a Christian?


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

Ernie said:


> Are you a Christian?


Yes, though many mainstream Christians would probably consider me a heretic.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Possibly so if you don't believe that every word of the bible is God's direct message to us. 

Personally, I believe the bible is a supernatural document given to us for our instruction. It's all applicable. Every word. Even 10 pages of "begets". Any discrepancies are simply our own limited understanding of God's word. 

On a more secular level, if you believe that the population should be curtailed, then how shall the curtailing be done? Shall Al Gore and the prophets of the death cult of climate change get to decide how many children we shall have? Or how long we should live before giving up our place on this planet? You notice that they seem to have exempted themselves from every standard they would place upon us. I would not allow any such restrictions to be placed upon me and my family, and would fight against them. I'm sure I would not stand alone.

If as much energy and thought was being put into space exploration as is being put into schemes and plans for how to control others in the name of "sustainability", then we'd undoubtedly find and be able to reach vast new frontiers where we could find resources and living space. It's either that, or watch our civilization decline and fall the way all of the other ones have.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

I don't want to totally derail your thread into a religious/political debate, but I do want to answer your question. I, for one, don't support any kind of active reduction of the population, as in killing people who are already alive, including unborn babies. I don't even support restrictions on family size. All I was saying was that MAYBE it's time for Christians, and anyone else who chooses to, to voluntarily have smaller families. I realize that brings up other issues, such as Christians dying out as a large part of the world, and then who would spread the gospel? That's part of why I say maybe, and not for sure. I have a great friend in my church who is expecting his tenth child, and I don't think less of him and his wife for having so many. I actually admire the fact that they can do it, and I once wanted to have such a large family myself, but I don't think that's what God called me to do. Just because God told Adam and Eve to multiply doesn't mean He is telling me to multiply. And I think people make a mistake when they think that God's commands to other people automatically apply directly to them.

As far as your thoughts on the Bible being God's direct message to us, I do believe that. And I believe every word is applicable to every person, but not necessarily directly, as in God is telling me to do exactly the same thing he told Adam and Eve to do, or Moses, or even new testament figures. The epistles especially need to be understood in context. In college I studied under some of the foremost evangelical Bible scholars alive, and they all taught the importance of context. One common idea was that in looking at any passage of the Bible, you have to determine what it said to "them then, people presently, and all always." This is widely accepted practice in Biblical hermeneutics. My "heretical" beliefs are in different areas, and I'm pretty sure it's really the American variety of Christianity that is heretical. But that's a topic that doesn't belong here.


----------



## gunseller (Feb 20, 2010)

Does that mean the TEN COMANDMENTS do not count? You sound like some libs I know when they are talking about the BIBLE or the CONSTITUTION. 

Lets get back to the topic. Cows were ment to eat grass not corn. You better explain this because corn is a grass. You just said cows were ment to eat corn then said they were not. Ethonal production from corn is not what is driving up corn prices, exports are. That and spectulars are driving up prices. If you want to do anything push to get ride of the Board of Trade. Then there will be not spectulators. Oh it will also help lower oil prices as the rise in oil is being driven by the same thing as it was a few years ago. Spectulators.
Steve


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Corn is a grass in the same way that wheat or barley is a grass. But we don't eat the stalk and "leaves" and neither do the cattle. We eat the grains. Your cows wouldn't do much better if you collected all the grains from Timothy hay and fed that to them. 

Mice and birds are about the only creatures that thrive on grains.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

NewGround said:


> First it is stupid to burn food in our cars... We were given plenty of oil reserves, let's use every last drop before we go burning corn in our cars.


Right. Not only were we blessed with enough oil, we were blessed with the knowledge of WHERE it is, HOW to get it out and HOW to process it!! 



> Second, go forth and multiply did not come with any strings that I'm aware of. Every child is a gift from the Creator. All will be provided for the faithful...


Right. I didn't see any "but, except, or when" after, "Go forth and multiply".



> I seem to remember (could be oldtimers...) a story about Australia being nearly out of water but then they miraculously found a giant aquifer that will provide all their needs for hundreds of years. Maybe not a miracle, if you don't believe but all we need do is act responsibly, with faith in God and we will be provided for.


Agree. He Promised, I Believe. Ta da!



> Lean on Him. For He that could create all this would you think this was unforeseen? Everything, everything has a purpose... We may not seem to understand but what is faith?


I am more valuable than the sparrow, and He knows when everyone of them falls to the ground...

Great post, thank you!


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

gunseller said:


> Does that mean the TEN COMANDMENTS do not count? You sound like some libs I know when they are talking about the BIBLE or the CONSTITUTION.


Absolutely not. I can almost guarantee I'm more conservative than anyone you've ever met.



> Lets get back to the topic. Cows were ment to eat grass not corn. You better explain this because corn is a grass. You just said cows were ment to eat corn then said they were not. Ethonal production from corn is not what is driving up corn prices, exports are. That and spectulars are driving up prices. If you want to do anything push to get ride of the Board of Trade. Then there will be not spectulators. Oh it will also help lower oil prices as the rise in oil is being driven by the same thing as it was a few years ago. Spectulators.
> Steve


Corn is a grass, but they feed the grain more than the stalk. Also, it has been bred to make the grain portion much bigger than it naturally was. I don't know a lot about corn, but I think grains in general are poor choices for food, at least in a world with a food shortage. But I also don't think there is a food shortage yet. As far as I can tell, starvation for the most part is not from lack of food, it's from food distribution problems, often caused by corruption within the leadership of poor countries.


----------



## Pam6 (Apr 9, 2009)

I really don't understand the whole over population thing and that we are over using and stretching our resources. My one neighbor has 90 acres he produced EXACTLY ZERO pounds of food on his good fertile ground last year, the year before, and the 20 years that he has owned the land. The neighbor behind me has 65 acres...he produced EXACTLY ZERO pounds of food on his land as well! This is GOOD fertile ground! We have the resources available and we just choose not to use them for our own benefit or for the benefit of others.


----------



## marinemomtatt (Oct 8, 2006)

This thread had a good beginning.
Now, its gone to there aren't too many mouths to feed, there's plenty of water, there's lots of oil... lets just keep on doing what we're doing and in the end some god will come down and save us from ourselves...or will it come down and curse us for our destruction of such a rare gift in this galaxy.


----------



## gunseller (Feb 20, 2010)

ryanthomas Just clarifing after your statement about God not telling you to do exactly the same thing as he had told Moses.
As for the corn I can tell you have not been around many beef feed lots. The whole stock is cut off abount 4 inches above the ground and chopped. It is then put in a silo or bag and used as feed. With that I do agree that the futher from the sun the more energy is lost. The sun being the sourse of all energy for everything living. And you are so right about food distribuation being the problem not a shortage. At least not yet. Just remember the first two rule of being a Dictator, 1) get the guns 2) get the food. Without guns people can not take the food from you. Without food people will willingly do what you want them to do to get food.
I also believe that we should be drilling for all the oil we can. Be that off our coast, in the mid west, the west, in Alaska or where ever it is.
Steve


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

marinemomtatt said:


> This thread had a good beginning.
> Now, its gone to there aren't too many mouths to feed, there's plenty of water, there's lots of oil... lets just keep on doing what we're doing and in the end some god will come down and save us from ourselves...or will it come down and curse us for our destruction of such a rare gift in this galaxy.


As usual, 80% of the population agrees there's a problem but they're evenly split between what to do about it. 20% of the population thinks everything is fine and then focuses on the most extreme of the arguments to prove their point.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

> As for the corn I can tell you have not been around many beef feed lots. The whole stock is cut off abount 4 inches above the ground and chopped. It is then put in a silo or bag and used as feed.


I know all about silage, I've worked for farmers putting it up, and worked at a feedlot briefly, and spent a lot more time out on range rounding up cattle to take them to the feedlot. Feedlots I'm familiar with tend to feed a lot more combined grain than silage.



> Now, its gone to there aren't too many mouths to feed, there's plenty of water, there's lots of oil... lets just keep on doing what we're doing and in the end some god will come down and save us from ourselves...or will it come down and curse us for our destruction of such a rare gift in this galaxy.


There definitely are not too many mouths currently. The United States alone can produce enough food to feed all 7 billion people in the world, IF it were used in the most efficient way, which would mean no conventional grain-fed beef/chicken/pork. Water is a big concern. It won't end the world, but it probably will force us to adjust how we use water. There is plenty of water, just as much now as at the beginning of time. The problem is it's been moved from freshwater aquifers into the ocean. Ocean water comes back to the land as freshwater in the form of rain, but not necessarily in the most convenient ways. That's where we'll have to adjust. Topsoil, on the other hand, goes into the oceans, and it's not coming back. That is something we need to fix. Soon.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Some sobering statistics: http://www.worldometers.info/

.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

The world population density map. Pretty much all of the places on here that are not already heavily populated (the white areas) are thus because they are uninhabitable areas that will not easily support agriculture nor many life forms. Deserts, tundras, muskeg, methane fields, mountains and ice fields and snow covered rock. 

Many places that once were inhabitable are no longer habitable because they are turning into deserts.











http://www.worldometers.info/population/

.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

> Many places that once were *inhabitable* are no longer habitable because they are turning into deserts.


I don't think this says what you meant to post.


----------



## ne prairiemama (Jan 30, 2010)

Sorry for getting the thread sorta OT Ernie...:lookout:

ryanthomas there isn't just 1 verse though  

Psalm 127:3-5

3Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. 
4As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. 
5Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.

Jeremiah 1
5Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. 

Proverbs 17:6
6Children's children are the crown of old men; and the glory of children are their fathers.

Theres a ton more. If I'm a Christian and children are a reward and blessing, who am I to tell the Lord I don't want his rewards or blessinngs?

Corn in a cows gut is one reason we have an e-coli problem in our meat supply. As far as grass, sorry I guess botanically speaking corn would be a grass but the problem lies in feeding them the grain. Plus most of the corn here is GMO.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

AngieM2 said:


> > Many places that once were *inhabitable* are no longer habitable because they are turning into deserts.
> 
> 
> I don't think this says what you meant to post.


Yes, it does. Inhabitable means a place that is suitable for habitation. So, some places that were once inhabited are no longer inhabited because they have turned to deserts. For example, where the Anasazi used to live in America. It once was a lush inhabited place that has turned to desert. 

Another example is Bolivia, the country that is introducing the Mother Earth laws - climate change has melted nearly all of the fresh water producing glaciers that it once had and soil erosion and desertification has begun in those places. In another 20 years all of its remaining glaciers (which isn't much now) will be gone and Bolivia will become almost entirely desert. 

Similarly, Glacier National Park in Montana had 125 glaciers at the beginning of the 1900's and that freshwater melt provided much of the fresh water to USA. Now it only has something like 28 glaciers left and they are very small and it is estimated they will be entirely gone in another 10 years. Soil erosion and desertification has already begun now in the places where the glaciers have disappeared from. When the rest of the glaciers are gone and no longer providing surface water desertification will spread out from there to other inhabited places that presently rely on that water. 

They will become _uninhabitable_.

.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Wow...all this talk of overpopulation. What's the solution? China's? Give me a break! You don't sound like a lot of freedom loving homesteaders to me!

We waste a lot of water in this country. It's not that the water isn't there, it's that it is wasted and devalued by society. We have no clue what it's like to truly have to conserve water here. Even when I lived in the high desert of Utah, an amazing amount of water is wasted every minute! As far as the middle east is concerned, if you read a little bit of the history of the area, you'd understand that droughts and famines have been part of their lives for eons. Yes, although the population has increased over the last couple centuries, likewise technology has increased to where we desalinate water and increase the availability. But growing massive crops that are high water demand crops in the middle east is not intelligent. Perhaps focusing on more native crops, even if the yield is lower would be a better return in the long run than forcing nature to bend to our will. This is what happens when you attempt to conquer and populate a desert. Nature will not be dominated. 
That being said, I know that here in rural Ohio, there are hundreds of farms all around me that grow one major crop. Period. No veggie gardens, no orchards, no backyard chicken flock, no beef, no nothing, just corn/soybeans/wheat/tobacco. It's a business, nothing more. They could be more self-sufficient and put less of a burden on an already over burden food system, but they don't. They choose not to. If all of them, and half of the families that simply live in the country on a couple of acres did the same, have a garden, some chickens, and a raised a calf or lamb or pig each year, they'd live better, be healthier and the food production system would not be so overburdened. Prices might even go down to some degree as the demand would be far less. I could raise 15 kids on my land and not be a drain on society if I am responsible for my own food stuffs as much as possible, and I am careful to preserve water, to not be wasteful. We have rain barrels that we catch rainwater in and use it for our livestock and our gardens. This water finds its way back into the ground and does what it should be doing in the grand scheme of life on Earth. We also are constantly composting things here, everything that can be composted, we compost. My husband brings us loads of wood chips from work to compost over two years into rich black soil. We add this to our fields and gardens to build up the top soil. But it takes work and time. Our businessmen we call farmers today don't want to invest the work and time needed to do this, regardless of how responsible it is. 
No, the problem isn't too many people. It's too few responsible people. We need to educate the people on responsibility. I'm trying in my own sphere of influence to do just that.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

Excellent post, the queensblessing! Not sure it's a total solution, but definitely would be a BIG help.


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

As usual, Donna is a voice of reason.

The "doom, gloom, population boom" crowd always gets dangerous when they start talking about "limiting growth".


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

Natural law will solve any problem humans don't solve first. Natural law includes famine and disease.

We've mined our topsoil and water in this country, to the point where it's almost gone, in the breadbasket region.

Cheap land and free water, out in CA, drove greens agriculture out of most of the country... hard to compete with cheap/free. Now, we're stuck with CA produce... and their ag depends upon imported water, (luckily for them, they're getting deluged with snowpack 'this' year)... and the soil is becoming more salty/alkaline each year.

America cannot feed the world, with oil over 100$/barrel. We might be able to feed ourselves... the rest of the world's poor won't be able to afford it.... and without subsidies, a lot of America's poor will be in the same boat.

At a certain point in our future history, I can see where only a certain sort of human will eat, on a regular basis.... those with land and water, and the skills needed to work and defend it.

Btw... that last sentiment has been told to me, all my life, by folks who worked the dirt... an undying belief that without them and their kind, folks would starve to death. When I was a footloose and fancy free 'turnip/sheeple' I thought those sentiments trite and passe...until my own epiphany (did that come from continuous soil contamination under my fingernails???)... I never 'knew' how much I actually learned from my older relatives, till I started actually doing for myself.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

I dunno.

Having been involved in large scale farming of just one cash crop, I'm of the opinion that these businessmen farmers don't have the time to grow their own homestead operation. Spring is far to busy with planting and all things agriculture to be messing with anything other than the token hobby garden, henhouse and whatever else you might find on the homestead that begin at the same time. In the spring and fall full time farming is much more than a nine to five job. It is dawn till dark.

Sure, they could all do a little homesteading, if they reduce the size of their cash crops.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

seedspreader said:


> The "doom, gloom, population boom" crowd always gets dangerous when they start talking about "limiting growth".


I'm not seeing a discussion about limiting population growth in this topic. 

What I'm seeing here is a discussion about available resources and the misuse and abuse of resources. 

Disappearing resources, the misuse of available resources and nature in the form of famine will take care of over-population. It has already started.

Furthermore, the population "boom" has already ended. According to one of the links that was posted above, annual growth rate reached its peak in the late 1960's. The rate of increase has almost halved since its peak of 2.19% in 1963 to the current rate of 1.15% and it's estimated that it will become less than 1% by 2020 and less than 0.5% by 2050. 

http://www.worldometers.info/population/


----------



## NewGround (Dec 19, 2010)

I just heard (I'm slow, I know) that Israel just announced finding an estimated 3.8 trillion feet of natural gas. And oil shale deposits equal to or greater than all the oil in Saudi Arabia. I believe even more will be found. Also they are developing a new clean technology the extract the oil from shale while still in the ground. A byproduct of the process is water by the way. Israel has announced they will share this technology with the world. 

What does this mean?

Well if true this could destabilize the price of oil. The center of all viable oil production would no longer be the middle east Arab countries. Not only would this lead to great wealth for the state of Israel but be a boon to the world economy if added resources dramatically dropped the per barrel price. Increased supplies mean lower costs. Will we see $10 a barrel oil again? I hope so. Will the merchants of sand be looking for a new export?

The Lord God has promised to care for his people and finding vast energy reserves right about now in Israel would be called what... miraculous? The world jumps to serve the Saudis because of oil. Perhaps now the world will stop ganging up against Israel if in the end tiny Israel becomes the reliable trading partner for such a high value commodity.

For those of you who believe is this not foretold?


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

thequeensblessing said:


> Wow...all this talk of overpopulation. What's the solution? China's? Give me a break! You don't sound like a lot of freedom loving homesteaders to me!
> 
> 
> That being said, I know that here in rural Ohio, there are hundreds of farms all around me that grow one major crop. Period. No veggie gardens, no orchards, no backyard chicken flock, no beef, no nothing, just corn/soybeans/wheat/tobacco. It's a business, nothing more. They could be more self-sufficient and put less of a burden on an already over burden food system, but they don't. They choose not to. If all of them, and half of the families that simply live in the country on a couple of acres did the same, have a garden, some chickens, and a raised a calf or lamb or pig each year, they'd live better, be healthier and the food production system would not be so overburdened. Prices might even go down to some degree as the demand would be far less. I could raise 15 kids on my land and not be a drain on society if I am responsible for my own food stuffs as much as possible, and I am careful to preserve water, to not be wasteful. ....... But it takes work and time. Our businessmen we call farmers today don't want to invest the work and time needed to do this, regardless of how responsible it is.


I think that Time has made a valid point and I just want to add a point of my own in answer to the above quote.

The majority of the population are not farmers nor homesteaders who grow their own food. The majority of the population live in towns and cities and do not own land. The majority of the population cannot be forced to all become farmers or live like homesteaders.

It is the businessman farmers involved in large scale farming who feed the majority, not homesteaders. Feeding the world is not a homesteader problem.


----------



## ryanthomas (Dec 10, 2009)

After doing some more reading today, I've come to the conclusion that overpopulation will not become a problem, since population growth is actually slowing down, and the world population is projected to stabilize in 40 years or so, and then quite possibly decline. So I take back my previous comments about population. I don't think I was wrong, but I'm now convinced that it is only relevant to the global food crisis to the extent that it affects over-consumption of resources, which doesn't inherently go along with having many children. It only applies if you raise your kids like typical Americans, which would create a greater burden on the planet. I can't imagine many homesteaders live like typical Americans.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

> It only applies if you raise your kids like typical Americans, which would create a greater burden on the planet. I can't imagine many homesteaders live like typical Americans. <!-- / message -->


By comparison with the American population as whole, there are not many homesteaders. Homesteaders and farmers are a very small percentage of the population.


----------



## Oldcountryboy (Feb 23, 2008)

Just barely got in on a top soil subject from a t.v. show the other day and they stated that in Ohio alone, they loose something like 9.8 million tons of top soil every year. Flooding takes place and washes it into the Mississippi river where it ends up dumped into the sea below New Orleans. Also stated that where the soil dumps into the sea has caused a bigger dead zone where aquatic life cannot live. This is due to the soil and fertilizer dumped into the sea which causes algae that depletes the oxygen. 

Wide scale farming practices is killing the world as we know it. Our children and grandchildren will suffer greatly.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Oldcountryboy said:


> Wide scale farming practices is killing the world as we know it. Our children and grandchildren will suffer greatly.


More civilizations have fallen because of the plow than the sword.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Paumon said:


> I think that Time has made a valid point and I just want to add a point of my own in answer to the above quote.
> 
> The majority of the population are not farmers nor homesteaders who grow their own food. The majority of the population live in towns and cities and do not own land. The majority of the population cannot be forced to all become farmers or live like homesteaders.
> 
> It is the businessman farmers involved in large scale farming who feed the majority, not homesteaders. Feeding the world is not a homesteader problem.


yes, it is true that most Americans live in cities and towns and cannot raise their own food and must rely on the commercial food system for survival. I'm addressing the millions of Americans who live in the country but choose NOT to raise their own food at all. If millions of Americans took themselves out of the commercial food demand, much stress would be relieved from the system, allowing more to go to those who need it and can't produce it, perhaps lowering prices to some small degree. 

As far as Times response, let me say this:
There are myriad excuses for why people don't raise their own food. Yes, commercial farming is agribusiness and spring and fall particularly are very busy seasons. However, we, personally, have an ever growing sheep operation (striving for 200 head), have a pick your own orchard of 45 fruit trees, various veggie and herb gardens, berry patches, etc. We also have 14 hives of honey bees. My husband is a tree surgeon for a large national company. He goes out of state to work on "storm", meaning he goes off for weeks at a time to help with tornado, ice storm, hurricane, etc., cleanup. He works at least 40 hours off the farm. I'm a consultant and am gone hosting classes, etc. most days. Between the two of us, we still manage to keep our farm business going and keep the off the farm jobs going as well. With our sheep industry, our busy times are winter, spring, and fall. With our orchard, it's spring and fall. With the honeybees, it's spring and fall. We still manage to feed ourselves with the sweat of our brows. It's not easy, but it's rewarding and empowering. It's also about priorities. I believe the agribusinessman CAN grow his own food if he chose to. If it were an equal priority, he could do it. I'm not talking about a "token hobby garden". Reduce his cash crop? Not by much, and if it did reduce it by some small amount, he'd make up for that by not spending his cash on the commercial food industry, and he'd have healthier food and not be adding to the strain of societies food system. I know many crop farmers around here. Yes, they are busy in the spring/fall. Summers are not busy at all. They COULD grow a garden, plant trees, have some chickens, if they chose. Most of them are married. I take up the slack on our farm when hubby's not here/not able to do it. 
I'm sorry, but I get tired of the excuses. "I can't" really means "I don't want to". when most of us really want to do something, we find a way to do it.


----------



## Leo (Feb 7, 2006)

> most Americans live in cities and towns and cannot raise their own food


IMOE, where there is a will there's a way. I used to live in the city, I grew anything I could in pots in windowsills, any spot of light I could utilize, I had two chickens(BR,RIR), they slept/resided in bunny cages in my bedroom, I had them trained to come when called or attack foodstuffs pointed to them. (They make chicken diapers for the indoor chicken). 
I wasn't self-suficient, but as long as you have light and water, you can grow.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Leo said:


> IMOE, where there is a will there's a way. I used to live in the city, I grew anything I could in pots in windowsills, any spot of light I could utilize, I had two chickens(BR,RIR), they slept/resided in bunny cages in my bedroom, I had them trained to come when called or attack foodstuffs pointed to them. (They make chicken diapers for the indoor chicken).
> I wasn't self-suficient, but as long as you have light and water, you can grow.


Leo, I have to agree with you, completely.


----------



## Pam6 (Apr 9, 2009)

thequeensblessing said:


> Leo, I have to agree with you, completely.


A case in point:
http://urbanhomestead.org/urban-homestead


----------



## tab (Aug 20, 2002)

Chicken diapers?!? And my mil used to think the litter pan was bad. 
Needed a chuckle, sorry for the thread drift.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

I've heard everything now.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

Leo said:


> IMOE, where there is a will there's a way. I used to live in the city, I grew anything I could in pots in windowsills, any spot of light I could utilize, I had two chickens(BR,RIR), they slept/resided in bunny cages in my bedroom, I had them trained to come when called or attack foodstuffs pointed to them. (They make chicken diapers for the indoor chicken).
> I wasn't self-suficient, but as long as you have light and water, you can grow.


And the businessmen farmers are still feeding you and 6 billion others. Don't get me wrong, I respect what you do for yourself. My mother lives in town and has chickens and garden.

I see no reason to put more responcibility on the farmer for growing and selling potatoes, corn, wheat, beets or whatever grows in their area and buying tomatoes, eggs, beef, chicken, or whatever else they may want.

There is a reason people say we need immigrant workers to do the jobs many here in the states won't do and there is a reason most of those jobs are ag jobs. Because it's hard and long. If someone wants to pretend they know what the hours are and the amount of work required to farm like this compares to a hobby farm having not done it, I can't change their mind. Summers after planting are filled with equipment repair, irrigation, and an endless supply of things to do. Farmers do not plant in the spring then sit on the porch drinking lemonaide till harvest time.

Then again, they could cut out a couple hundred acres of crops and grow a garden instead. Much better time management.


----------



## denaliguide (Aug 30, 2008)

conservative, liberal, literal, interpretive? Intelligent design ?

Roll it any way you want. In my conservative university, in the religion and philosphy courses, it was emphasized that a lot of this was HISTORICAL, in-context, more or less. Thats #1

Number #2 is Martin Luther's thesis of Universal Priesthood, that is, you and I have a direct link to GOD, without others interfering. So how you execute, is your business, and none of anyone elses, including what others say THEY think the Christian Bible says.

Number #3 is my belief in Anarchist philosophy that simply states that you are free to execute and bear the consquences of your own ethical decisions.
Thus we are all bound by ethics.

So we know certain things, and must move to resolve them ETHICALLY no matter if others dont take that route.

I personally have had a tour de force, first hand of a number of Christian and other faiths common to North America, and each has been ETHICS bound, so whatever my faith, I act with ethics and in respect of other, and hope for reciprication.




ryanthomas said:


> Yes, though many mainstream Christians would probably consider me a heretic.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

NewGround said:


> I just heard (I'm slow, I know) that Israel just announced finding an estimated 3.8 trillion feet of natural gas. And oil shale deposits equal to or greater than all the oil in Saudi Arabia. I believe even more will be found. Also they are developing a new clean technology the extract the oil from shale while still in the ground. A byproduct of the process is water by the way. Israel has announced they will share this technology with the world.
> 
> What does this mean?
> 
> ...



Could I get a link to this story?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I just heard (I'm slow, I know) that Israel just announced finding an estimated 3.8 trillion feet of natural gas. And oil shale deposits equal to or greater than all the oil in Saudi Arabia





> Could I get a link to this story?


http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=788962&page=8


> New data suggests Israel may not only have much larger gas resources than believed, but also the 3rd largest deposit of oil shale in the world


.

http://www.jpost.com/Features/FrontLines/Article.aspx?id=211676


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Thanks. Any others?


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

Here are a couple thousand:

[ame]http://www.google.com/search?q=Israel+shale&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a[/ame]

In case you don't trust the Jerusalem post...


----------



## bruce2288 (Jul 10, 2009)

Just a point here. People moaning about the price of corn on one hand and then complaining about large farms. Farms got bigger and consolidated because the small farm could not make a decent living. I remember the last time fuel prices got high farmers around here were saying "need price controls on fuel". I mentioned that sounds great but how are you going to like it when they put price controls on your crops. It's all wonderful when it is the other guys ox getting gored. I for one am happy with these high feed and livestock prices, I finally have a chance to get ahead a little.


----------



## nebraskafarmer (Jan 27, 2011)

First off although I am mostly a lurker, I am an avid follower of this boar, mostly I just mind my own business. Let me also say I am almost always in total agreement with Ernie so I hope he will not take offense to this as it is in direct contradiction to the article he posted.

I am a commercial farmer in central Nebraska, and as a member of the agricultural community I just can't let an opportunity to dispel negative myths.

While I do not dispute there is a food crisis in the world it is not due to farming practices. It is due to misuse of our system.

Let me first address some of the issues brought up in the article and here.

We are running out of groundwater--While I cannot vouch for other places in the country, I know for a fact "there is a aquifer level monitoring well on a piece of the land I farm", in central Nebraska the aquifer level has been steadily rising for the last 30+ years, with the exception of our drought years from 99-06 when the level stayed static. The level has even been becoming a problem in the nearest large city near to me, where new construction requires dewatering wells, with water pumped out of the ground and dumped in the river no less. 

We are losing massive amounts of topsoil--this is true, but you need some perspective, there is no denying the dustbowl days of the 30's were a product of weather and poor farming practices, but the figure posted back a ways should be countered with the fact that a paper thin layer topsoil spread over an acre ways 3 ton. So yes there is topsoil being lost, but it is not outpacing the level it is being replaced by modern farming methods of residue management.

We are wasting food growing capability by producing ethanol--corn fed its raw form, is only 30-40% digestible to a bovine, slightly more for hogs, and chickens. DDG or the by-product of ethanol is almost 100% digestable to all animal species and when mixed with low quality roughage for fiber content provides almost a complete ration after the ethanol production process has produced a useful product. For all those who gripe about ethanol and increased grain cost keep in mind that break even this year with fertilizer, fuel, land and equipment prices is almost $4.5 a bushel, (and I farm with paid for 20 year old equipment). There have been years in the past that farmers lost money on every bushel they raised, would you continue working a job that you knew lost you money? Farmers do in hopes of a better year and the fact that the world depends on them. 

There are several more things I would love to discuss if anyone would care to but I don't want post a novel on here. Anyone feel free to pm me on the subject. Also as I said in the beggining don't take anything I said as a personal attack just trying to dispel some myths.


----------



## ne prairiemama (Jan 30, 2010)

nebraskafarmer this is OT but I just wanted to say hello since we live in the same state lol!


----------



## Astrid (Nov 13, 2010)

What is completely ludicrous is that Saudi and Bahrain -which are in the desert!- think that they can grow anything!! Saudi for some odd reason decided to grow wheat instead of using its vast wealth to buy it from wheat producing countries. Bahrain, also a wealthy country is trying to grow food. The only thing that grows naturally in these countries is date palms. Everything else is imported.... even the sheep! When crops, that require specific growing conditions - like water - are grown in a place like Saudi which has very little water, they need irrigation. So, the brilliant solution is to deplete aquifers. Maybe a better solution is to not have out of control population growth so they don't have to feed so many people.


----------



## nebraskafarmer (Jan 27, 2011)

OT here to but hello, always good to see another Nebraskan, there are a few on here, most of them are like you though in the western part of the state, I think you are nearer the Imperial/McCook area? I'm from near Kearney myself.


----------



## cvk (Oct 30, 2006)

Am I wrong in assuming that what is removed from the corn to make alcohol is sugar and sugar is what fattens and also provides heat in winter for critters. Now I see that they are adding sugar to cattle rations to replace what is missing from the corn products that have had the sugar removed. If a person has to feed sugar to cattle what is the advantage of feeding corn that has been depleted of it's sugar content to make alcohol? You are right that the left overs can be used from the production of ethanol but you will not convince me that the cattle are getting what they need from the product the same as they get from the whole grain. JMHO :<)


----------



## bruce2288 (Jul 10, 2009)

cvk There are a couple of kinds of byproduct. The two main ones are syrup, which looks like running pancake batter it is high in corn oil and is an energy supplement. Distillers grain in semi solid and is a high protein supplement. You are right, the starch of the corn is removed by the conversion to alcohol. These bi-products allow the feeding of lower quality forages such as corn stalks.
Both the pro and anti ethanol groups like to spin perceptions to support their goals. I feed both of these products and animals love them. I swear the high oil liquid is addictive to cattle. Think of some of the high fat foods people enjoy so much cheese cake, ice cream ect.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

Cities aren't complete concrete jungles. Sure, there are condo towers and office towers but, here in Toronto at least, if you go up in a tall building and look out over the city, all you will see is green with a few tall buildings sticking up out of it. Except for the older downtown area, there is a lot of green space. Then there are the suburbs. All these sprawling residential areas have lawns and backyards. Industrial areas around the city have huge lawns and even shopping centers have large grassy areas. Most of the flat roofed buildings downtown could have gardens grown on them. As decorative trees die in the city they could be replaced with fruit trees which can be nice enough to look at.

Maybe cities couldn't feed ALL the city folks but enough food could be grown in the city to make a significant dent in the food supply if anyone had a mind to.

There are sites around the web of people who grow massive amounts of food on their own small properties to the point of even having enough to sell to others. It might not be easy but it can be done.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Hrm. Maybe I went to the wrong Toronto. The whole city appeared to me as a bleak, third-world industrial park. Most of the "green space" visible was in ditches and culverts.

Calgary though ... that's a really beautiful Canadian city.


----------



## sticky_burr (Dec 10, 2010)

as far as crisis its more panic to drive the prices up more so some one that cant invest in realestate can make more money. how many acres are unplanted and sprayed and fertilized for grass? how many people could your local golf course or McMansion lawn feed?
yes there are problems . desertfication. people put too much of a grazing load on maginal land with goats usually. because of dropping prices more animals=more money when each brings less.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

Yes, downtown Toronto has a lot of concrete but it's a huge city and once you get out of the downtown core there is a lot of green. If you have only been here once or twice you haven't even started to scratch the surface. I delivered in this city for more than twenty years and I can tell you that there are more green spaces here than most people know about.


----------



## SquashNut (Sep 25, 2005)

cvk said:


> Am I wrong in assuming that what is removed from the corn to make alcohol is sugar and sugar is what fattens and also provides heat in winter for critters. Now I see that they are adding sugar to cattle rations to replace what is missing from the corn products that have had the sugar removed. If a person has to feed sugar to cattle what is the advantage of feeding corn that has been depleted of it's sugar content to make alcohol? You are right that the left overs can be used from the production of ethanol but you will not convince me that the cattle are getting what they need from the product the same as they get from the whole grain. JMHO :<)


If we are going to continue to eat meat, we have to find cheaper ways to raise it. I use a ration for my rabbits that has feed grade mollasses in it and they do ok.


----------



## Usingmyrights (Jan 10, 2011)

The water pumping thing I know is true. Its killing the lakes where I lieve at because the closest big city is pumping much more water than they need and the rest just gets dumped into the ocean.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

nebraskafarmer said:


> We are wasting food growing capability by producing ethanol--corn fed its raw form, is only 30-40% digestible to a bovine, slightly more for hogs, and chickens. DDG or the by-product of ethanol is almost 100% digestable to all animal species and when mixed with low quality roughage for fiber content provides almost a complete ration after the ethanol production process has produced a useful product. For all those who gripe about ethanol and increased grain cost keep in mind that break even this year with fertilizer, fuel, land and equipment prices is almost $4.5 a bushel, (and I farm with paid for 20 year old equipment). There have been years in the past that farmers lost money on every bushel they raised, would you continue working a job that you knew lost you money? Farmers do in hopes of a better year and the fact that the world depends on them.


While I agree with most of what you have writen about, my problem with corn and ethanol isn't a food or animal feed issue. I have those issues but it is not a great concern.

My problem with it is a financial one along with the use of resources.

If the farm equipment and processing plants ran on pure ethanol, could more ethanol be produced from an acre of corn than the amount of ethanol required to make it?

When we are using fossil fuels to make ethanol in order to conserve fossil fuels, things do not add up to a worthwhile savings of anything. No significant savings in fossil fuels and no cost savings.


----------

