Climate Change Concerns Pt 2: Are heaps of food and fertilizers just good news?

While reading and riding last night (42 miles of cycling helped me burn over 600 calories) I read a passage in Super Freakonomics that linked back to a letter in yesterday’s newspaper that touched on the damage to our water supplies caused by meat and dairy production. [Please link to Part 1]

Timely, I thought as I pushed past Mile 30.


I read that over 250 years ago, when Earth’s population was about 800 million people, there were those that worried “agriculture could not respond to the pressure of feeding extra people.” (pg. 141)

But then a variety of innovations, e.g., higher-yielding crops, better tools, etc., spurred the Agricultural Revolution.

‘In late eighteenth century America, it took 19 out of 20 workers to feed the country’s inhabitants and provide a surplus for export. Two hundred years later, only 1 of 20 American workers was needed to feed a far larger population while also making the United States the largest single exporter of food in the world.’

I also read that the millions of hands that were freed up went on to power the Industrial Revolution, and by 1850 worldwide population had grown to 1.3 billion; by 1900, 1.7 billion; by 1950, 2.6 billion.

‘And then things really took off. Over the next fifty years, the population more than doubled, reaching well beyond 6 billion.’

‘If you had to pick a silver bullet that allowed this surge, it would be ammonium nitrate, an astonishingly cheap and effective crop fertilizer. It wouldn’t be much of an overstatement to say ammonium nitrate feeds the world. If it disappeared overnight, says the agricultural economist Will Masters, “most people’s diets would revert to heaps of cereal grains and root crops, with animal products and fruits only for special occasions and for the rich.”’ (pg. 142)

To an economist, heaps of food on the back of cheap fertilizer must sound good - might even look completely nutritious.


["Heaps of peppers by the roadside on the back of cheap fertilizer?": photos GAH]

However, when positive agricultural growth leads to negative environmental results, i.e., “such production contributes more pollutants to our water supplies... shortages... global deforestation... wildlife habitat destruction” (Part 1) we should be more concerned about how our food is produced and how much and what we eat, shouldn’t we?

Especially if the link between food production and serious environmental damage is as visible as the nose on our face.

***

More to follow about ammonium nitrate production and use.

Please click here to read Part 3.

.