Food Crisis 2011? 14 Disturbing Facts That Make You Wonder

[WIP]

I'm going to single out this statement from your post, as we need to resolve this. Hunger rates have HALVED since 1970 from the stats I saw.

By RATE we mean the rate at which hunger occurs in the population, or percentage of hungry. The population of the earth is increasing far more quickly than the hunger rate.

If there were half a billion starving back when Paul Ehrlich wrote the Population Bomb, at a time when there were 3.5 billion people in the world, and there are now one billion starving at a time when the World population nears 7 billion, it still doesn't add up to cutting hunger in half: The Population Bomb Revisited

[Michael Hardner]

If there were half a billion starving back when Paul Ehrlich wrote the Population Bomb, at a time when there were 3.5 billion people in the world, and there are now one billion starving at a time when the World population nears 7 billion, it still doesn't add up to cutting hunger in half: The Population Bomb Revisited

Here is the statistic I am using

Share of malnourished people in the developing world[6][7][3]

1970:37 %

1980:28 %

1990:20 %

2005:16 %

2007:17 %

2009:16 %

Wiki

[WIP]

Here is the statistic I am using

Wiki

They must be using different definitions to classify hunger and starvation! The one thing I do know is that the near future,as well as the longterm future is bleak when it comes to famine and starvation. I've heard a couple of population experts say recently that they have become skeptical of this 9 billion figure for 2050 as the peak world population; because the global food supply system is already straining to support the near 7 billion we have now. Just in: Climate Change May Cause ‘Massive’ Food Disruptions

Global food supplies will face “massive disruptions” from climate change, Olam International Ltd. predicted, as Agrocorp International Pte. said corn will gain to a record, stoking food inflation and increasing hunger.

[GostHacked]

I'm allergic to Alex Jones! Most of his fellow conspiracy theorists follow his same recipe of one part facts, one part conjecture, and two parts exaggerated bullshit. I found of this Gerald Celente even more irritating and obnoxious than the host....and that takes some doing! This guy may know currency issues and economics....I started drifting a bit during that clip....but this Mr. Knowitall is talking about money, when the real underlying issue is rising food prices. It's not just an economics issue if it's a country like Egypt, or many other Middle Eastern nations that are overpopulated and can't grow enough food to support their populations. Egypt's population has grown from 27 million in 1960 to almost 85 million today. Oil production is in decline, and imported food is getting more expensive, since there are so many other buyers of food commodities lately.

Celente has had a spectacular track record in predicting trends. Celente is Wall Street's go to guy in predicting trends. I love the way Celente presents his case, he tells it like it is. You are probably used to the filtered and sanitized mainstream media and how they present things. The alphabet networks are not giving you the information you need. I've been following Celente for some time, and he has nailed it on the head about what is going on.

I know many don't like Alex Jones here either, but he was one of the people who was on about the TSA abuses before mainstream media like CNN and FOX and CBC picked up on it. He talked about that months before it hit the MSM. I challenge you to listen to him for a week and then make up your mind about him. I thought he was a nutjob as well, but most of what he is yelling about is coming true.

This would be an economics issue if Egypt and other M.E. countries had the capacity to turn these problems around; but a new government, whether it's democratic or not, has little room to work with to figure out a way to bring down food prices in Egypt.

Egyopt slashed food prices during the latest conflict. As did other countries.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/08/algeria-riots-prices-idUSLDE7070AB20110108

Jan 8 (Reuters) - Algeria's government said on Saturday it will slash taxes and import duties on some staple foods after a wave of riots triggered by a sharp rise in consumer prices, official media reported.

A meeting of ministers in response to the rioting agreed measures which would reduce the price of sugar and cooking oil by a total of 41 percent, the official APS news agency quoted a government statement as saying.

http://article.wn.com/view/2011/01/13/Tunisian_president_vows_to_slash_food_prices_4/

TUNIS, Tunisia - Tunisia's president has ordered prices on food staples slashed and suggested he will not run for re-election after deadly riots that have rocked the North African country. President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, in a televised speech Thursday night, pledged to end Internet censorship and to open up the political playing field. He said the 75-year age limit on presidential candidates should remain untouched. That would mean Ben Ali, who is 74 and has ruled Tunisia with an iron fist for 23 years, would not be able to run in 2014. He spoke after nearly a month of protests that have left 23 dead according to official figures, dozens...

And, if you think that's bad, take a look at some of the background articles on Yemen! Same problems: overpopulation, declining food production, importing more food from abroad plus there is the unusual looming crisis for Yemen's population of having almost the entire nation dependent on an underground fossil aquifer for fresh water. That means this is water that does not replenish. Like oil, it will run out, and when it does, there will be an entire nation with no water supply.

Wait for it, this shit is going to hit North America later this year.

Edited February 20, 2011 by GostHacked

[WIP]

Celente has had a spectacular track record in predicting trends. Celente is Wall Street's go to guy in predicting trends. I love the way Celente presents his case, he tells it like it is. You are probably used to the filtered and sanitized mainstream media and how they present things. The alphabet networks are not giving you the information you need. I've been following Celente for some time, and he has nailed it on the head about what is going on.

Yes, but there have been many environmentalists who have been tracking this problem of rising populations/declining food supplies for a few years now also. My problem with this guy is that in his summation, he is presenting it as a strictly economic and political issue, when the underlying causes are ecological. Many environmentalists who have been monitoring declining water resources and depletion of topsoil, have been warning that the good days of the Green Revolution were about to come to an end; the economists only started picking this up when world commodity prices started rising a few years ago.

I know many don't like Alex Jones here either, but he was one of the people who was on about the TSA abuses before mainstream media like CNN and FOX and CBC picked up on it. He talked about that months before it hit the MSM. I challenge you to listen to him for a week and then make up your mind about him. I thought he was a nutjob as well, but most of what he is yelling about is coming true.

Oh, I totally hate Alex Jones! I remember him from when he was on Art Bell's late night conspiracy radio show and making his grand claims about 9/11. Back in the first few weeks before there were additional video clips, he was claiming that the planes hitting the WTC weren't actually passenger planes....but as soon as one claim gets blown out of the water by new evidence, he's off to the next one. The problem with Jones and the other 9/11 Truthers is that they distracted attention from the real evidence of failure from the Bush Administration on down the chain of command.

I haven't flown on a plane to a U.S. destination since 2000, so I don't have direct experience with airport security to go on, but this may be another issue where Jones makes a mountain out of a molehill, and makes legitimate criticism of over-zealous security look like part of collection of conspiracy theory clowns.

Egyopt slashed food prices during the latest conflict. As did other countries.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/08/algeria-riots-prices-idUSLDE7070AB20110108

http://article.wn.com/view/2011/01/13/Tunisian_president_vows_to_slash_food_prices_4/

Which doesn't address the point because many basic food commodities were already subsidized by governments to keep the poor satisfied. When prices go up, most of these countries have to borrow money they don't have to reduce food prices further.

Wait for it, this shit is going to hit North America later this year.

It's already here, and prices will keep rising unless we have the miracle of the whole world breaking out in good weather! We are not at the same point where food riots would break out....but the way things are going, it might be just a matter of time.

[Michael Hardner]

They must be using different definitions to classify hunger and starvation! The one thing I do know is that the near future,as well as the longterm future is bleak when it comes to famine and starvation. I've heard a couple of population experts say recently that they have become skeptical of this 9 billion figure for 2050 as the peak world population; because the global food supply system is already straining to support the near 7 billion we have now. Just in: Climate Change May Cause ‘Massive’ Food Disruptions

Global food supplies will face “massive disruptions” from climate change, Olam International Ltd. predicted, as Agrocorp International Pte. said corn will gain to a record, stoking food inflation and increasing hunger.

Do you trust Olam International more than the UN reports that form the basis for my number ? What do you know about them ? They are an international food agriculture business that has been accused of misdeeds by Greenpeace.

The UN and international aid groups, NGOs and religious groups do good work, and I don't want to denigrate their efforts by denigrating the impact that they have had. They need to have access to more resources, and not be cut back as many here would like to do.

[blueblood]

Oh moses smell the roses!!!

For north americans to be complaining about a food crisis is chicken little to the extreme. North America is the largest food exporting region on the planet. High food prices are a good thing. There is a saying in the grain industry "high prices cure high prices". There is a massive amount of land in Russia and Africa ready for production. Enough so to drop prices significantly. For those smart enough to invest in the ag sector, the returns have been fantastic. I have 65% more revenue than last year and all of us farmers are on a shopping spree. Oil use in the USA is projected to DECREASE due to the use of corn ethanol which otherwise would be sitting in a pile. Not only that 2 dictators have been punted with another on the way. The north american ag economy has been on fire and with high prices there is incentive to start up ag production in africa which will provide them a base in which to start their economy. This business of ultra low priced subsidized food from europe is a disaster. Europe is now broke and african farmers were put out of business, thank goodness that's over. Finally, with all the capital in ag, emerging market farmers will be able to catch up to the western world.

[GostHacked]

Oh moses smell the roses!!!

For north americans to be complaining about a food crisis is chicken little to the extreme. North America is the largest food exporting region on the planet. High food prices are a good thing. There is a saying in the grain industry "high prices cure high prices". There is a massive amount of land in Russia and Africa ready for production. Enough so to drop prices significantly. For those smart enough to invest in the ag sector, the returns have been fantastic. I have 65% more revenue than last year and all of us farmers are on a shopping spree. Oil use in the USA is projected to DECREASE due to the use of corn ethanol which otherwise would be sitting in a pile. Not only that 2 dictators have been punted with another on the way. The north american ag economy has been on fire and with high prices there is incentive to start up ag production in africa which will provide them a base in which to start their economy. This business of ultra low priced subsidized food from europe is a disaster. Europe is now broke and african farmers were put out of business, thank goodness that's over. Finally, with all the capital in ag, emerging market farmers will be able to catch up to the western world.

Russia had stopped some exports last year I think. Wheat was one of them. And the US is the biggest exporter of genetically modified foods. Also, you would want to look into how Monsantos and their terminator seeds now are holding the farmers hostage.

In a crisis the USA would stop it's exports of food. But even before that happens, bombs would be dropping because other countries would be desperate and hungry.

And the more corn you use for fuel, the less you use for food.

[blueblood]

Russia had stopped some exports last year I think. Wheat was one of them. And the US is the biggest exporter of genetically modified foods. Also, you would want to look into how Monsantos and their terminator seeds now are holding the farmers hostage.

In a crisis the USA would stop it's exports of food. But even before that happens, bombs would be dropping because other countries would be desperate and hungry.

And the more corn you use for fuel, the less you use for food.

Russia has a lot of land that hasn't been even used yet. Not only that, they're technologically behind us. Gmo foods have the best yields and are priced competitively with conventional crops in terms of cost of production, so that myth of being held hostage is busted. Plus farmers can invest in said companies and get dividend cheques. I do wish terminator seeds existed, it would help out with weed control.

There's plenty of corn to go around which is putting a lid on US oil dependancy. Sounds like enough corn to keep the US standard of living as high as it is.

[WIP]

Oh moses smell the roses!!!

For north americans to be complaining about a food crisis is chicken little to the extreme. North America is the largest food exporting region on the planet.

And North America is also near maximum capacity for food production. And it's important to stress that present levels of farm production are unsustainable; they are going to decline because of the over-use of groundwater for irrigation, and soil depletion 16 times the rate it can be revitalized. Here's one example today that shows just how precarious U.S. agricultural production is:

California farms represent 8% of the US's agriculture value

, and the Central Valley is where most of that growing takes place. However, as the state struggles with ongoing droughts, the groundwater supplies are dwindling at a frightening rate. According to satellite technology used by NASA, over a 6.5 year period the groundwater supplies in Central Valley leaked away by an amount equal to 63% of the capacity of Lake Mead, the nation's largest reservoir. With that much water disappearing, it is harder to replenish supplies when it finally does rain. Does this water debt mean a future food crisis?

Now, let's add the increasingly volatile weather that has been damaging crop yields around the world, one of which has already been mentioned by GostHack, and tell me how confident you feel about food prices and availability!

High food prices are a good thing. There is a saying in the grain industry "high prices cure high prices". There is a massive amount of land in Russia and Africa ready for production. Enough so to drop prices significantly.

That would be great if there was extra capacity to make available....but there isn't:

At the same time, cropland resources are under severe strain. FAO Food Balance Sheets show that more than 99.7 percent of human food (calories) comes from the terrestrial environment, while less than 0.3 percent comes from the oceans and other aquatic ecosystems. Of the total of 13 billion hectares of land area on Earth, cropland accounts for 11 percent, pastureland 27 percent, forested land 32 percent, and urban lands 9 percent. Most of the remaining 21 percent is unsuitable for crops, pasture, and/or forests because the soil is too infertile or shallow to support plant growth, or the climate and region are too cold, dry, steep, stony, or wet.

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/554

In a world that is bumping up to the limits of food production and staring at an inevitable longterm decline, supply and demand is meaningless. What will happen is that scarce resources will skyrocket in price.

For those smart enough to invest in the ag sector, the returns have been fantastic. I have 65% more revenue than last year and all of us farmers are on a shopping spree. Oil use in the USA is projected to DECREASE due to the use of corn ethanol which otherwise would be sitting in a pile. Not only that 2 dictators have been punted with another on the way. The north american ag economy has been on fire and with high prices there is incentive to start up ag production in africa which will provide them a base in which to start their economy.

It appears that Gosthack has already covered the ethanol fallacy: corn-based ethanol is oil-intensive and a total waste of time. And if North America gets hit with similar weather disasters that have befallen Russia, Australia, China, and West Africa...so much for the money-making opportunities!

This business of ultra low priced subsidized food from europe is a disaster. Europe is now broke and african farmers were put out of business, thank goodness that's over. Finally, with all the capital in ag, emerging market farmers will be able to catch up to the western world.

African farmers weren't put out of business by European protectionism. They were put out of business by large foreign corporations that have bought up vast tracts of land to produce food-for-export.

Edited March 4, 2011 by WIP

[WIP]

Russia has a lot of land that hasn't been even used yet.

And it's not used because it can't be used! One quarter of Russia's land mass is bleak northern boreal forest called the Siberian Traps...the remnants of a volcanic flood basalt plain produced 250 million years ago. It is never going to be suitable for agriculture regardless of climate change.

Not only that, they're technologically behind us. Gmo foods have the best yields and are priced competitively with conventional crops in terms of cost of production, so that myth of being held hostage is busted. Plus farmers can invest in said companies and get dividend cheques. I do wish terminator seeds existed, it would help out with weed control.

There's plenty of corn to go around which is putting a lid on US oil dependancy. Sounds like enough corn to keep the US standard of living as high as it is.

The real terminator is topsoil depletion of modern agribusiness that ranges between 16 and 40 times the rate the topsoil can be replenished. Eventually, the productive land has to be taken out of service. Also, as mentioned previously, all around the world, groundwater is being used primarily for agriculture, but also for cities and industrial production beyond sustainable rates of recovery. A time of reckoning is coming one way or another. It's a matter of making necessary adjustments now, or just crashing into the wall applied by the limited resources of this planet, and seeing who, if anyone survives the coming years.

[blueblood]

And North America is also near maximum capacity for food production. And it's important to stress that present levels of farm production are unsustainable; they are going to decline because of the over-use of groundwater for irrigation, and soil depletion 16 times the rate it can be revitalized. Here's one example today that shows just how precarious U.S. agricultural production is:

California farms represent 8% of the US's agriculture value

, and the Central Valley is where most of that growing takes place. However, as the state struggles with ongoing droughts, the groundwater supplies are dwindling at a frightening rate. According to satellite technology used by NASA, over a 6.5 year period the groundwater supplies in Central Valley leaked away by an amount equal to 63% of the capacity of Lake Mead, the nation's largest reservoir. With that much water disappearing, it is harder to replenish supplies when it finally does rain. Does this water debt mean a future food crisis?

Now, let's add the increasingly volatile weather that has been damaging crop yields around the world, one of which has already been mentioned by GostHack, and tell me how confident you feel about food prices and availability!

That would be great if there was extra capacity to make available....but there isn't:

At the same time, cropland resources are under severe strain. FAO Food Balance Sheets show that more than 99.7 percent of human food (calories) comes from the terrestrial environment, while less than 0.3 percent comes from the oceans and other aquatic ecosystems. Of the total of 13 billion hectares of land area on Earth, cropland accounts for 11 percent, pastureland 27 percent, forested land 32 percent, and urban lands 9 percent. Most of the remaining 21 percent is unsuitable for crops, pasture, and/or forests because the soil is too infertile or shallow to support plant growth, or the climate and region are too cold, dry, steep, stony, or wet.

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/554

In a world that is bumping up to the limits of food production and staring at an inevitable longterm decline, supply and demand is meaningless. What will happen is that scarce resources will skyrocket in price.

It appears that Gosthack has already covered the ethanol fallacy: corn-based ethanol is oil-intensive and a total waste of time. And if North America gets hit with similar weather disasters that have befallen Russia, Australia, China, and West Africa...so much for the money-making opportunities!

African farmers weren't put out of business by European protectionism. They were put out of business by large foreign corporations that have bought up vast tracts of land to produce food-for-export.

These blasted smartphones make posting difficult so bear with me...

To disect the jist of your post ill try and shorten your points.

Your point about water in the future is a non starter, you underestimate the human capacity to innovate, quite possibly desalinization and pipeline networks are the future. As for infertile land, that's where our friend fertilizer comes in. There are gps guided autopilot machinery and remote controlled machinery components which were unheard of 15 years ago, technology has a knack for solving problems.

Volatile weather has been around since the advent of agriculture and will be around for a long time. That's why we have crop insurance. In spite of volatile weather, there is still some production and prices will rise to ration demand.

Ethanol is as much a waste of oil resources as growing corn and giving it away to poor people and put them out of business. Cnn.com has an oil dependancy article and suggests that forein oil imports will drop in the future due in large part to ethanol production. The only fallacy is that ethanol production will increase oil use when in fact oil use is projected to decrease.

As for the african farmers being put out of business by large corporations, who do you think works for those companies? Could they be africans perhaps? And why would those companies take a bath shipping products out of africa due to freight charges when there are numerous buyers in african govts? No, when you have subsidized food from idiot europeans that is sold for less than it costs to produce in africa, you got an unsustainable situation - a broke europe and a 3rd world africa. Foreign govts from the middle east are investing to plow up the serrenghetti which will mean employment, stability, and a better economy.

[WIP]

These blasted smartphones make posting difficult so bear with me...

To disect the jist of your post ill try and shorten your points.

Your point about water in the future is a non starter, you underestimate the human capacity to innovate, quite possibly desalinization and pipeline networks are the future.

Yeah, there's always water in the oceans! But, have you considered the amount of energy that is needed to desalinate sea water? Aside from a few oil-rich desert emirates, large scale desalinization is too expensive to be feasible.

As for infertile land, that's where our friend fertilizer comes in. There are gps guided autopilot machinery and remote controlled machinery components which were unheard of 15 years ago, technology has a knack for solving problems.

We've pretty much reached the limits of what we can produce with oil-based fertilizers. There are no equivalent technological fixes for agriculture similar to the invention of gadgets described here. And, the oil is running out...which is why there is no slack in the world supply of oil -- every little hiccup, like the troubles in Libya, causes a huge increase in prices and starts a new run of hoarding supplies. Also, fertilizers don't replenish trace minerals and nutrients that we need from our food. Non-organic, factory-farmed produce is becoming increasingly devoid of essential nutrients as the soil becomes depleted.

Volatile weather has been around since the advent of agriculture and will be around for a long time. That's why we have crop insurance. In spite of volatile weather, there is still some production and prices will rise to ration demand.

Take a look at what has happened to world prices of wheat, soybeans, rice over the last year. It was skyrocketing grain prices that acted as the catalyst for the revolts in Arab countries, starting with Tunisia. Global warming is making the weather more volatile in recent years; and it's happening at a time when declining food production and increasing world population is leaving no slack in the global food production system.

Ethanol is as much a waste of oil resources as growing corn and giving it away to poor people and put them out of business. Cnn.com has an oil dependancy article and suggests that forein oil imports will drop in the future due in large part to ethanol production. The only fallacy is that ethanol production will increase oil use when in fact oil use is projected to decrease.

Let's start with the math. Corn doesn't grow like a weed. Modern corn farming involves heavy inputs of nitrogen fertilizer (made with natural gas), applications of herbicides and other chemicals (made mostly from oil), heavy machinery (which runs on diesel) and transportation (diesel again). Converting the corn into fuel requires still more energy. The ratio of how much energy is used to make ethanol versus how much it delivers is known as the energy balance, and calculating it is surprisingly complex.

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory states that, "Today, 1 Btu of fossil energy consumed in producing and delivering corn ethanol results in 1.3 Btu of usable energy in your fuel tank." Even that modest payback may be overstated. Skeptics cite the research of Cornell University professor David Pimentel, who estimates that it takes approximately 1.3 gal. of oil to produce a single gallon of ethanol.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/biofuels/4237539

As for the african farmers being put out of business by large corporations, who do you think works for those companies? Could they be africans perhaps? And why would those companies take a bath shipping products out of africa due to freight charges when there are numerous buyers in african govts? No, when you have subsidized food from idiot europeans that is sold for less than it costs to produce in africa, you got an unsustainable situation - a broke europe and a 3rd world africa. Foreign govts from the middle east are investing to plow up the serrenghetti which will mean employment, stability, and a better economy.

Every country should be doing like Europe has tried to do, by supporting their own agriculture. Globalization of food production has created this system of giant monocultures that need heavy amounts of fertilizers and pesticides, along with the energy wasted shipping food products around the world.

Another issue to consider, since you seem to be advocating plowing the entire amount of arable land on the planet, is that we are heading into a major extinction cycle, equivalent to the five great extinctions of the past which wiped out on average 75% of the animal species living on Earth at the time. Plowing up the Serengeti would be just one more insane thing to do, like the destruction of the rainforests in Borneo and the Amazon. We don't know how much biodiversity can be lost before the human species that now consumes most of the world's resources becomes another casualty of the Sixth Extinction....but unfortunately, the next generations are going to find out!

[Michael Hardner]

Every country should be doing like Europe has tried to do, by supporting their own agriculture. Globalization of food production has created this system of giant monocultures that need heavy amounts of fertilizers and pesticides, along with the energy wasted shipping food products around the world.

I read an article in NOW Toronto that talked about how the energy advantages from local food compared to Canada are often overgrown. Globalization allows countries to specialize in what they're better suited for.

I'll see if I can find it.

[Michael Hardner]

NOW Toronto

A holistic odometer of pollutants and greenhouse gases would factor in not only the distance from producer to retailer, but also the miles from the fertilizer and pesticide factory to the farm, from the package factory to the food processor, and the miles travelled by empty trucks on their return trips after making these deliveries of fertilizer, pesticides, packaging and produce.

Add to this the miles travelled by the kitchen scraps to the landfill or green box composter, from the package recycling box to the recycling factory (often in Asia), and – usually the biggest energy load of all – the miles travelled by electricity to keep perishable food from spoiling in large freezers and refrigerators, many of them in supermarkets with doors open to warm air.

The reality is, the experts have different ways of calculating all this. It’s an inexact and oft-changing science. But the consensus seems to be that the distance travelled from farm to fork accounts for only 10 to 15 per cent of the total energy consumed in a complete food life cycle

Roberts explains that local food is important for food security and farm jobs.

As a Globalist (pro-UN New World Order feed-the-children type) I feel that 'food security' is a false fear and that the world works better when we're interdependent.

As for farm jobs, we make choices as which jobs we're going to protect and which we won't. It's up to us to make sure that those in transition have options. Farming is already in decline as a career choice for many Canadians.

There’s one issue people don’t often put on the sustainability scale, though it should be. That’s the well-being of farmers in the poorer countries of the global South, even if shopping with this in mind might sometimes feel like an ethical close call.

The world’s more than 50 million producers of coffee, cacao and tea – good for carbon content of the soil and for the health of consumers when sound practices are followed – depend on trade, since these crops thrive mainly in mountainous areas ill suited to many other kinds of cash crops.

[Shady]

As has already been stated, the biggest driver up of food prices is the insistence of environmentalists to use grain and corn for ethanol production. Instead of feeding people, where it belongs. Many of the people in this forum have only their selves to blame, and others like them.

Take a good long look in the mirror. It's just another example of the unintended consequences of "good intentions." Even Al Gore admits that pushing ethanol was a mistake.

[Oleg Bach]

I personally wathched developement destroy the most fertile farm land in the world. When I could get a good carrot from twenty miles north of Toronto - but can't now and get a damned plum flown up from Chile...something is amiss. Developers who put in the big pipe around Toronto destroyed the best fresh water supply in the world - and as I said the best food generator on the planet..but these developers were habitualists...Once they had a billion dollars they wanted TWO billion...once there were no more customers to to by their cheeze ball subdivision homes - they lobbied Ottawa for more immigration so they could destroy more farmland and sell more housing.....It was a sever mistake...Now we are dependent on others to eat...and the OTHERS are getting wise that we are no longer vibale...so here comes the gouging..and more to come.

Farmland should have never been destroyed so a few classless Italian developers could own a Van Gough painting ...then lust for a second..This shows that power does corrupt totally - and now we pay...I hope we make it...........Time for a kitchen garden and maybe a chicken or two IF you can find a bit of dirt....but now 5000 year old top soil has been scrapped away........Good luck!

[blueblood]

NOW Toronto

Roberts explains that local food is important for food security and farm jobs.

As a Globalist (pro-UN New World Order feed-the-children type) I feel that 'food security' is a false fear and that the world works better when we're interdependent.

As for farm jobs, we make choices as which jobs we're going to protect and which we won't. It's up to us to make sure that those in transition have options. Farming is already in decline as a career choice for many Canadians.

Exactly, the business of wasting tax dollars to produce food at lower than cost of production has been a serious problem. It has put many farmers out of business because they can't compete with countries dumping excess production. The world is a better place with the despots starting to disappear due to higher commodity prices.

Its a shame that there is an arrogance regarding the ag sector as a profession. The employment rates of university grads specializing in ag is close to 100 percent. The western producer has 3 pages in the classified section looking for jobs with a variety of education and skill sets. Young people with university ag degrees are having a good laugh at those with liberal arts degrees who would poo-poo them because they were hicks.

High prices cure high prices. There is an enormous amount of money being poured into the ag sector through investors. My guess is twenty years down the road look at some skyscrapers being retrofitted to house agricultural production, the money and returns are now here to do that.

As for ethanol, its simply this - the usa cannot afford to pay massive subsidies to farmers to produce cheap corn and at the same time import vast amounts of oil. Oil imports are projected to be down from above 60 percent of oil usage down to 45 percent. Not only that, the usa as the worlds largest ag exporter gets a much added boost to its battered economy through higher priced exports.

The european model for agriculture is an epic failure. Africa is a basketcase and europe is literally broker than the usa. When prices of energy and ag get high enough that results in investments for improvement, desalinization plants in the usa are most likely on the way. The rate of tech advancement in the ag sector these days rivals advances in computers. The world has become richer and more and more people can afford to buy things, the heyday of north america's high living standards with cheap inputs are over. For those opposed to the direection of modern ag policy, ask yourselves is what you want worth giving up your standard of living? We in the west should learn to accept high commodity prices and learn how we can benefit from them.

Edited March 5, 2011 by blueblood

[WIP]

Exactly, the business of wasting tax dollars to produce food at lower than cost of production has been a serious problem. It has put many farmers out of business because they can't compete with countries dumping excess production. The world is a better place with the despots starting to disappear due to higher commodity prices.

The steady rise in oil prices is going to make transportation alot more expensive in the coming years, so globalization, as dreamed by multinational corporations is going to start falling apart anyway. Our economies are going to return to localization out of necessity, and only products of high value will be worth transporting over large distances. Former CIBC economist Jeff Rubin outlined the problems that high oil prices are already presenting for Chinese exports of steel and farm produce to U.S. markets here:

So how do we adapt? How do we grow in an economy of triple digit oil prices? We change the nature of our economy. In a world of triple-digit oil prices, distance costs money. The global economy, where we produce one thing at one end of the world, to be sold at the other end of the world, doesn't make any economic sense, because in too many cases, what will be penny-wise, will soon become pound-foolish. The wage "arb", what we save on wages, we will more than squander on bunker fuel.

Take the steel industry, for example. Just before the recent recession, some very curious things were happening in the US market. When oil prices got to be over $100 barrel, all of the sudden, Chinese steel exports to the US fell at double-digit rates. And all of the sudden, US steel production was up. And all of the sudden, US Steel Corp., which was one of the biggest dogs in the market, all of the sudden its share price doubled.

What was going on? I'll tell you what was going on.

For the first time in 20 years, it was cheaper to make steel in the United States than to import it from China.

Why? Consider what China has to do to send you steel. First, it has to ship iron ore from Brazil, across the Pacific Ocean, turn it into steel, which is itself a very energy-intensive process, then ship it back, across the Pacific Ocean, to you. At $20 barrel, that works. At $100 barrel, that doesn't work. It added on $60 to $70 dollars, to the cost of a ton of hot-rolled steel. How much labor time do you think there is in making steel these days? One and a half to two hours.

The transit costs all of a sudden exceeded the labor costs.

Who would dream that triple digit oil prices would breathe new life into our hollowed-out Rust Belt? But in a world where distance costs money, that is exactly what is going to happen.

Take food. Last year, China exported $6 billion of food to America, everything from apples to frozen chicken wings, bringing a whole new meaning to having your Chinese food delivered. Steel doesn't have to be refrigerated. Hopefully, frozen chicken wings do. What do you think powers that refrigeration unit? Bunker fuel! The same thing that is powering the boat.

The world of triple digit oil prices--it won't matter that farm labor is cheaper in China than in the United States, because the cost of bringing those frozen chicken wings to us will be too expensive.

High prices cure high prices.

As noted above, that simpleminded supply and demand curve doesn't work when it comes to scarce commodities. By this logic, oil should be back down to $60 a barrel...but it's not, and it's not going to go back down to any significant degree except for reductions caused by economic recessions. In the 70's, the high oil prices of the OPEC Embargo led to a flurry of new oil developments in non-OPEC nations. But, that can't happen this time, because the only oil available is under several miles of ocean floor, and expensive to extract, or the crap they call oil...like tar sands and shale oils, that a desperate, oil-dependent world economy is trying to make use of. So don't expect your supply and demand curve to work any more for oil and commodity prices. Now high prices just lead to more high prices.

[GostHacked]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/03/04/f-canadian-food-prices.html

With the United Nations reporting record increases in global food prices in February, many Canadians are wondering whether these price hikes will affect them at the grocery store checkout.

George Weston Ltd., one of the country's largest bakeries, announced a planned five per cent increase in prices set to take effect April 1. It cited rising global prices of wheat, oil and sugar as the justification for the hikes.

This is a warning to those who don't think a food crisis could hit north america.

[blueblood]

The steady rise in oil prices is going to make transportation alot more expensive in the coming years, so globalization, as dreamed by multinational corporations is going to start falling apart anyway. Our economies are going to return to localization out of necessity, and only products of high value will be worth transporting over large distances. Former CIBC economist Jeff Rubin outlined the problems that high oil prices are already presenting for Chinese exports of steel and farm produce to U.S. markets here:

So how do we adapt? How do we grow in an economy of triple digit oil prices? We change the nature of our economy. In a world of triple-digit oil prices, distance costs money. The global economy, where we produce one thing at one end of the world, to be sold at the other end of the world, doesn't make any economic sense, because in too many cases, what will be penny-wise, will soon become pound-foolish. The wage "arb", what we save on wages, we will more than squander on bunker fuel.

Take the steel industry, for example. Just before the recent recession, some very curious things were happening in the US market. When oil prices got to be over $100 barrel, all of the sudden, Chinese steel exports to the US fell at double-digit rates. And all of the sudden, US steel production was up. And all of the sudden, US Steel Corp., which was one of the biggest dogs in the market, all of the sudden its share price doubled.

What was going on? I'll tell you what was going on.

For the first time in 20 years, it was cheaper to make steel in the United States than to import it from China.

Why? Consider what China has to do to send you steel. First, it has to ship iron ore from Brazil, across the Pacific Ocean, turn it into steel, which is itself a very energy-intensive process, then ship it back, across the Pacific Ocean, to you. At $20 barrel, that works. At $100 barrel, that doesn't work. It added on $60 to $70 dollars, to the cost of a ton of hot-rolled steel. How much labor time do you think there is in making steel these days? One and a half to two hours.

The transit costs all of a sudden exceeded the labor costs.

Who would dream that triple digit oil prices would breathe new life into our hollowed-out Rust Belt? But in a world where distance costs money, that is exactly what is going to happen.

Take food. Last year, China exported $6 billion of food to America, everything from apples to frozen chicken wings, bringing a whole new meaning to having your Chinese food delivered. Steel doesn't have to be refrigerated. Hopefully, frozen chicken wings do. What do you think powers that refrigeration unit? Bunker fuel! The same thing that is powering the boat.

The world of triple digit oil prices--it won't matter that farm labor is cheaper in China than in the United States, because the cost of bringing those frozen chicken wings to us will be too expensive.

As noted above, that simpleminded supply and demand curve doesn't work when it comes to scarce commodities. By this logic, oil should be back down to $60 a barrel...but it's not, and it's not going to go back down to any significant degree except for reductions caused by economic recessions. In the 70's, the high oil prices of the OPEC Embargo led to a flurry of new oil developments in non-OPEC nations. But, that can't happen this time, because the only oil available is under several miles of ocean floor, and expensive to extract, or the crap they call oil...like tar sands and shale oils, that a desperate, oil-dependent world economy is trying to make use of. So don't expect your supply and demand curve to work any more for oil and commodity prices. Now high prices just lead to more high prices.

But it does apply to commodities. You seem to consistently discount the aspect of human innovation. Triple digit oil has opened up the oil sands, rapidly increased biofuel use,and the dvelopment of shale gas which has tanked natural gas prices. The reason prices are still rising is because of vorocious demand from china india et al. Had prices stayed low, production would not be able to keep up because of the lack of capital for investment. With high oil prices, the usa has implemented a policy which will put a lid on oil imports. Had china and india not existed, that would cause a price crash.

As for economies becoming more localized, by your logic that should happen with grain production because the cost to acquire said grain would be too expensive to import when it could be grown locally. When the price goes up, people find ways to get production where there was none before. Irrigation is a manmade phenomenon. The question is what's next? There is a movement in cities to start food production in high rise buildings. If the price is right innovation takes place. Your last synopsis proves that high prices cure high prices with steel production taking place in the usa when before it was taking place in china at the expense of the usa.

[WIP]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/03/04/f-canadian-food-prices.html

This is a warning to those who don't think a food crisis could hit north america.

Higher food prices will hit us in the pocketbook! The difference between us and the approx 2 billion who live on less than 2 dollars a day, is that higher prices mean starvation or a desperate struggle to get enough food somewhere.

[GostHacked]

Higher food prices will hit us in the pocketbook! The difference between us and the approx 2 billion who live on less than 2 dollars a day, is that higher prices mean starvation or a desperate struggle to get enough food somewhere.

It will hit us harder than most think. Most of us are living on some credit or loans from the banks that our taxpayer money helped to bail out. And we got rewarded by higher fees, less service and banks still went under.

For many living already in poverty in North America, this is already a crisis for them.

[WIP]

But it does apply to commodities. You seem to consistently discount the aspect of human innovation. Triple digit oil has opened up the oil sands, rapidly increased biofuel use,and the dvelopment of shale gas which has tanked natural gas prices.

Here's an example of why I can't take those with faith in future technology seriously when it comes to solving big problems that are encroaching on us today: take a look at this little blurb story I happened upon yesterday:

India has more mobile phones than toilets: UN report Far more people in India have access to a mobile phone than to a toilet, according to a UN study on sanitation.

Now, what should that tell us about blind faith that human progress will fix any and all of our problems? When I was 8 years old, we were supposed to have flying cars by now...just like on the Jetsons! But possibility does not tell us much about feasibility. Most of the big innovations have been in information technology, rather than stuff that's mechanical like robots and new, high yield energy sources. The Star Ship Enterprize's matter/antimatter propulsion system is theoretically possible too; but making it a practical possibility will likely never happen in a million years.

And, it needs to be added that what you are calling "new" here - tar sands - is not new! The Alberta Tar Sands were discovered before they were even aware of oil under the surface. What has changed is that tar sands that were previously considered only suitable for paving roads, have now become an essential fallback alternative for an oil industry that is desperate to keep their highly profitable energy monopoly alive. The tar sands are still badly degrade petrochemical deposits that require vast amounts of energy and clean water to turn into even low grade oil...and that is even at such a highly acidic level that Americans are balking at allowing a pipeline intended for transporting tar sands oil through their states. This crap is hardly innovation! Rather, it's a sign that our civilization is in an increasingly desperate predicament, as we produce more CO2 and pollute land and groundwater to get at what oil is still available. Smart innovation would be government with guts enough to push back against the petrochemical industry and hit them with the taxes that they have been deferring, and shift the remaining tax burden onto these sources of pollution that are going to kill us in the long run.

The reason prices are still rising is because of vorocious demand from china india et al. Had prices stayed low, production would not be able to keep up because of the lack of capital for investment. With high oil prices, the usa has implemented a policy which will put a lid on oil imports. Had china and india not existed, that would cause a price crash.

That is a separate problem, but one that plays a huge role in the oil debate: demand is increasing at a time when supplies are running out; and demand from newly industrialized countries like China and India will keep oil prices high in spite of a weakening demand in the U.S., Europe and other western oil-dependent countries that are pushed back into recession by high oil prices.

In a sense, the rise of China and India's carbon footprints on Planet Earth is a testament to the failure of Neoliberal economic theory. They are just following the directions that our pro-globalization economists advised them to go in back in the 70's and 80's, and now we have a whole host of problems because they have been successful at it!

As for economies becoming more localized, by your logic that should happen with grain production because the cost to acquire said grain would be too expensive to import when it could be grown locally. When the price goes up, people find ways to get production where there was none before. Irrigation is a manmade phenomenon. The question is what's next? There is a movement in cities to start food production in high rise buildings. If the price is right innovation takes place. Your last synopsis proves that high prices cure high prices with steel production taking place in the usa when before it was taking place in china at the expense of the usa.

Relocalization is going to happen whether the Neocons and the Neoliberal globalists like it or not! Their strategy is dependent on dirt cheap energy sources, and now that they are running out, our economies will become more local to be more energy efficient. This would be a complete good news story if it wasn't for the fact that the world oil industry still has the clout to push their increasingly dirty products in the market; so even though we are going to use less energy, we won't be saving as much on carbon emissions as we should.

[WIP]

It will hit us harder than most think. Most of us are living on some credit or loans from the banks that our taxpayer money helped to bail out. And we got rewarded by higher fees, less service and banks still went under.

For many living already in poverty in North America, this is already a crisis for them.

I wasn't discounting that it will be a crisis for poor people here; I guess alot depends on how our governments and society as a whole respond to the growing crisis of people falling between the cracks. I heard an interview with Chris Hedges a little while back, about a recent book he has written; Hedges says that he starts his book on growing income gaps and poverty in the U.S. with an examination of the city of Camden New Jersey. Camden has taken on the appearance of a typical third world city, and what he found most striking is that the poorest neighbourhoods in the city centre, don't even have supermarkets. There are convenience stores that will sell food at higher prices and suburbanites have to pay for groceries, plus a few remaining fast food restaurants, since buying crap at McDonalds or KFC is actually cost-efficient compared to having to buy groceries at a 7-11. But no doubt that also adds to the problem of obesity, diabetes and heart disease that will shorten their lives by an estimated 20 years below the average American life expectancy.

Now that I think about it, maybe the problems will be worse for the poor here than in many of these third world countries, because at least they are more likely to have access to real food in the first place!