[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: The Limits To Growth



l.mcfadden@mail.utexas.edu (Loretta McFadden) wrote for all to see:

>Mike wrote:
>
>> >Tremendous increases, although the curve is obviously approaching an
>> >asymptote.  Rice, another staple, has recently seen the introduction of new
>> >high-yield species and is increasing along similar lines.   Dozens of
>> >companies are creating new species of fruits and vegetables; expect another
>> >yield explosion here within the next decade.
>
>OK - I promise to butt out after this - in fact I don't think I'll be able
>to stand reading this outdated debate. Mike, why are you acting as if the
>"Green Revolution" hasn't been debunked years ago? 

Really, who debunked it and when?  If this were the case, would we not
be seeing declining yields/acre?  Do you have evidence of this, or do
you consider your assertion sufficient?  See "world Crop Production",
USDA/FAS, WCP 5-87, May, 1987 or "World Agricultural Production",
WAP-1-91, Jan 1991.

>Why are you ignoring the real reason farmland is declining in this country
>(ie: being covered in suburpia) - because so much of it has lost it's
>value as farmland, thanks to the ignorant short-term strip-mining approach
>of petro-chemical farming? 

USDA has been studying soil erosion for years, and would like nothing
more than to prove it to be a large problem, and hence generator of
programs for them to administer.  Their survey found the average loss
to be 7 tons a year per acre of farmland, while natural regeneration
runs at 5 tons a year/acre.  Call it a net loss of 2 tons per acre.
Two tons an acre is 1/65 of an inch.  Thus, in 65 years, the average
farmland will lose 1 inch of topsoil.  Assuming it has been farmed the
entire 65 years.  Some fallow years will make up for this loss.

>Hey - even the popular press (GASP) has heard
>the news. Much of the best farmland in this country eroded into the ocean
>years ago. Biggest question of all - why are you on this list? Is it just
>to bait people who acknowledge these facts? 

I don't know about Mike, but I understand your arguments.  You make
assertions, present no references, state that even the press agrees
with you (like that's a good reference!), then question the motive of
the character of the previous poster.  Too typically an example of
modern postings on the net.

>Betsy

Is your name Loretta or Betsy?  Or both?

Regards, Harold
----
"Monster one minute.  Food the next."
	Kiakshuk, Inuit Hunter



Follow-Ups: References: