View Single Post
  #4   Report Post  
Posted to alt.politics.scorched-earth,alt.home.repair,uk.legal,uk.politics.misc,alt.politics.uk
p-0''0-h the cat (coder) p-0''0-h the cat (coder) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 981
Default Why organic is better - by an organic farmer.

On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:14:16 +0100, "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 14:23:30 +0100, Norman Wells
wrote:

On 07/08/2018 13:21, p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:15:51 -0400, "BurfordTJustice"
wrote:

: I read somewhere that Britain would be able to feed itself organically if
: the population was reduced to 1871 levels, about 22 million...

That doesn't seem to add up.

According to Wikipedia Nitrogen fertilizers weren't produced until the
1920's and it was 1931 before it became more economical.

Phosphate fertilizers were produced from 1871 onwards but faced
competition from bone meal and guano to the 1930's.

Large amounts of synthetic pesticides weren't produced until the 1940's.


So, why doesn't it add up?


Thank you for asking.

You'll have to forgive my preliminary findings and if you think my
figures are wildly wrong I'm sure you will correct them but I don't have
time to find authoritative sources right now. Anyway, these are my
results.

This idea that we can feed ourselves organically if we go back to 1871
is kinda funny.

In 1871 we were importing 40% of food because the empire was a cheap
source thereof. So what are we comparing here.

Strangely phosphate based fertilizers became available at that time. Was
that the reason for the date. Who knows. However, Nitrogen was largely
supplied by bone meal and guano up to the 1930's.

Weed killers and pesticides [synthetic] didn't seem to take off till the
1940's.

If you can make any sense out of that please enlighten me because I
cannot see a baseline to work from historically to justify this
statement as anything other than a bit of tittle tattle.

The figure in that statement that Britain had a population of 22 million
is wrong. The census shows 22.7 million but excludes Scotland. So it's
sloppy at the very least. In light of this I doubt a great deal of
rationale was applied.

Perhaps you think different.


Ah! I have found an interesting graph.

https://www.populationmatters.org/do...tain_feeds.pdf

Britain's Population and Food Supply, 1700-2015 graph

Which shows that we haven't fed ourselves since 1800.

More interestingly the change from organic to chemical farming happened
from shortly after the second world war up to the 1975 which fits in
with the UK government pushing changes in agriculture after all the
rationing and all those **** potatoes and tomatoes I had to endure
growing up.

Looks like an interesting document. I will read it later.


Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, ******* hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
punk ass dole whore troll, religious maniac, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian,
the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky