On 07/08/2018 15:50, p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 15:36:59 +0100, Norman Wells
wrote:
On 07/08/2018 15:14, 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.

I still have no idea why you think it doesn't add up.

The back of an envelope calculation shows we could currently support 24
million people if we went totally organic.

You haven't offered any better calculation. What is this back of an
envelope calculation based upon. Does the 24 million include imports?

No, it doesn't. Nor should it if you're considering whether organic
farming can make us self-sufficient in food, which I thought we were.

You aren't making yourself clear. Just like the 1871 figure.

I didn't give that date. Nor is it actually relevant.

The precise date when it was last at that level is not important, and
wasn't something I suggested anyway. However, if you think it's
interesting then, according to the Office for National Statistics UK
Population Estimates 1851 to 2014, it was some time before 1851. By
1871 it had actually risen to 31.5 million.

I don't understand what point you're trying to make about the amount of
food we used to import, or the dates of introduction of fertilisers,
weed killers and pesticides, none of which, I assume, can be used in
organic farming anyway.

Well? Can you clarify this?