Going green in The Netherlands and Sri Lanka
It’s hard to say whether a governmental policy of required Green farming – currently causing problems in The Netherlands and even bigger ones in Sri Lanka – is the result of wishful thinking on the part of the government or whether it’s a desire for willful destruction.
One-third of Sri Lanka’s farm lands were dormant in 2021 due to the fertilizer ban. Over 90% of Sri Lanka’s farmers had used chemical fertilizers before they were banned. After they were banned, an astonishing 85% experienced crop losses. The numbers are shocking. After the fertilizer ban, rice production fell 20% and prices skyrocketed 50 percent in just six months. Sri Lanka had to import $450 million worth of rice despite having been self-sufficient in the grain just months earlier. The price of carrots and tomatoes rose five-fold. While there are 2 million farmers in Sri Lanka, 70% of the nation’s 22 million people are directly or indirectly dependent on farming.
Things were worse for smaller farmers. In the Rajanganaya region, where the majority farmers operate just a hectare (2.5 acres), families reported 50% to 60% reductions in crop harvest. “Before the ban, this was one of the biggest markets in the country, with tonnes and tonnes of rice and vegetables,” said one farmer earlier this year. “But after the ban, it became almost zero. If you talk to the rice mills, they don’t have any stock because people’s harvest dropped so much. The income of this whole community has dropped to an extremely low level.”
But the damage to tea was the key to Sri Lanka’s financial failure. Tea production had generated $1.3 billion in exports annually. Tea exports paid for 71% of the nation’s food imports before 2021. Then, tea production and exports crashed 18% between November 2021 and February 2022, reaching their lowest level in 23 years. The government’s devastating ban on fertilizer thus destroyed the ability of Sri Lanka to pay for food, fuel, and service its debt.
Sri Lanka had other problems, too. But the Green anti-chemical-fertilizer laws seem to have been key in the destruction there.
The free part of the article ends with the questions: “What, exactly, were Rajapaksa and other Sri Lankan leaders thinking? Why did they engage in such a radical experiment?”
If any of you are able to access it, I’d be curious what the author’s answer is. But this article mentions some of the other problems and then characterizes the fertilizer decision as “ill-conceived” and “overnight.” So this was an impulsive move?
Gotabaya Rajapaksa had outlined his vision for an organic transition in his presidential manifesto. He was eager to rein in the use of chemicals that had been linked to kidney disease in Sri Lanka’s central and northern provinces, where they had washed into the water supply. Quixotically, this would have made him a global leader in going organic.
However, in a nation where more than 30 per cent of people are employed in the agricultural ukorale, a single 42-year-old farmer near Ballapana, a village 90 minutes’ drive north-east of Colombo, was floored when the ban was imposed in April last year. As urea, a key top dressing for rice paddy fields, and other fertilisers disappeared from shelves in less than a month, the remainder hoarded by those with the deepest pockets, Atukorale was forced to abandon a rice paddy she had leased after two successful harvests.
“The government told us to make our own organic fertiliser, from using dung from goats, from chicken and from cows and leaves from discarded material,” she says. “I didn’t have the means to make enough for two acres of paddy, so I left it.”
Manufacturers of organic fertilisers didn’t have the capacity to cover for chemical products coming off the market, Gotabaya Rajapaksa has since conceded, and what was provided by the government to farmers also proved nowhere near as effective. Atukorale has maintained another rice paddy in the area, afraid of losing the lease when it expires if she doesn’t, but after previously extracting 1000 kilograms of rice from it during a single harvest, it has since produced only 400 kilograms.
There’s much more at the link. The fertilizer decision was not the only factor in Sri Lanka’s fall, but it was a huge one and a self-inflicted one, top-down. The most benign explanation is that the leaders of the country are operating under a delusion or a set of delusions about how a change of such magnitude could ever be accomplished, and what its economic and physical results would be. And if so, they are hardly alone.
You can come up with the less benign explanations yourself.
And then there are the Dutch farmers. What do Dutch farmers have to do with Sri Lankan farmers? This:
Roughly 40,000 protesters gathered in central Netherlands to protest plans to curb the emissions of nitrogen and ammonia last month. Weeks later, the protests have continued across the country with no sign of abating…
The Dutch government is aiming to cut nitrogen and ammonia emissions by 50% by 2030 in a bid to improve air, land and water quality. The plans include cutting back on fertilizer used on farms and ratcheting back the number of livestock by an estimated 30%.
The country is one of the largest agricultural producers in the world, exporting roughly $97 billion in 2020 worth of fruit, flowers, vegetables, dairy products and meat…
Farmers say they are being unfairly targeted by the rules while other industries, such as aviation, construction and transportation, are also contributing to emissions and face fewer rules. Farmers also argued that they have not been provided a clear picture of their futures in light of the reforms.
Again we have the same questions: are the people who run the government merely abysmally stupid and in the grip of fantasy? Or are they actively destructive as part of The Great Reset? I guess it’s not either/or, because the two are not mutually exclusive.
Here’s an article from about a month ago, attempting to explain:
Nitrogen pollution is caused by the burning of fossil fuels, which releases nitrogen oxide, and manure from farm animals (when dung and urine mix), which emits ammonia.
The Dutch use “nitrogen” (stikstof) as an umbrella term in order to add up and compare emissions from industry and farms. Industries cause a small share of ammonia emissions, mostly in waste management, and farms cause a small share of nitrogen oxide emissions, mostly from the heating of greenhouses with natural gas…
Farms cause 85 percent of ammonia emissions and 40 to 45 percent of overall nitrogen emissions.
But they cause 60 percent of nitrogen deposits in conservation areas (to which they are more likely to be in proximity than industry)…
Dutch animal farming is among the most intensive in the world…
…The Netherlands has 162 [conservation areas]. They range from the dunes of Holland to the Veluwe National Park to the Wadden Sea to tiny preserves that dot the countryside in the interior. All are protected by EU law.
Excess nitrogen deposits in those so-called Natura 2000 areas are the proximate cause of the crisis. They cause some plants, like grass, to grow faster, but others to wither and die.
That can wipe out entire ecosystems. When plants die, so do the bugs that feed on them, which in turns kills the birds and ducks that eat the bugs — and a major impetus for the whole Natura 2000 program in the 1990s was to protect European bird species…
That year, the Council of State, the Netherlands’ highest administrative court, ruled that more needed to be done. It took Rutte’s four-party coalition, which includes the traditionally pro-farmer Christian Democrats and the environmentally-friendly D66, almost three years to come up with a solution.
In the meantime, judges struck down construction permits for not only farms but energy companies, housing developments, infrastructure and industry, because building causes nitrogen emissions, and the Netherlands was already in violation of its commitment to protect the Natura 2000 regions…
That plan is for farms to cut nitrogen emissions by 12 to 70 percent, depending on their proximity to conservation areas. In exceptional cases, where farms are situated in Natura 2000 areas, they would have to cut emissions by 90 percent to stay — which is impossible.
Farmers who cannot meet their targets would be given three options:
Downside, or switch from animal farming to crops.
Relocate.
Quit.
There is so much more in the article; I suggest you read the whole thing. The author appears to be mostly in favor of the government restrictions and against the farmers, by the way, but it’s still an interesting look at the positions and arguments on both sides. But I’ll just add this, which indicates the role the EU plays:
Farmers argue the models to calculate pollution are imprecise, the standards for deposits are arbitrary and the whole problem only exists because the Netherlands declared so many areas Natura 2000 preserves…
Perhaps previous governments should have been more conservative about setting aside lands for conservation, but now the Netherlands would need the European Commission’s permission to remove Natura 2000 classifications — and it is in no mood to help out a country that predictably hectors others when they break (debt and deficit) rules.
As I read this, it reminds me a bit of Soviet collectivization efforts. Less obviously brutal, of course, but the product of people operating under a theory that ignores reality. They are either extremely disinterested in the plight of the ordinary human beings living in their countries or actively hostile to them. I’m not sure there’s much of a difference between those two concepts.
I’ve no doubt EUrocrats would love collectivization, but rather than forcing it at the point of a bayonet they’re trying to force it through regulations acting on the market.
Maybe those Dutch farmers can immigrate to the US and become child book reading drag Queens?
Sens. Sanders (D-grifter) and Warren (D-Cherokee Nation) would approve.
when they say the earth has fever, and we’re the disease, what do you think they are talking about,
This is the warning that should not be ignored. Why does Bill Gates own so much farmland in the US ? It’s over 200,000 acres.
A hint. It’s uncertain why Gates has invested in so much farmland or how his tracts are currently being used. Cascade did not immediately respond to a phone message Friday, and the company declined to comment to The Land Report “other than to say that Cascade is very supportive of sustainable farming,” the outlet said.
What the hell is “sustainable farming?” Bill Gates ex-wife has removed her name and money from the Foundation. I guess his Epstein trips were too much for her.
Has Gates ever driven a tractor or unloaded silos filled with grain? I am so sick of these people who want to plan the world from their palaces. VDH has a piece today that calls them the new Antoinettes.
It’s being done in Canada also. Now it’s nitrous oxide emissions that are bad…. https://thecountersignal.com/trudeau-nitrogen-policy-will-decimate-canadian-farming/
willful destruction. Yes, next question.
When these “leaders” go hungry they might learn. But somehow they will always have food. Solent Green coming to a Supermarket near you.
Archive of page removed from WEF site
http://web.archive.org/web/20220710161819/https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/08/this-is-how-we-will-make-sri-lanka-rich-by-2025/
“It’s hard to say whether a governmental policy of required Green farming – currently causing problems in The Netherlands and even bigger ones in Sri Lanka – is the result of wishful thinking on the part of the government or whether it’s a desire for willful destruction.” neo
The governments of The Netherlands and Sri Lanka and the UN are engaged in wishful thinking.
On the other hand, the Global Elite who hold inordinate influence over all Western and many other governments have bought into the climate change enviromentalist agenda.
Which at base, posits that human activity itself is a mortal threat to the planet and thus, to the human race’s very survival. That validates as an existential necessity the willful destruction of the means needed to sustain the earth’s population. Population reduction, as WEF’s Elitist members have repeatedly championed is the only rational explanation for creating the conditions that will result in famine.
“The Dutch government is aiming to cut nitrogen and ammonia emissions by 50% by 2030…”
Clearly the Dutch gov. has embraced the U.N.’s “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”
https://www.un.org/humansecurity/agenda-2030/
Sri Lanka sounds like the anti-Norman Borlaug. “Progressing” its way back to early 20th century of agricultural standards.
______
It’s unfortunate that the Dutch have latched onto the terminology of “nitrogen” pollution because they are mixing and confusing at least a couple of very different things. Tailpipe nitrogen emissions that are usually called NOx emissions here are included in the Dutch issues, if I read Neo’s material correctly, and maybe includes N2O which is the only one properly called “nitrous oxide.”
The NOx is usually NO and NO2 and can create smog. N2O can be part of the normal crop and bacteria growth process although it is accentuated by fertilizers, but it really isn’t a main part of smog creation, I think. N2O or “nitrous” is laughing gas and isn’t really toxic. The NOx’s are relatively reactive and don’t stick around in the atmosphere for that long.
Then there is ammonia which is toxic and is more of an issue when it enters the land and water.
The greenies have a long history of overhyping the NOx problem with a goal taking down the whole internal combustion powered machinery sector. The smog issues in places like Los Angeles were mostly cleaned up with a tailpipe regulation of 1 gm/mile of NOx. Now I think the EPA or California’s CARB requires something like 0.02 to 0.03 gm/mile, which greatly lowers fuel efficiency.
Ammonia, ammonia based fertilizers or other animal waste are the only pollutants that are going to have any effect on the Natura preserves.
The far-left facists will literally kill us if we let them.
https://www.bestfoodfacts.org/organic_feed_the_world/
As to Bill Gates farmland ownership, there are more than 14 million acres of farmland in Washington state. I guess he is entitled to a few of those.
The county I live in here is ranked #1 in the state in terms of crop sales, and 11th in the country, so we certainly rely on farming.
MikeK:
200,000 acres is 312 sq miles. The land area of Nebraska is 77,421 sq miles. Not all of Nebraska is arable, farmed land, but the again neither is King County WA.
I’d heard that Xi is buying US farmland too. Not that we should worry about that ….
NPR runs major stories on the Sri Lanka economic crisis and civil revolt every day, but they never mention what factors CAUSED either. They can’t. NPR is thus worthless as a source of objective information.
Ray Van Dune,
NPR has always been living in ‘an alternate reality’.
It’s often referred to as “National Palestinian Radio” for a good reason.
I’ve figured out both Gates’ and Xi’s purpose in buying up so much productive US farmland!
High yield Bug production. Think of the superlative advantages.
Bugs don’t take up a lot of room so 200,000 acres can yield trillions upon trillions of bugs. Plus, theyre a ‘renewable’ resource!
Once humanity is ‘persuaded’ to replace meat consumption with “much more nutritious” bug consumption, those on the ground floor of supplying the world with bugs at the grocery store will make billions… 😉
I can’t wait for the day when Gates and Xi and Schwab of course sit down to a meal with bugs as the main course. I’m sure they will be eager to set an example for the rest of us… though I do wonder if the bugs served will be dead or the more nutritionally optimal alive… sarc/off
I googled “ukraine climate change” and was surprised at the number of hits. I’m trying to understand why Democrats and the Elites are hanging so tough on Putin and Ukraine.
I think Putin is a Bad Guy and what he is doing in Ukraine is Wrong. However, since when do Democrats and the Davos set care about a poor Eastern European country’s independence? What is their real motivation?
I’m wondering if Putin is getting in the way of the Great Reset by the energy chaos being created by invading Ukraine. Perhaps we are not meant to see, just yet, how not-ready-for-prime-time solar/wind/etc power are.
I think we are approaching the point where people can understand that solar/wind just won’t cut it. We keep using fossil fuels and/or we build a full boat of nukes everywhere.
My conclusion is that at the top levels authorities intend climate change as a club for beating the middle class, especially the US middle class, into submission.
They dont the war is an excuse to ratchet up the transition to green energy which like tony starks arc reactor doesnt exist,
Discussion around the webz.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2022/07/11/the-revolution-wont-be-reported/
https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/07/protesting-dutch-farmers-refuse-to-back-down-despite-police-crackdown/
https://michaelyon.com/media-appearances/war-room-dutch-govt-demonizing-farmers/
Mr. Yon is NOT optimistic.
DisGuested, that was excellent!!
Yep, that’s the blueprint, alright…
(which is precisely why that “mega-successful” sucka’ has to be hidden from sight!!).
…brought to you from all the truth-tellers (and truth-seekers…and truth-shovers-down-yer-throats) at the WTF!!!**.
Delicious….
** Since the WEF is far more of an elitist CULT than an economic institution, think tank, forum (with ONE OPINION! heh…) or otherwise, it’s only fair and proper to refer to it by a far more honest appellation: World Theological Forum.
Huxley,
one crisis good;
two crises better;
dozens, scores, hundreds of crises…FREAKIN’ FAR OUT!!!
(To paraphrase the Big Bad—Schwabian?—Wolf: “The better to DISTRACT, CONFOUND, CONFUSE, EXASPERATE, STARVE and ultimately CONTROL you with, my dear…” (yep, that’s one eloquent wolf!)
Our elites are aiming to make an omelet the size (and extent) of which Guinness has never seen…or dreamed of.
Legal Insurrection is looking at what I’m looking at:
_____________________________________
The Green Agenda, whether called Net-Zero or The Green New Deal or whatever, is about using manufactured panic over Climate Change to enact sweeping changes in society through increasing the cost of fossil-fuels and energy and production dependent on fossil fuels. Like so much of the destructive idiocy sweeping politics, it started at and is driven by the campuses. It puts at risk all of the economic ties that bind us together, and it’s incredibly dangerous to societal stability.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/07/the-green-agenda-will-be-revolutionary-against-the-green-agenda/
As I read this, it reminds me a bit of Soviet collectivization efforts. Less obviously brutal, of course, but the product of people operating under a theory that ignores reality. They are either extremely disinterested in the plight of the ordinary human beings living in their countries or actively hostile to them. I’m not sure there’s much of a difference between those two concepts.
Yes, well, as we all know, we’re all getting in the way of “The future of the Liberal World Order”… right? What better way to “fix” that than to starve a couple billion of us?
They should Pay Special Attention to the last time this crap happened…
Revolutions of 1848: Crash Course European History #26
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXTaP1BD1YY
Hungry people have a significant history of unhappiness with the Ruling Elites.
It is unfortunate that we’ve gotten too civilized to deal with them using guillotines and firing squads and the like.
That improves both the gene pool and the political pool.
Leaves pools of blood, too.
Willful destruction. Hanlon was wrong.
It’s all about population control.
floor wax dessert topping
@ huxley > “Legal Insurrection is looking at what I’m looking at:”
Yeah, me too.
Professor Jacobson:
Get a head start on your prepping with the comments to the post, as several people with expertise have weighed in.
Ideologically, though, this is the winner:
AesopFan:
They think they can control the chaos that will ensue, but that’s just another example of their hubris.
See this.
What a bunch of assholes.