by Tom Harris, America Outloud:

Are you ready for massive spikes in food prices? Less food on the shelves in your local grocery store? More natural habitat destroyed to make space for organic, low-tech farming?

All that and more is coming our way if the World Economic Forum (WEF)-directed “radical” and “comprehensive” transformation of the global food system continues in the name of stopping climate change, a wholly impossible objective.

TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

The WEF wants to dramatically reduce the use of inorganic fertilizers because, so they say, the nitrous oxide (N₂O) produced when microbes in the soil break down the nitrogen fertilizers that are not absorbed by the plants is a threat to the climate. Furthermore, in “Fertiliser emissions could be cut to ‘one-fifth of current levels’ by 2050,” the WEF wants us to believe we could have massive reductions in N₂O emissions without damaging the food supply. They do admit:

“However, a co-author on the research tells Carbon Brief that this figure would be “very challenging” to achieve, “both economically and in terms of practical implementation.”

In the scientific paper the WEF cites, the authors actually state:

“The single most effective way to reduce fertiliser-associated emissions, however, would be to reduce the amount of fertilisers that we use.”

To help us get some appreciation of the impact on the food supply and the costs involved if major fertilizer reductions were actually carried out, we should look to Canada where energy economist Robert Lyman has written an important report, “Less Food on your Fork – Climate Policy’s Attack on Canadian Farmers.” Much of this, adjusted to account for different production levels, would also apply to the United States.

Mr. Lyman writes:

“To quantify the impact of reducing nitrogen-based fertilizer use on food production and incomes, Fertilizer Canada contracted for a study by MNP LLP. That study modeled the difference between a continuation of “business as usual” and a scenario in which there was a 20% reduction in the use of chemical fertilizers starting in 2023 and continuing to 2030 (in other words, a much less severe case than that implied by the adoption of the federal target.

Canada’s target is to reduce absolute greenhouse gas emissions associated with fertilizers by 30% below 2020 levels by 2030. Specifically addressed are nitrous oxide emissions, especially those linked to synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use.

The following are the main findings:

• By 2030, the reduction in potential yields of the three most important crops would be 23.6 bushels per acre per year for canola, 67.9 bushels per acre per year for corn, and 36.1 bushels per acre per year for spring wheat.


• In 2030, the total value of lost production of these three crops would be $10.4 billion dollars. The cumulative losses over the 2023 to 2030 period would be $40.5 billion.


• These losses would be disproportionately concentrated in Saskatchewan and Alberta.


• Assuming that all of the remaining supply were sold within Canada, by 2030, Canadian exports of canola would decline from more than 10 million tonnes today to 750,000 tonnes.


• Annual spring wheat exports would drop by 4.2 million tonnes by 2030.


• Annual corn production would decline by 6.2 million tonnes by 2030.

“This study examined the impacts of the proposed target on only three crops. If it had been expanded to include other crop types, such as barley, oats and pulse crops, the costs would have been higher.

“The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association has indicated that income losses caused by lower projected yields in corn, canola and wheat would cost farmers $2.95 billion a year in Alberta, $4.61 billion a year in Saskatchewan and $1.58 billion a year in Manitoba by the year 2030.

“Fertilizer Canada commissioned a separate study utilizing a series of scenarios for major Canadian cropping systems across Canada based on broader and more intense application of 4R Nutrient Stewardship best management practices. It found that Canada can reduce production levels with “aggressive but realistic” adoption rates of 4R management practices and substantially reduce nitrogen fertilizer N2O emissions by 1.6 MtCO2e, or 14%. Achieving a 2.5 MtCO2e emission reduction would require zero yield increases plus a cost to farmers of $495 million per year. To reach a 30% emission reduction with some yield increase would require an expenditure of $4.6 billion over a ten-year time frame. Farmers would have to weigh the risk of increased spending with the potential of experiencing below average yields or prices due to weather or markets in some years.

Read More @ AmericaOutloud.news