Live data from Hacker News

Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

bloombergquint.com

311–320 of 575 posts

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similarly, a sure-fire way to tell someone hasn't lived in a place where you haven't needed a car for every aspect of life is when they criticize anti-car policy without engaging with the deeper reasons behind it :) I think a lot of the pushback against cars have to do with the popularization of human-centric design movements that question the assumption that cars are the pinnacle of transportation that American citi…

> Does it make sense to give every family 0.75 acres of grass, 400 sqft of driveway and a 2 car garage A standard suburban house doesn't sit on 0.75 acres. 0.2 is typical. Though you're probably low on the driveway and garage :). I'd like to see a better argument for why we shouldn't live this way. There are relatively large metros (e.g. Portland) that are predominantly suburban single family homes, and so far it see…

It's not the first-order (i.e. direct) effects of suburban life. In fact, TBH, suburban life can be downright cozy--you got your own decent-sized home, a little patch of grass, maybe a patio, barbecue, deck, maybe even a garden.

That's not the issue. It's the externalities, the downstream effects, of trying to scale up suburban living to huge numbers of people.

At a small scale, a little town of a few hundred or couple thousand people, things remain walkable. There could be a corner grocery store, one gas station, a few stores clustered together in the town square, courthouse, playground, park, school, church....all nice and wonderful.

But all that disappears when you scale suburbs up to tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, then millions of people. The amount of land area gets enormous. Traffic gets enormous. It scales like O(n^2). You get bigger and bigger streets. Bigger and bigger courthouses. Bigger and bigger stores, parking lots, huge shopping malls, and everything keeps getting pushed out by the pressure of it all. It sprawls. The city tries to transform itself into something medium density, as housing prices go up. Office and commercial real estate go up. People want white collar, nice, high-paying jobs. They don't want to be plumbers and electricians and house painters, but executives and managers and have their own businesses.

But suburban sprawl really doesn't support those things very well. People get pushed miles and miles from their jobs. Traffic becomes a nightmare. The prices go off the charts. Tradespeople get pushed out. Culture takes a dive. No more walking or biking when those freeways go up.

Bad examples of sprawl are places like Houston and Los Angeles, even the Bay Area now. I spent 4 years in LA, 5 in the Bay Area. LA is truly mind-blowing. The entire basin is just one big grid of endless permutations of the same concrete jungle, here or there less dense or more dense, a few bright spots, but OMG and endless labyrinth of Stapleses, Starbuckses, McD's and strip malls...

But LA in the 1930s wasn't that. It was just a few towns here and there and some downtown. It was literally a few spots in the desert where people had little nuclei of the small-town living. It just grew without real direction and was completely powered by oil and cars.

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#312
post #107

Food security always makes me think about food waste. When I was 17 years old I went to Sweden as part of a cultural exchange program (I'm from South America). One of the first things that shocked me was the sheer amount of food being wasted for no reason whatsoever. In my country, even though I come from a privileged family, you can't shield yourself away from poverty. Throughout my entire life living with my parent…

Suggested listening about food waste: Econtalk Rachel Laudan on Food Waste Dec 4 2017

Historian Rachel Laudan talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about food waste. Laudan argues that there are tradeoffs in preventing food waste--in reduced time for example, or a reduction in food security, and that these tradeoffs need to be measured carefully when considering policy or giving advice to individuals or organizations. She also discusses the role of food taboos and moralizing about food. Along the way, Laudan defends the virtue of individual choice and freedom in deciding what to eat.

https://www.econtalk.org/rachel-laudan-on-food-waste/

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#313

This is an engineered problem. Fertilizer shipments were interrupted by a labour attack by rail workers unions limiting and delaying shipments during planting season, and who are co-ordinating with other groups to create scarcity as a means to impose stronger government social controls. There is an active disinformation campaign about attacks on food processing plants as a means to sow popular panic as well. Yes, fer…

> We have the most sophisticated data collection and logistics networks in the history of the world, and you think we just accidentally run out of a fundamental economic factor at a key moment in the natural economic cycle, and that risks mass starvation?

Absolutely.

There is no omniscient Illuminati pulling the strings for the entire planet. Just people, corporations, governments, and other corporate entities making decisions based on what they perceive to be their best interest. And all of them are limited and fallible.

Also, wars and pandemics tend to throw a wrench into the quality of planning forecasts.

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I mean, this comment is wrong. The US has some of the world most stringent food standards in the world. FDA, USDA, OSHA etc. wield immense regulatory power. Is it perfect? No. You can't sell meat at scale in the USA without the government signing off. It may not be up to your or mine standard, but it has proven successful at getting _quality_ meat into the mouths of millions. Also, I would bet there aren't any cattle…

> I mean, this comment is wrong. The US has some of the world most stringent food standards in the world. FDA, USDA, OSHA etc. wield immense regulatory power. Is it perfect? No. You can't sell meat at scale in the USA without the government signing off.

> It may not be up to your or mine standard, but it has proven successful at getting _quality_ meat into the mouths of millions.

The GP was maybe a little hyperbolic with "basically no food quality standards", but I don't think "regulatory agencies exist therefore you're wrong" is any better.

A lot of people would likely be alarmed at the lack of standards for cattle feed. You can't feed dead cow brains back to cows, for instance, but you can use lots of other parts of dead cows for feed for other animals, and then those animals (and their manure) can be used in feed for cows. And this distinction is almost entirely self enforced by workers whose jobs are largely only rewarded for throughput.

> Also, I would bet there aren't any cattle housed in a desert in the USA. They'd die immediately due to heat because no way anybody is paying for AC for _cattle_

You'd be wrong. There are a lot of cattle raised in the Chihuahuan Desert and surrounding arid regions, as just one example.

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#315
post #107

Food security always makes me think about food waste. When I was 17 years old I went to Sweden as part of a cultural exchange program (I'm from South America). One of the first things that shocked me was the sheer amount of food being wasted for no reason whatsoever. In my country, even though I come from a privileged family, you can't shield yourself away from poverty. Throughout my entire life living with my parent…

I feel you. In my extended family environment, more food is wasted than necessary. Some relatives have a habit of buying lots of food, more than they need, because they used to be poor and now that they are no longer poor the derive happiness from buying lots of things. The fridge is always full, and they'd still come home with two huge bags packed with food. Food is regularly thrown away because it has rotted in the fridge: food comes in faster than anybody can eat it.

And meals are often bigger than what everyone can finish during that meal. This is especially so when there is visit. In Chinese culture, it's not done to ask visit whether they want more food because they are not supposed to say yes. Asking is thus equivalent to signalling that you don't want to give them more food, i.e. a lack of hospitality. Thus people make more food than necessary.

That in itself isn't a problem because one could save the leftovers in the fridge. But some refuse to eat leftover food because it's not fresh, or they refuse to eat fridge leftovers that are more than 1 day old (you can save most leftovers in the fridge for 3 days if you put them in the fridge immediately after eating). Some even believe that even frozen food is considered unfresh, or has fewer nutrients or something. Others refuse to put anything in the fridge at all because they hate colder-than-room-temperature food (why reheating is a problem eludes me, but they refuse to use reheating as a solution).

All of this pains me. I hate wasting food. The result: I'm often the only one who eats the oldest leftovers, everybody else eats fresh even though there are lots of leftovers.

This doesn't just apply to food, but also energy. Some insist on turning the heat so high that they can wear tshirts indoors during winter, because that's more comfortable than wearing more clothes. Others think I'm being weird for trying so hard to drive electric-only (driving to a public charging station can be a pain compared to parking at the most convenient location).

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 'insanely oversized "trucks"' are necessary for reasons probably not evident if you grew up in a country like NT. I'm from a small town in rural Ontario, Canada where most people drive a 4WD vehicle largely because they'd never get out of their snow-filled driveway in a tiny European style car. Lots of country roads are literally impassable without a large machine; having a truck of some kind is more or less a ne…

What explains the abundance of trucks that I see here in suburbia? Or in places like the Bay Area, where there's never, ever any snow.

Outdoor activities? Labor jobs? I don't think you can judge without knowing their lifestyle.

Even then, who is to say who can get what? I don't see why trucks are one of things people can't buy just because they prefer it.

I'm sure everyone owns something that another person would consider frivolous.

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#317

I feel like the economics will sort this out automatically, at least for the average first-world citizen. Most consume way more than they actually utilize for nutritional value. In America, food is entertainment more than anything else. Once the price of this "entertainment" becomes prohibitive, people will start looking at it with the proper perspective. Simply switching from daily takeout to weekly meal prep can sh…

While people try to figure out how to feed themselves, it'd be a good opportunity to blame you for their problems and get some political capital :)

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't that mean we have extra corn that can be used for human/animal consumption if shit hits the fan? Right now we're growing a bunch of crops that don't feed anyone, but it would not be hard at all to have that be the case. Much easier than the whole process of starting from scratch to get new farmland ready for growing corn.

Ethanol corn can be digested by animals but not humans.

It can be turned into corn meal and can definitely be digested by humans. It just can't be eaten directly off the cob.

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two counter points. - Where I live (The Netherlands) you don’t have to live in a city to have good PT. There are places that you cannot reach by train or bus but they are few. - While sometimes a car is necessary, the cars many people prefer (insanely oversized “trucks”) are hardly ever necessary.

The 'insanely oversized "trucks"' are necessary for reasons probably not evident if you grew up in a country like NT. I'm from a small town in rural Ontario, Canada where most people drive a 4WD vehicle largely because they'd never get out of their snow-filled driveway in a tiny European style car. Lots of country roads are literally impassable without a large machine; having a truck of some kind is more or less a ne…

Yeah but thirty years ago they were all little 2WD Nissans and Toyotas with a few bales of hay in the back. The trucks you're talking about were kind of family tractors and would rarely be used for distance. They all got like 9mpg and just needed to run when something got stuck.

Re: Historic fertilizer crunch threatens food security

#320
Not just fertilizer but politics. In my Canadian province there was a bumper crop of potatoes in 2021 but one field had one section with a potato virus. Shipments stopped and it took months of deals to get back to selling them. Even Puerto Rico with no potato fields and willing to take shipments was not allowed to receive any.

Millions of pounds of perfectly good potatoes had to be destroyed. The US FDA declared the potato virus a threat to human health but no other country made that determination. Politics ruined a lot of food.

Post reply on HN