Live data from Hacker News

Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

apnews.com

191–200 of 481 posts

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nitrogen emissions from farming are a big topic in the Netherlands. We have a right wing populist governments that wants to raise maximum speeds back to 130km/h but they can't because of nitrogen emissions that caused the previous government (also right leaning, pro car, etc.) to lower the limits. Intense cattle farming is a big environmental challenge in both countries and it comes at a price. Lots of farting cows i…

[flagged]

Do the math. Then comment.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denmarks agricultural performance is not great at all. it's way too expensive to produce stuff. if it wasn't for EU subsidies the agricultural sector in Denmark would loose over 50% of their profits. To drive the point home the agricultural sector in Denmark only makes up 3.6% of the bnp and 4.3% of exports while taking up 60% of Denmarks total area and employing around 3.9% of the working population. i think Denmark…

3.6% of bnp seems like little but I think agriculture counts for more than, say, management consulting that goes through 5 intermediaries (does it get counted towards the bnp 5x then? I'm not sure). At the end of the day money is only an abstraction while food, you can actually eat it.

yes, but like 50-70% of the crops grown is animal feed. if Denmark really needed efficient food for the population i think the whole thing could be done more efficiently and those 10% won't be missed.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quick search shows that global c02 emissions are about 35 billion tons. So the cow farts are a bit less than 8%. That isn't insignificant.

And how much of a dent would reducing cow consumption by 25% make?

Hmm, lets see: 8% * 25% = 2%

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said that cow emissions weren't significant (well, that it was "absolute lunacy"). Two people have provided rough calculations that show they do have a measurable effect. What's your point?

My point is people should do the math and come to their own reasonable conclusion. Assuming these numbers aren't totally bullshit (see what I did there) this won't move the needle unless we cut out cow consumption 100% and cull all native herd animals. Me? I think we can probably survive some cow farts as our ancestors who hunted buffalo and burnt down entire ecosystems doing so did. We should focus on the real solut…

A 2% reduction is absolutely moving the needle.

There is no silver bullet that's going to be a 25% reduction all on its own. The only way to win is a combination of changes each of which reduce emissions by a few percentage points.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#195
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Denmarks agricultural performance is not great at all. it's way too expensive to produce stuff. if it wasn't for EU subsidies the agricultural sector in Denmark would loose over 50% of their profits. Agriculture in the EU is renowned for not being financially unjustified. For decades it's been a finantial no-brainer to import the bulk of agricultural products from south America and Africa. This is not new or the re…

Resistance to a blockade doesn’t require subsidies for growing flowers etc. Subsidizing exports similarly has very different goals.

The government has all sorts of policy goals. Resilience, employment, etc.

In the US, Nixon era policy and legal thinking drives all things. Price is king, except it isn’t. Our crazy governance model means that corn is better represented than humans, so our food is more expensive, less nutritious, and our supply chains are incredibly fragile.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#196
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it does. The goal is keep the farmland available and productive along with keeping agricultural infrastructure. The USA helped win WW2 because our car factory lines were retooled to make war machines.

Demand for war materials goes up in a war, but the population and thus food demand isn’t going to drastically spike. There’s a reasonable argument for having a food stockpile in case of emergencies, but extra farmland is harder to justify.

In the case of the US, we turned much of the richest farmland into subdivisions. The breadbasket of the nation is powered by an aquifer that will be depleted in my kids lifetime. Most of our green goods come from the deserts of California and Arizona, and won’t exist if the Colorado River water system breaks down.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#197
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denmarks agricultural performance is not great at all. it's way too expensive to produce stuff. if it wasn't for EU subsidies the agricultural sector in Denmark would loose over 50% of their profits. To drive the point home the agricultural sector in Denmark only makes up 3.6% of the bnp and 4.3% of exports while taking up 60% of Denmarks total area and employing around 3.9% of the working population. i think Denmark…

What's your source for 4.3% of exports? This source says 22%. https://agricultureandfood.dk/media/m1qfuuju/lf-facts-and-fi...

i admit that i haven't read the sources listed here

https://www.dyrenesbeskyttelse.dk/artikler/landbrugets-bundl...

and also that this source is probably biased toward minimizing the numbers while your source might be pulling in the other direction. the true number is probably somewhere in between and depends on what you include. like, could the raw products be imported instead and the refined in Denmark without those 22% taking a hit?

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#198

I've seen a bit of confusion regarding this. First, it's 10% of Denmark's total land area, which is roughly equivalent to 15% of farmland area. Second, the conversion of farmland area into nature and forests is mainly for improving water quality, as excess nitrogen from agriculture has essentially killed the rivers and coastal waters through oxygen depletion from algae. Regarding global warming and CO2, the area conv…

I am very conflicted on a carbon tax for the agriculture industry. It is going to sidle a cost to an industry of razor thin margins. The transition from regenerative agriculture is expensive & rising food costs has a destabilizing effect. There need to be changes, but I am not convinced that this will have the desired effects. Its quite possible this leads to a net conversion of farmland to residential or commercial…

It should be fine, I believe. Just in terms of land-use, livestock is several times less efficient than other kinds of agriculture for the same food output. So a shift from meat to other food crops would be a net win, even as it frees up land for other purposes.

Many farmers will receive a one-time payment on land sales and some will use this windfall to subsidise their transition from growing livestock to more environmentally-friendly food.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#199

I've seen a bit of confusion regarding this. First, it's 10% of Denmark's total land area, which is roughly equivalent to 15% of farmland area. Second, the conversion of farmland area into nature and forests is mainly for improving water quality, as excess nitrogen from agriculture has essentially killed the rivers and coastal waters through oxygen depletion from algae. Regarding global warming and CO2, the area conv…

I am very conflicted on a carbon tax for the agriculture industry. It is going to sidle a cost to an industry of razor thin margins. The transition from regenerative agriculture is expensive & rising food costs has a destabilizing effect. There need to be changes, but I am not convinced that this will have the desired effects. Its quite possible this leads to a net conversion of farmland to residential or commercial…

I think we should start doing more taxes combined with subsidies. Give everyone a $1/t carbon tax. Give everyone a ~$1/t farming subsidy based on current carbon production. Nobody loses, but everyone is incentivized to decrease carbon production and the faster ones profit more. Phase out the subsidy over X years if you like.

Otherwise, you’re right. We’re upsetting the balance of a very complex, very important system and causing a regressive tax in the form of price increases.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#200

I've seen a bit of confusion regarding this. First, it's 10% of Denmark's total land area, which is roughly equivalent to 15% of farmland area. Second, the conversion of farmland area into nature and forests is mainly for improving water quality, as excess nitrogen from agriculture has essentially killed the rivers and coastal waters through oxygen depletion from algae. Regarding global warming and CO2, the area conv…

I am very conflicted on a carbon tax for the agriculture industry. It is going to sidle a cost to an industry of razor thin margins. The transition from regenerative agriculture is expensive & rising food costs has a destabilizing effect. There need to be changes, but I am not convinced that this will have the desired effects. Its quite possible this leads to a net conversion of farmland to residential or commercial…

Currently the public subsidizes the agriculture industry by paying for the consequences of the industry's carbon emissions. Also, that subsidy distorts industry choices in favor of carbon.

The industry might be accustomed to profiting from the subsidy, but that doesn't make them entitled to it! And certainly the industry has had plenty of time to anticipate and adjust to the problems of carbon emissions.

Post reply on HN