Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 481 posts

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

#211

Post by regnull »

gklitz wrote: post #121
chipdart wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because it’s becoming increasingly obviously dumb to be paying farmers money to pretend like they are farming their land. This is a particularly ignorant and clueless opinion to have. The whole point of Europe's common agricultural policy is to preserve the potential of agricultural production as a strategic asset. Europe's strong economy and huge population density, coupled with cheap access to agricultural produc…

> It would be tempting for farmers to just cash out on real estate if they didn't had an economic upside. That’s tempting even with subsidies. I have friend who own farming land at the outskirts of the city, they rent it to a farmer at almost net zero to themselves after taxes, but would make a small fortune if they could develop the land. The reason farmers don’t sell their land to real estate and 100x the value ins…

> Why is the farming subsidies seen differently

Because you can live without private militias but you can't live without food?

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

#212

Post by photonthug »

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #184
insane_dreamer wrote: post #171

Incidentally this is one of the approaches described in Kim Robinson's The Ministry for the Future, a novel on climate change (more about the political ramifications of it than the ecological impacts). Interesting read.

Before anyone jumps into this book I would caution against it. This book had many very cool ideas and moments. The way it played out felt very "real". However, in the end there was very little actual story and was very boring at times. I actively dislike Neal Stephenson but if you want a near-future climate story I would recommend Termination Shock over Ministry For The Future. Just a random internet person's two cen…

Since we’re here.. These are probably everyone’s top 2 eco-punk novels but the rest of an appropriate top 10 list is way more contentious, and imho sources like goodreads or whatever will always have many items that aren’t really even in the genre.

So I’ll offer the “metatropolis” anthology, which as a bonus has an audiobook version read by the Star Trek cast. Anyone got anything else?

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

#213

Post by torlok »

CaptainFever wrote: post #67
freetanga wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is just conjecture without proof, followed by a lazy shot at capitalism. https://www.infinitescroll.us/p/ugh-capitalism At the very least, provide some citation that a 20 cent increase in production price would cause a 2 euro increase in consumer price, as you claimed.

It's an obvious hyperbole, don't get your khakis in a bunch. You have to have spent the pandemic under a rock if you didn't notice corporations significantly boosting their margins under the excuse of rising costs, especially in the food industry.

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

#214

Post by mp05 »

mmooss wrote: post #200
manvillej wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

We can debate the role of subsidies and carbon emissions, but framing agriculture as if it's uniquely nefarious misses the critical point that we all need to eat.

The industry isn't "choosing carbon" but rather it's responding to the immense challenge of feeding billions affordably while dealing with slim margins and unpredictable conditions. Adjustments require viable, scalable alternatives, not just finger-wagging.

I think we focus on supporting innovation rather than vilifying an essential industry.

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

#215

Post by motohagiography »

rob74 wrote: post #209
manvillej wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments pay to keep food at the cheapest point possible to ensure stability. a fed population doesn't kill their governments. Agriculture is not a regular industry; its a national security issue Farming is not a profitable endeavor. There would be a lot less financial advisors in the world otherwise. A carbon tax will either drive up prices or reduce suppliers, increasing prices. Reducing farmland will require mo…

So, what are you proposing? Just do nothing about climate change, as we have done before, and have worse social consequences in the near future rather than now? Denmark is more at risk from rising sea levels than other countries ( https://cphpost.dk/2023-02-17/news/rising-sea-levels-threate... ), so they want to do something about it.

not OP, but how about some technology innovation instead of governance and taxation? the effect of taxing farmers as though they were some kind of vanity industry will be similar to what nationalizing farms has done in prior schemes like this.

it creates a national dependency on imported food from countries that do not bankrupt their farmers, and suddenly (shocked!) the entire Danish food supply crosses the borders to arrive and is then subject to federal management. this latter case is of course the purpose, and climate change is merely a pretext. I hope european farmers are able to organize a revolt.

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

#216

Post by shiroiushi »

lovemenot wrote: post #198
manvillej wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 envir…

>Just in terms of land-use, livestock is several times less efficient than other kinds of agriculture for the same food output.

This assumes that the land is equally usable for both activities. Many times, it isn't: a lot of land that's good enough for grazing cows doesn't have enough water available for growing plants that people want to (or can) eat. People can't eat grass.

This probably isn't an issue in Denmark, but in many other places it is.

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

#217

Post by shiroiushi »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #186
thinkingtoilet wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before anyone jumps into this book I would caution against it. This book had many very cool ideas and moments. The way it played out felt very "real". However, in the end there was very little actual story and was very boring at times. I actively dislike Neal Stephenson but if you want a near-future climate story I would recommend Termination Shock over Ministry For The Future. Just a random internet person's two cen…

I agree it doesn't have much of a story. It reads much more like a non-fictional recounting of events, but provides a lot of food for thought about how things might unfold. Just don't approach it like your typical novel.

Sounds a bit like The Silmarillion by JRR Tolkein. If you finish reading LotR and then try to read this book, you'll be in for a rude awakening.

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

#218

Post by _DeadFred_ »

Retric wrote: post #173
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #157

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.

The demand won't spike, but the need to switch to local production necessitates some way to locally produce.

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

#219

Post by roenxi »

rob74 wrote: post #209
manvillej wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments pay to keep food at the cheapest point possible to ensure stability. a fed population doesn't kill their governments. Agriculture is not a regular industry; its a national security issue Farming is not a profitable endeavor. There would be a lot less financial advisors in the world otherwise. A carbon tax will either drive up prices or reduce suppliers, increasing prices. Reducing farmland will require mo…

So, what are you proposing? Just do nothing about climate change, as we have done before, and have worse social consequences in the near future rather than now? Denmark is more at risk from rising sea levels than other countries ( https://cphpost.dk/2023-02-17/news/rising-sea-levels-threate... ), so they want to do something about it.

How will converting farmland to forests help with climate change? It seems like it would have no particular impact or make the situation worse w.r.t. climate change for Denmark. If it is a good idea I'd imagine it would also be a good idea if the climate was not changing.

Denmark has no ability to impact global CO2 emissions at all. In fact nobody does except ironically the Chinese and their industrial-growth-at-any-cost coal based approach from the 90s and 00s.

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

#220

Post by RayVR »

mmooss wrote: post #200
manvillej wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It’s also important to note that, at least in this specific situation, the effects of those hidden subsidies are extremely regressive.
Post reply on HN