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

Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#51

Post by swe »

electricblue wrote: post #14
briantakita wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Compared with the agricultural system's main task – keeping us from starving to death the agricultural system's main task is to make money & control others through the market. if it's main goal was to feed the world, we would have succeeded long ago. just look at all of the food thrown away (more than enough to feed those who don't have food) & subsidies to grow ethanol, instead of food. the best agricultural model…

The problem isn't supply. We have more than enough supply as you said. The problem is transportation. There just isn't a technology that's cheap and light enough to make shipping food to the food poor countries around the world profitable. If there was somebody would be doing it. Instead they rely on charity and subsistence farming

No, what we need is a decentralized food system. You really should be eating food indigenous to the region in which you live.

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#52

Post by swe »

kotach wrote: post #5
moonshinefe wrote: post #3

The cynic in me wonders if we're simply doomed to having these useful species die off at this point. We've killed off a great deal of nature already, and it seems the major voting populations in our democracies are insulated enough in concrete cities and modern conveniences to not really care enough to force politicians to address these issues. And also, there's not much money in it compared to other courses of actio…

There's a lot of money in agriculture. Increased demand of food due to exponential growth of the population. Increased demand for luxurious food like meat due to exponential economic growth of the population. Long term, it is the most economically sustainable business from the perspective of the business owner. Long term, it is the largest polluter of all, and is unsustainable in its core. The reason why pollinating…

> Long term, it is the most economically sustainable business from the perspective of the business owner

That's true, but not for the reasons stated. Once the population bubble bursts, the majority of human beings will become farmers if they want to survive. The negative stigma associated with farming for a living will quickly evaporate.

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#53

Post by swe »

coldcode wrote: post #9

Once the availability of food declines people will decide to do something about it. The only question is is it then too late? Or is it to late for some and not others?

We'll pollinate by hand:

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/5193-De...

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#54

Post by swe »

Joof wrote: post #21
moonshinefe wrote: post #3

The cynic in me wonders if we're simply doomed to having these useful species die off at this point. We've killed off a great deal of nature already, and it seems the major voting populations in our democracies are insulated enough in concrete cities and modern conveniences to not really care enough to force politicians to address these issues. And also, there's not much money in it compared to other courses of actio…

Maybe, but losing pollinators probably means the loss of thousands of plant species. Wealthy countries who have industrial agriculture will be fine (although arguably the world will be poorer for the loss), but poor countries will be 100% fucked if they lose their pollinators.

Losing the pollinators is part of an unravelling ecosystem. If you think you're safe in your bubble, you won't be.

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#55

Post by brightball »

swe wrote: post #49
proksoup wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agriculture's purpose is economic. Eating (and eating tasty food) does have a large demand though. I'm maybe just repeating what the parent comment said, but that seems backwards to me. If we treat agriculture's purpose as economy for economy's sake, which we have been doing, it seems counter-productive to our goals of staying alive sustainably.

This really should be no surprise. Mainstream economics practices that the environment is a subset of the economy and not the other way around. "Sure, I can live without fresh water and clean air, but a market? I need a market." /s

If you lack fresh water and clean air, there would be a market for fresh water and clean air. :-)

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#56

Post by johansch »

maxerickson wrote: post #42
johansch wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's interesting, I didn't know. Honest question though: Is this relevant to my argument?

I think so, the lack of pollinators won't curtail aggressive practices associated with those crops.

Seems like basic economics would still make things work out in the end, at least on a macro level.

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#57

Post by johansch »

Houshalter wrote: post #41
johansch wrote: post #28

"The causes of the pressure on these creatures intertwine: aggressive agricultural practices that grow crops on every available acre eliminate patches of wildflowers and cover crops that provide food for pollinators. Farming also exposes the creatures to pesticides, and bees are under attack from parasites and pathogens, as well." Seems like this should self-regulate quite well. If there are no bees to pollinate the…

Most crops don't need pollinators. Corn uses wind, and wheat and soybeans self pollinate. The farms that do rely on pollinators are careful not to spray too much.

Aha. So the answer is probably, somewhat ironically, what the part of America that grows the most of these things hates the most: Increased federal regulations. :)

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#58

Post by gutnor »

marcosdumay wrote: post #26
gutnor wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the western nations are nicely isolated from the consequences of climate and environmental changes. If you look at the map of the region that are expected to suffer from the consequences of Global Warming, you will notice that the western world, again, is a lot safer. I used to be a lot more cynic before, but in practice, the level of awareness and empathy for climate and environmental issues is surprisingly…

What maps are those? And they include things like bee species extinction? I've seen some people claiming that global warming will make the extreme North have a flourishing agriculture revolution, with enough productivity to compensate the loss of the tropical regions. Those people ignore both how to read a map, and that plants need sunlight to grow. Also, they ignore every single consequence that isn't plain linear,…

That actually reinforced my point: the green movement in the western world is disproportionally strong compared to the actual consequences perceived today, and the expected consequences from the optimistic projections people believe in.

Re: Decline of Species That Pollinate Poses a Threat to Global Food Supply

#59

Post by shanev »

kotach wrote: post #5
moonshinefe wrote: post #3

The cynic in me wonders if we're simply doomed to having these useful species die off at this point. We've killed off a great deal of nature already, and it seems the major voting populations in our democracies are insulated enough in concrete cities and modern conveniences to not really care enough to force politicians to address these issues. And also, there's not much money in it compared to other courses of actio…

There's a lot of money in agriculture. Increased demand of food due to exponential growth of the population. Increased demand for luxurious food like meat due to exponential economic growth of the population. Long term, it is the most economically sustainable business from the perspective of the business owner. Long term, it is the largest polluter of all, and is unsustainable in its core. The reason why pollinating…

Some farmers say it's possible to run holistically managed farms that produce the same or higher yields than industrial farms if run properly. The issue is changing policy and subsidies to make this a reality. As a side effect we'll get more grass cover which sequesters carbon and healthier meat with more omega 3.
Post reply on HN