From what I read, the concern is not for Europe, but for Africa that can not afford to pay a higher Price for wheat and where the main supplier is Russia and Ukraine.
3 Likes
Better the next 2 weeks. I have heard about discussions in Germany about extending land use and less production of biofuels, but I have no information about what is realy done.
1 Like
The US wonāt really have any problems. They probably benefit more from the higher prices as they are the biggest exporter of food worldwide. Europe has a very connected food market, produces a lot itself too with very high yields per area and imports mostly from other western countries such as the US, Australia, New Zealand and South America for its more tropical produce. Also, it is the primary receiver of Ukrainian exports if there are any, because Ukraine is limited to exports over road and rail with the black sea ports being blockaded. They are also in the best position to pay the increased price.
It will be poorer countries that are going to be suffering, mostly in Africa. They are also the least capable of finding alternative foods. We should not expect western countries to start producing wheat at increased rates, because their agiculture is centered around high yield, high intensity, high earning crops. Ukrainian agriculture was producing for the rest of the world and that is where the shortages will be felt, so unless we feel like ādonatingā (selling under market price) our high end crops, or we help countries produce more domestic food crops (something not easily done), they will suffer shortages. If that will result in famine is yet to be seen, but we should not sit around waiting until it happens only to send food rellief after the fact.
Only in the past week have we seen this news starting to make headlines and only now do we start talking about it. Politicians typically only start thinking about these kinds of things when the rest of us are too, so I hope they are starting to pick it up as well. As I have outlined before though, global food supply chains are rather complex and cannot simply be fixed. It is not as simple as: āOh, we have a lack of wheat, so hey, our farmers need to switch to wheatā. I do agree that we need to talk solutions urgently as any intervention you do now is much more effective and less expensive than any you do later. Food shortages and famine are good incentives for forced migratory streams and with it usually war and conflict. If thereās anything we need less of itās that.
A very concrete thing you and I can do is reduce our intake of meat. Most of the Ukrainian exports in the west are used as animal fodder, so our consumption of meat is actually the way that we ingest most of the Ukrainian wheat. We should also support more sustainable agriculture, especially when it comes to bio-industry and fodder crops. Our ridiculous production and consumption of meat is really what is unsustainble.
1 Like
Totally agree you cannot just grow crops on command. Lead time is required to procure seed supplies and that is just one piece of a complex industry of which I know little. But you can put more land under cultivation to grow something (what that is I leave to farmers) and you definitely can change biofuel regulations to encourage crop changes. You can make maximizing food production a national priority rather than just fodder for speech making. This is what serious government does.
Maybe itās time to launch a victory garden campaign.
1 Like
This really succinctly sums it up, thanks. Also I know that in the past there were ridiculous subsidies for biofuels for rapeseed and other produce. These at first glance well meant initiatives were disastrous. i am not sure if these have been stopped but if not they should be stopped. GO GREEN if not for environmentalism that for good security reasons. The left and right can agree here!
1 Like
Putting more land under cultivation is not easy to do and even if possile rather unlikely to be done in any significant number. Most fertile arable land is already under cultivation and those that are not are either to poor quality or part of nature conservation areas or have other very compelling reasons. Changing biofuel regulations is a more reachable target, but falls in the category of selecting other crops. Be aware that this will in turn make biofuels more expensive which will encourage the use of fossil fuels more. Itās a minimal impact, but its not without consequences. No decently impactful measure will not bring with it some form of pain.
I think the victory garden is a fun and nice proposal, but I doubt it will be all too impactful. I donāt see people growing fields of wheat in their backgarden and shipping them to Africa, or their local baker for that matter. Not a bad idea though if only for the increased awareness about our foods origins, healthy food and physical activity.
Bloomberg News reported yesterday that, āThe European Union is proposing a 1.5 billion-euro ($1.65 billion) funding package for farmers, plus freeing up fallow land for crops as it seeks to shore up food security after Russiaās invasion of Ukraine.
The Bloomberg article noted that, āOther measures will free up almost 4 million hectares of fallow land for crops in 2022, officials said. While it wonāt be the most productive land, it will give farmers more flexibility, they said.ā
This is the kind of activity I am talking about. Fallow land is good farmland but they rotate it to rest and recover nutrients. In a pinch and with proper fertilizer, itās a whole lot better than nothing.
As for biofuels, they are of questionable value anyway. I have always understood that the ethanol additives are actually not that great for engines but I defer to others with a better understanding than I.
Donāt underestimate the power of national will. When the pandemic kicked inward were able to jumpstart medical production and develop vaccines quickly. This is different with a different set of problems but government can get out of the way of those who can solve them and provide what they need.
Ok, well, 4 million hectares of extra land for crops is indeed a big pinch. It does risk worse performance in subsequent years as those lands are typically fallow for renutrition, but European agricultural technology should be able to mitigate a lot of that.
What I am sceptical about is the EU throwing a big financial aid package towards its own farmers. Agricultural subsidies in the EU have distorted the global market for years and this looks like its only getting worse.
Another point of scepsis is the reduced import limits, which would according to the article lead to more animal fodder coming in from South America. That to me sounds like another big chunk of the Amazon going down. Also, as stated before, meat is not a critical part of a healthy diet, not in the way Europe and North America consume it anyway. If you should limit subsidies anywhere itās here. Meat is too cheap as it is, so we should not care about fodder prices spiking, only of the crops we digest directly ourselfs. Thatās my take anyway
1 Like
What are these other measures?
My bad. I should have included the link:
It mentions other efforts. Which is the most important or impactful, Iām not sure. Iām glad they are considering these changes. I hope the US does more as well.
While I totally agree that farm subsidies distort the market, the huge spike in fertilizer as well as fuel prices could benefit from specific aid being useful.
There will be areas in the world which cannot afford or just plain cannot get fertilizer and it may be reasonable to assume crop yields might drop as a result. I consider it a moral imperative for the west to help mitigate this. It is also a security issue. I do see as the Ukrainian war is heading towards a stalemate they will plant more crops and maybe it wonāt be bad. Fingers crossed.
I see your point. I am not against intervention in the market. My scepsis is mostly target to those subsidies applying to European domestic agricultural production which has outcompeted foreign grown crops for years and has kept them very dependable on our cheap agricultural products and uncapable of producing more themselves.
1 Like
1 Like
Just in case somebody missed this:
2 Likes
Wow, that is quite a read. This guy would have pleased Stalin I believe.
I know it is easy to manipulate humans and all of us are being manipulated all the time.
To vote on something , buy crap we donāt want or need , shift blame.
And Iām exposed to other manipulations then the Rusian people but I can not see how anyone would buy this as being anything then total bullshit
2 Likes
Remember a few weeks ago when Kyiv was being besieged and there were interviews with people in bunkers calling their relatives in Russia, only for said relatives to tell them that the bombings were a lie? I fear a good chunk of their population is just too far gone.
2 Likes
I would realy like to agree with you, but I am sure there will be a lot of idiots acting on this bullshit.
1 Like
Austrian military view, pretty balanced. Krieg in der Ukraine: Bilanz nach 40 Tagen - YouTube
1 Like
The US Senate voted unanimously to put Ukraine on Lend-Lease. That isnāt a typo, itās the exact same statute used in WWII. The House has yet to vote.
2 Likes
Maybe we can send them a couple hundred old m1 Abrams to help the cause.
1 Like