Population hysteria is all the rage, but this one tops any I have seen to date.
To meet the food and fiber needs of a world population projected to double just 20 years from now will require a more productive agriculture and an increased utilization of technology, says Russ Green.First, let's examine the assertion here. No matter how I read it, Mr. Green seems to be under the impression that in 2030 our population will be over 13 billion people. (Today = 6.8B, 2X = 13+B)
“By 2030, we’ll have to feed twice as many people as today,” the president of Claas of America, Inc., said during a recent Mid-South visit. “We’ve broken about all the land we can — which means we’ll have to do better with what we have, using technology and science to produce more on available land.” [More]
WTF???
Let's look at some other population projections for perspective.
First, from the UN 2004 Estimates and the US Census Bureau.
Notice that 13B by 2030 is mildly off the map of even the highest expert estimate.
OK, maybe those UN lefties are low-balling the chart. Let's see what our own Yankee-Doodle Demographers estimate.
I could go on, but you get my point. The central point of Mr. Green's remarks, I think, was to blast the HSUS, but while that always plays well with farmers, doing it with fatuous numbers won't cut it in the Google information universe. Either the guy is badly misinformed, or the reporter didn't bother to research and ask the obvious question, "What do you base that statement on?"
Either way it is a shabby performance all 'round, IMHO.
Yo - Penton. Hire a fact-checker.
5 comments:
John before you take shots people who are unhappy with HSUS, maybe you should research who and what they are. They are not looking out for the best interests of animals as the ASPCA has done for years. HSUH is an NGO with with an agenda that has very little to do with the welfare of animals.
anon:
I know about the HSUS - how could any of us not? It has been the most type-cast villain for agriculture we could ask for. I have posted more complete comments last winter. (Search HSUS on this blog - upper right) But it has also become a pretty tired piece of red meat to throw out to farm audiences for an applause line.
While we're staring at this shiny object, there are other, arguably larger policy, social, and cultural problems begging attention. Of course, they aren't so black and white, so we tend to circle back to the one problem we can all love to hate.
Besides for all the rhetoric, I haven't seen any real strategies to counter them (HSUS) other than mount "education" campaigns. Haven't we been doing that?
My actual point was the stunning piece of misinformation being bandied about as truth, unquestioned by the media. Population is a problem, but do we need to create false numbers to make our point?
John,
I can't speak for Mr. Green but I believe he said ()as FAO has) that the "food and fiber needs" will double, not that the world population will double. FAO I believe is saying production needs to double by 2050, not 2030, and they are accounting for a population of about 9 billion, PLUS a rising standard of living in the developing world. It is the two factors together that drive the demand for food and fiber.
Re HSUS, they are only one interest group that needs to be countered. If FAO's prediction is close to being correct, Mr. Green's basic assertion holds true, i.e. modern production technologies are essential to feeding a hungry world. We won't do it with Michael Pollan's model or any other 1050s approach.
As far as ag's "education" campaigns, thus far they have been fragmented and piecemeal/stove piped tactics that lacked a well funded ($20-$30 mil/yr needed), long term (5 yr) master plan to focus consistent messages on high value audiences (see Mike Rowe, Ag in the Classs Room, speakers bureaus, etc.) in a way that can effectively change attitudes and perceptions of opinion leaders, early adopters and engaged consumers.
However, I believe this is starting to change. Serious dialogue is now occurring among major players about linking arms, pooling resources and doing this right.
John,
I can't speak for Mr. Green but I believe he said (as FAO has) that the "food and fiber needs" will double, not that the world population will double. FAO I believe is saying production needs to double by 2050, not 2030, and they are accounting for a population of about 9 billion, PLUS a rising standard of living in the developing world. It is the two factors together that drive the demand for food and fiber.
Re HSUS, they are only one interest group that needs to be countered. If FAO's prediction is close to being correct, Mr. Green's basic assertion holds true, i.e. modern production technologies are essential to feeding a hungry world. We won't do it with Michael Pollan's model or any other 1950s approach.
As far as ag's "education" campaigns, thus far they have been fragmented and piecemeal/stove piped tactics that lacked a well funded ($20-$30 mil/yr needed), long term (5 yr) master plan to focus consistent messages on high value audiences (see Mike Rowe, Ag in the Classs Room, speakers bureaus, etc.) in a way that can effectively change attitudes and perceptions of opinion leaders, early adopters and engaged consumers.
However, I believe this is starting to change. Serious dialogue is now occurring among major players about linking arms, pooling resources and doing this right.
VA:
The first sentence could be read that way, and I puzzled over it. But the second "twice as many people" is hard to construe any other way.
The problem is you could lob about any ol' population number out there and get credibility.
Post a Comment