Farmers and Organic / chemical farming

Jahcure

Active member
So are you for or against the 30% reduction in nox in the soil.

Do you believe the gov has our best interest in mind ?

I for one i dont beleive this is the way is there maybe a compromise to be made probably.

Discuss.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
 
So are you for or against the 30% reduction in nox in the soil.

Do you believe the gov has our best interest in mind ?

I for one i dont beleive this is the way is there maybe a compromise to be made probably.

Discuss.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

Your beliefs > facts
 
Élabore un peu, ça manque de viande ton sujet

30% de moins , c'est quoi les chiffres, lets me guess, le gouvernement va compenser les pertes des agriculteurs ...
 
Your beliefs > facts
Well not exactly. But my food availability at a resonable price > facts ahhahaha .

But answer the question do you think a 30% reduction is the way to go cause specially with seeing whats going on in the Netherlands and Sri Lanka. Canada thinks it is.



Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
 
There are FAR too many people to feed for us to stop/reduce massively using nox fertilizers all willie nillie like the greens want to do it.
 
Hollistic agriculture reaps a better yield/square foot then factory farming. The difference is in the labour required. With AI and automation, we will eventually get there.
 
Hollistic agriculture reaps a better yield/square foot then factory farming. The difference is in the labour required. With AI and automation, we will eventually get there.

We unfortunately will have to starve out Africa to get there.
 
Semble avoir eu des manifestations en Ontario en solidarité avec les Pays-Bas

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
So are you for or against the 30% reduction in nox in the soil.

Do you believe the gov has our best interest in mind ?

I for one i dont beleive this is the way is there maybe a compromise to be made probably.

Discuss.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

First question I have for anyone who believes the bullshit that comes out of their mouths, how is nitrogen based fertilizer a "polluting" GHG? Serious question because when I search its breakdown, all I get are bullshit article just with material claims that it 200x as bad as CO2. It's N2O, if the plant doesn't absorb the the fertilizer in the first place and it gets into the air, would it not end up as N2 and O2 upon breakdown, you know, the two biggest elements of the air we breathe? How does the crackpot science that said the polar ice caps would melt in 15 years, 20+ years ago, explain this grift.

I'm more inclined to think the carbon reduction they're talking about is of the two legged kind. Less fertilizer, equals less food, equals less humans and therefore less pollution. You are the carbon footprint they want to reduce. Now that I believe wholeheartedly.

But hey, I've been temporarily "wrong" so many times before, why should anyone listen to me now when they can regret it weeks, months, years from now? Instead we can laugh at the statements above in August 2022, enter a global food shortage sometime in the near future where people are going to be paying magnitudes more for groceries if they even can find it, and then they can then shrug it off a la Clinton "What difference does it make at this point" as we're led into the next stupid idea.

I might be wrong only for the fact that the world is revolting. The farmers in the Netherlands and the world won't roll over easy and if they win their cause, we happily won't have to experience food shortages.
 
ya plein de moyens d'entretenir un sol sans utiliser de fertilisant en bouteille avec des mineraux.

Il faut garder le sol en vie, utilisation de champignon, de vers de terre, de bacteries, de nematodes. Utilisiation de predateurs naturelles comme pesticides. Nos sols sont mort avec lutilisation de lagriculture industrielle

Mais cest ben plus facile de vider une bouteille dans leau, mixer sa pi le sprayer, crissment moin douvrage.
 
Les choses évolues. Les méthodes de y'a 100 ans, 50 ans et de demain seront pas les mêmes. À semaine verte à radio can ils en parlaient justement des fermiers et agronome qui optimise et cherchent a améliorer l'aération et le microbiote dans le sol. Les futures terres à haut rendement seront pu ceux booster aux fertilisants. Il y a pas juste du mauvais qui se passe.
 
ya plein de moyens d'entretenir un sol sans utiliser de fertilisant en bouteille avec des mineraux.

Il faut garder le sol en vie, utilisation de champignon, de vers de terre, de bacteries, de nematodes. Utilisiation de predateurs naturelles comme pesticides. Nos sols sont mort avec lutilisation de lagriculture industrielle

Mais cest ben plus facile de vider une bouteille dans leau, mixer sa pi le sprayer, crissment moin douvrage.

Tu as de laisser en jachère aussi et alternance de récolte, certain végétaux comme le soya peuvent rebalancer le PH et la terre. L'usage du fumier et matière compostable est aussi sous utilisée.

Moi je ne crois aucunement qu'il manque de terre pour nous nourrir. J'ai un micro terrain et j'ai fais un jardin en pot de 12 x 12, planter 2 arbres à bleuet et 3 plans de framboises, ça a combler 50% des mes légumes et fruit depuis juin et j'utilise même pas 10% de mon terrain. Je met peut-être 10 min par jour pour arroser et enlever les scrabé japonais manuellement, j'ai mis 3 fois du fumier de poule. Si vraiment on manquait de terre, dont worry qu'on en trouverait des sols à cultiver, chacune des court de 5 000 pieds carré en banlieue est suffisante pour nourrir en fruit et légume la maison sur le terrain.

J'ai un shit load de piment fort que je vais même jetter tellement mes plans ont fourni.
 
Back
Top