Can We Solve Climate Change and Hunger?

Last I remember, there was plenty of food in the World, --The problem was logistics--How to get the food to people that needed it ?? --Remember the Ethiopian airlift?---Food was not allowed to be dropped IN THE COUNTRY--only at the borders--That is exactly where the warlords confiscated it and sold it on the Black Market. So much for Humanitarian aid to Criminal governments etc-- Idi Amin comes to mind---Afraid that the U.N. is complicit in blackmailing Western countries into this scam--They are plundering their own faster than we can replenish them--My viewpoints only --Others are welcome!

I couldn't agree more. The simple truth is that we already grow enough food on the Great Plains to feed pretty much the entire planetary population. The problem is, as you say, greedy barstids that don't care how many of their own people die as long as they get richer and more powerful. And I completely agree that the U.N. is complicit.

As far as climate "change", I remember less than a generation ago when the big furor was global cooling, and pretty much for the same reasons. And a generation before that it was global warming again. And before that... Well, you see my point.

My point of view...

Transportation might be a problem, fair. But don't you also need the food to transport it?

I'm sure that you have never seen what is really going on or have never been so hungry that you would kill for food. I do not think there is enough food even for "certain" people in areas where the food is produced.

Do you know how many farmers just this year "quit" their jobs or left the industry?

To that...I have to agree too.

In some areas climate change is change in the form of less rainfall. That is the case in northern Burkina Faso. The Sahara is encroaching. I would say that is legit climate change. Food, climate, water, disease, all are related. Me I chose water and am doing something about it in a small way. Many have plenty of water availalble just poor quality.

The Navy guy is correct and governmental interference with food distribution must stop in countries where people are starving. That will never happen because Judeo-Christain ethics are not a world wide concept.

Government aside.

The "sustainable environment" people, believe any impact to the "natural setting" by man is unacceptable. They believe man has no right to impact. Any developed area for any purpose has an impact and in thier eyes it has no right to exist. What we need is low impact farming prctices not, no impact farming.

Then there is the culture that believes if you feed these people they will breed and require more food while adding nothing to society but more problems and disease (the U.N. perspective).

What is needed is a clear universal code of conduct concerning starvation and genocide. In countries that are controlled by gangs like Somalia perhaps the answer is to kill all of the bad people even if there is collateral damage. We must stop alowing them to hide behind human shields and take them out shields or not. Hunt them down and kill them wherever they are and with whomever they are with. Take none of them as prisoners and allow no surrrender kill them all. These people are cancers and society should deliver the will to deal with them and allow them no harbor, peace or, sleep. Otherwise, one day there will be more wretched criminals on earth than decent people and the decent will be fenced in, like in Iran. Then the distribution of food to end starvation can be effectively carried out.

If your last paragraph is an example of "Judeo-Christain ethics" I'll pass thanks.

While I agree with this guest for the most part, there is one missing point. You cannot simply free a man. Being free is something that comes from within. If we go in and slaughter the warlords and dictators and so forth, these peoples will simply be trading one set of masters for another, and unless the conquerors take over and rule them just as completely, with a matter or years, if not weeks, a new despot will arise to fill the vacuum.

No, until these people rise up and throw off the yoke of their oppressors themselves, and squash any new oppressors that try to arise in their place, they cannot and will not be free. And only free men (and women) can do what has been done in places like the United States, Canada, England, and so forth.

So yes, if some petty despot gets out of line, slap him down hard. International politics is no different than a school yard, and bully's only pick on kids that won't fight back. (The US government seems to have forgotten this. The Russians haven't.) But unless and until a people is ready to rise up on their own, there is little point it trying to help them do so.

It would be a good thing if the ever suffering peoples of these country's could get rid of there warlords or whatever but the so called democratic country's has to stop feeding these dictatorships arms and money. would that it is that simple,they will get there arms from elsewhere. If we interfere directly with force of arms the population will resent it,ie Afghanistan.Try to feed them and the food disappears to the black market.

The best situation is to leave them to there own devices even if it is unpleasent by our way of thinking because they will always blame there problms on somebody else and never learn for themselves if we interfeer.

High yield food crops production is one of the sound achievements of agricultural science and technology. This is with reference to exploitation of the so called currently used cultivation lands with gravity flow water streams and worth soils.

*The other main part leading to poor utilization of land surface areas are-

1] High land soils without water flow.

2]Hill terrains

3] Housing, building and industrial sheds occupied roof top surface area due to deforestation,

4]Un cultivated land areas and rocky terrains.

5]Desert lands and similar non use lands.

6]Fresh water surface areas like rivers, canals, lakes and finally oceans.

By suitable pumped water supples,surface area modifications in rocky terrains and even deserts lands massive cultivation is possible.

Then comes the area above water surfaces, that by suitable support soil layer formations cultivation again is possible.

I am rather optimistic on soil less cultivation to avoid dependency on land .

If there is an optimistic outlook on available avenues food shortage need not arise.

The priority development areas can start from 1to 6 and further to soil less cultivation.

The main matter is connected to open ness to options, possible R & D efforts by involving right contributer personnel.

Low cost electricity generation technologies and sound rain water storage strategies are added tasks to accomplish related to the issue under discussion.

The artificial U.V light based agricultural technologies for fast growth and higher yield is not an out of possibility area.

What is required at the hour is to go for effective research and basic modification in land allotment, renovation, water distribution , sound planning and optimistic out look.

Welfare measures and encouragement to agricultural professionals should also be in the policy aspects of governments.

One of the most overlooked issues I see is that people in developed countries don't have any understanding of what having so little means in relative terms of understanding and being able to create infrastructure in order to use what resources are available around them to better themselves.

If the average person from a developed county thinks that the poor and starving should come up to their level how about they themselves try and live the life of an ultra wealthy person who has servants and all the money and resources they need to do and get what ever they want. Anyone who has never lived that life and didn't grow up in that life couldn't even begin to adapt to it properly. Its simply too alien to them so most of it would seem like a total waste. Some parts would be appreciated but most of it would never be understood well enough to be appreciated and would just seem like total wastes of time and effort just for the sake of wasting time and effort.

If your blissfully ignorant to how poor and miserable your life is in comparison to that of someone who is far more privileged there is no reason to change how your life is. What you live is what you come to understand. Resources beyond your understanding are of no concern to you simply because you never had them to start with and thusly never had reasons to learn to use and become dependant on them.

If you grew up with all the resources that are common in any developed county you can not fully comprehend how by having nothing, having grown up with nothing, and having been educated in nothing, that thats what your standard of living will be. Nothing!

If you never saw a computer why would you need one?

If you never saw and understood irrigation and large scale farming practices why would you want to do it?

If you lived your whole life believing in superstitions or that some god like being wants you to live this way because its how everyone around you has lived since the beginning of your perceived time why doubt it and try and change it?

If everyone else around you is just like you why would you want to be any different?

I agree with you TCmtech, that is where the "education" part of the equation comes in.

Actually, the solution to both the hunger problem and over-population lies in Soylent Green...

I commend the persevering attitude toward a future with equal availability of resources for everyone. Alas, though, we are literally and figuratively losing ground.

the giant corporations are interested in one thing...profits.... we want food, not the salt, grease and chemical laden crap they sell to us. how we do it is not going to happen by the big food corporations. they only want money! if they would quit being greedy and selfish and think of someone else maybe they can help but today based on what they do it will never happen.

Good answer my friend. Very good answer.

Thank you Dr.Moose for your comments. Collective thinking and action towards final goals can solve most of human group conflicts. I think the U.N ideologies should get into public minds and effect a cultural change for the entire globe.

High ideals make good for high ideals. However, given the latitude of exploitation that is allowed those companies that are engaged (and see no further than their own profit margins) in using natural resources are the same that are willfully destroying the environmental structure that supports life. One example is the Jaipur region where Coca Cola is pumping groundwater at such a rate that the capillary structure of the water table has permanently collapsed in many regions of Jaipur....in other words ...no water! Similar has happened in the US and Canada. Mention should also be made what the soviets, in the interests of growing cotton, did to the Aral Sea.

There may be over extraction of resources by a particular party of the region. For example in a notified Industrial area, there are about 10 to 12 paper units extract river water and discharge untreated effluent spoiling ground water of nearly 5000 acres. In places where surface water supply is remote, all units extract ground water only. Water extraction, effluent discharges and unbalanced distribution issues are major global issues. There may be exceptions like the case you are discussing. Certain industries have huge margins depending on their monopoly and it is all in the game.

But all giant companies may not have that motives. You know the stress of stiff market competitions, changing trends and keeping happy their employees, keeping good health and competitiveness, labour disputes and unforeseen market conditions are all in a company's walk. More the employees and turn over ,more are the risks allied with and managements can not run away like individuals.

My point being that the UN has only adopted platitudes........and no firm basis for any geophysical standards.

The problem there, Duck old friend, is that the UN adopts all these high and lofty sounding ideals, but then they turn around and do quite the opposite.

you are right on the fact that there are still unsolved international border issues. Not only that the poor resources, food production, draught, group wars, environmental issues- which are chronical problems with humanity.

But there is a moral support exist that there is a global goodwill organization to question or for rescue support on international issues on disputed matters.

There are areas where the contributions by the U,N organization is excelling namely- International Education and science services, Health oriented activities, World bank supported projects, Population and environmental awareness campaigns and so on.

It will be more worth being supported by sound technical contributions to solve the issues than of mere policy and study reports.

Other than that the U,N concepts are of very high stand for which we need adaptation.

Interesting and thoughtful comments, all...Read an interesting study, about the area around Chicago--, and other cities that have lake and river frontage..These city sites were chosen hundreds , or in ancient civilizations, thousands of years ago, because of their accessability--Meaning they were easy locations from which to send and receive goods, move people etc--by water way, since roads were harder to build. As a result of this infrastructure buildout, it also meant that some of the most fertile land was paved over (mentioned by J-Man.) This fertility was brought about by seasonal flooding, and topsoil enhancement. As in the Missouri and Mississippi rivers, and no doubt others, the embankments meant to stop this flooding, and mitigate damage to the infrastructure, has created a situation in which all of this material is flushed downstream, and much out to sea, rather than re-collecting on the banks. The author made a strong case for urban farming, within cities, using this very fertile soil, and building local foodbanks, using people with little means, but with time and effort to grow, stock, and sell excess food before it spoiled. Made a convincing case!!

Javalinman,

G.A and you have added true values to the discussion. The recycling concept of irrigation systems sounds interesting. This can make potential use of nutrients without being wasted by way of downward flow out and causing EUTROPHICATION, CONTAMINATIONS ETC, FAIRLT TO SOME EXTENT.

The lavish flood irrigation system is a traditional and unscientific procedure followed for generations without consideration on accountability of availability of water sources.

To me the unused land utilisation by artificial means and possible new options mentioned in my post number 12 makes some potential sense.

*The major bottleneck to be cleared in this regard is the global gentlemen ship in sharing of resources like land, water and power between countries or within countries without disputes , added considerations and new technological inputs into the agricultural ways.

*Low cost, augment able green electricity is another mile stone to be accomplished.

Regards.

The greatest influence on overcoming rural illiteracy, child birth rates, and the chaos presented by the living practices of day to day, is a move towards urbanization. It is better to live in an urban slum than to be a poor landowner or migrant living on the margins of existence. The slum may not provide all the comforts of life but it does provide the hope that was missing in the rural environment. Women become empowered to control their own destiny. Urban women do not have to produce off-spring to support the agricultural life of rural living. Education in an urban environment becomes a reality. Yes it will take a couple of generations for the poor migrant from rural areas to city environments to realize real improvements but it is a hope that will provide people future dividends.

A big problem in Afghanistan (beside the war) is it is largely a rural society governed by local mullahs and tribes. The conflict will not likely be solved until there is a movement towards urbanization and the resultant improvement in knowledge to the population. Similar rural/governmental conditions are still found in the poorest of the world countries. Perhaps we should spend more money encouraging people in these counties to move to cities. This type of migration would quickly neutralize the influence of the Taliband that they currently hold. China and India are currently moving towards massive urbanization and are the newest important global economic blocs.

Urbanization will free some of the stresses put on the land through marginal agricultural practices and help to lead the country towards optimizing land use. It can also lead to a lower total population rate for the country thus further lowering stress on land and forests of a given country.

I make all my claims from a western aspect and do not advocate expanding slum development but suggest that the urban poor are in a better position than their rural counterpart. A good book to read is "Whole Earth Discipline: An Ecopragmatist Manifesto" by Stewart Brand, 2009, Viking Press.