Archive for new zealand

Agriculture and Carbon Emissions

Posted in Economy, Environment with tags , , , , , on October 6, 2009 by Cannon

As a person involved in agricultural production, this push – in this case by New Zealand’s minister of trade – hits close to home.  So, take my natural bias into consideration.  There is so little evidence that CO2, a substance which occurs naturally in the environment, generated by humans will have a significant impact on the world.  I know what Al Gore says, but I’m not convinced.  Many conservatives have conceded that greenhouse gas emissions deserve attention though I’m not part of this group.  What we’re talking about here is diverting resources in order to curb the production of a naturally occurring element.  The costs associated with such an endeavor will likely be steep.  Will reducing CO2 emissions by 10%, 25%, or even 50% help to stop temperatures from rising?  Is the climate even measurably changing?  If it is getting warmer, or cooler, are humans to blame?  I don’t believe these questions have been adequately answered.  There are still respected scientists who don’t buy in to the climate change scenario as laid out by the Gorites.

The above linked op-ed really doesn’t lay out a tangible plan, but puts forth an idea for a “Global Alliance” to address the “carbon footprint” created by ag production.  First off, I don’t like global alliances.  I don’t get to vote on leaders of New Zealand, or any other country outside the U.S., so I don’t care for these people affecting domestic policies beyond presenting information.  We’ve already got plenty of useless, corruption-ridden global bodies.  Why do we need another one to inhibit economic and personal freedoms?  Secondly, I’m not sure what the current carbon situation will mean for the future.  What I do know is that decreased food production and increased food prices will lead to disastrous consequences for many people around the world.  I realize that Mr. Groser is looking for the best of both worlds, but cutting down on emissions sounds a lot like increased production costs to me.  If we depend on the heavy hand of government to cram some “reform” down our collective throat, the end product will most certainly be fraught with negative consequences.  Consequences which could be dangerous for a world population that is always expanding.

Let’s make sure we know what we’re preventing before we decide to tinker with the food supply.  Hunger and starvation are the devils that we know.  Carbon-induced climate change is the devil that may not exist.