Willie Nelson faz cover do Coldplay, em mensagem agrícola

A questão das Factory Farms vai muito além dos problemas que conhecemos bem aqui no agronegócio brasileiro. Reforma agrária, financiamentos, código florestal ficam em segundo plano perto desta questão, de vital importância para a identidade do meio rural de pequeno e médio porte.

Acompanhe através da bonita animação com o cover do Coldplay, da música "The Scientist", pela voz de Willie Nelson.

Read More

Stealing Water: How Trade Can Negatively Impact Sustainable Development

There are many thoughts that go through one's mind when staring at a succulent orange for example or a hefty lamb chop. Those thoughts generally revolve around taste, satiation, or perhaps, if one is particularly considered with environmental conservation, the efforts by which said food stuff was raised. In general, one does not look at a lamb chop and think 'water'. And yet, it takes a lot of water to create the things we call food.

According to the non-profit organization Water Footprint Network, it takes roughly 13 gallons of water to make one orange, 500 gallons of water to create 1 pounds of chicken, 800 gallons for a similar amount of lamb. This would not necessarily matter if the water in question was free fresh water such as rain (as opposed to limited ground water supplies) and if the food was locally consumed. In a globalized economy in which food is produced, often through unsustainable use of local water supplies, in one location and consumed thousands of miles away in another location this has deep ecological and sociological ramifications.

For example, despite its reputation as a perennially rainy nation, an April report by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Engineering the Future Working Group report, 2/3rds of water consumed by UK Citizens is imported mostly in the form of embedded water; much of it from nations already under water shortage.

While this has serious repercussions for UK's sustainability if the projected global water crisis comes to fruition, this has larger ramifications for those countries - many of which are poor- that are already sending their scarcest resources abroad. It is even more ironic, when one considers that the IMF and WHO often priorities trade as the lynchpin by which nations can develop. It is questionable as to how by eroding one's environmental capital, in the form of fresh water, can lead to sustainable development.

This realization that developed nations are not only taking 'stuff' from developing nations, but also their water reveals an intrinsic flaw in agricultural and trade economics. These accounting systems often treats resources on the ground as 'free', but in doing so they actually prioritize short-term growth, over long-term growth and actually plunge developing economies more deeply into poverty.

Put another way, it makes sense for Australia to ship wheat to Europe because the 'cost' is cheaper. However, that cost is only cheaper, because it ignores the cost of water - which Australia has in short supply. Much of the water used to grow the wheat that it is exported is effectively lost forever, and Australia increasingly is uncertain how long the nation can support its wheat industry.

Similarly, Egypt's dependence on water thirsty cotton as an export crop has serious repercussions for its relations with its neighboring nations as well as its own. Despite Egypt's rights to 87% of the Nile's water, millions of Egyptians already experience water shortages - roughly 95% of the country's drinking and irrigation water comes from the Nile and it's downstream position makes it's precarious situation still the more precarious (Egypt's historical control over the river has to do with colonial agreements and not situational ones.).

There is an increasing awareness that if wars in the last century were fought heavily over territory, that wars in this century will be fought over water. It would help to stave off war, if we learned to properly value this scarce resource and use it accordingly so that the loss of human life whether by war or my drought would be unnecessary. 

from JustMeans

Read More

Wheat Harvest Met Live Ammunition In Gaza

Wheat Harvest Met Live Ammunition In Gaza "Buffer Zone"

13 June 2010: Israeli forces attacked women farmworkers and international human rights activists with heavy gunfire during three days’ wheat harvest in the southern Gaza Strip. The Israel-imposed “buffer zone” illegally claims over 30% of Gaza’s arable farmland. In Khoza’a village, east of Khan Yunis, substantial wheat remains unharvested despite severe poverty and food shortages, as a result of the attacks.

Tuesday, the first day of harvest, did not take place inside the 300m “buffer zone”. However, snipers approached the harvest in Israeli military Jeeps on two occasions, shooting live ammunition around five women who were crouching to hand-collect the wheat with four International Solidarity Movement (ISM) activists. The women laid down in the wheat during the attack but did not leave, and harvest continued after the Jeeps had left. Activists communicated the non- threatening nature of the work to soldiers with a megaphone.
A more severe attack was levied Wednesday, as the harvest continued within 300 meters of the fence. 5 ISM activists and 2 journalists were present as Israeli military Jeeps approached at 7 a.m. and fired several rounds, similar to the previous day. At 8:30, the Jeeps parked on a small hill near the fence. Snipers stood atop the Jeep closest to the workers, with a clear view of the obviously non-threatening hand- harvest. Israeli snipers then rained over 50 rounds on the women, activists and journalists, causing the women to crawl along the ground and shriek with fear. Rounds of live bullets hit within a meter of people’s heads, meaning any deviation would almost certainly hit someone. The harvest finished at 10 a.m.

Thursday, the final day of harvest, was cut short by two gunfire attacks at 8:00 and 8:30 a.m. Roughly 20 rounds were fired very close to the farmers and 3 ISM activists present. The women were evidently more fearful of attack, and those present agreed that a third attack was imminent and would target them. This proved a correct assumption as, soon after finishing at 8:45, 4 jeeps arrived and remained at the fence. The wheat will likely remain unharvested.
“We were shot at repeatedly with live ammunition; the deafening fizz and crack of the bullets flying past our ears”, states ISM activist Adie Mormech. “The women courageously returned after each attack. On the last day, after snipers had already come twice and fired many rounds quite close, it was clear that someone would be intentionally hit if we stayed. Consequently, the wheat will not be harvested. It is infuriating that this violence continues against what is clearly a peaceful endeavor to farm the third of Gaza’s arable land which is patrolled by the Israeli military.”
Israeli attacks in the buffer zone injured 50 persons and killed 14 between January and April 2010. In the past twelve months, at least 220 Israeli attacks have been carried out, with 116 coming since the beginning of 2010 (as of April 30th). – Palestinian Centre for Human Rights


Source: Scoop

Read More

Carl Sagan quote:

“Advances in medicine and agriculture have saved vastly more lives than have been lost in all the wars in history.”

Read More

Lichia (Litchi chinensis)

De crescimento rápido, esta lichia tem apenas 30 dias (após semeadura). Sem cuidados especiais, foi semeada depois de ficar "de molho" em um copo de água por 24 horas.  Mede aproximadamente  5cm e seu caule se assemelha muito ao de uma muda de eucalipto. Está em um vaso compartilhando espaço com outras experiências, até ser transplantada para lugar mais apropriado.

Read More

Aquí hay mucho tomate - reportagem da TVE (Espanha)

O programa Comando Actualidad da TVE bateu recordes históricos de audiência para a emissora  espanhola (11 milhões de telespectadores)  com a reportagem "Aquí hay mucho tomate", que tenta desvendar as razões que fazem o tomate ter seu preço elevado em até 500% entre o produtor e o consumidor final. Desde as estufas de Almeria até as fruteiras de Madrid, os envolvidos na cadeia produtiva são acompanhados, entrevistados e cada um conta um pouco sobre a sua função, problemas e desafios. A reportagem vai além e mostra o que os pequenos produtores de carne da espanha estão fazendo para diversificar seus negócios, com turismo rural para compras (açougues próprios) e redes de fornecimento direto ao consumidor via internet na área de pescados.

Estufas em Almeria - são tantas que chegam a alterar o clima da região com a vasta superfície branca, um efeito albedo.

Pontos Altos: As precárias instalações das estufas (invernaderos) e o alto custo de manutenção das mesmas, o perfil dos produtores e empregados, o grande volume de produtos descartados no produtor e no entreposto. A maneira como a "CEASA para tomate" de Almeria atua, com alta mecanização, isolamento (pessoas fora do mercado não entram) e tecnologia para venda, com leilões eletrônicos.

Pedaço do programa no youtube (10 minutos). O melhor é assistir no site da TVE (link abaixo).

O programa passou na NET na última quarta, mas está disponível no site da TVE. Como não é permitida a incorporação no blog, acesse o vídeo por este link. A reportagem inteira está ali (mais de uma hora). Recomendo mesmo que você não entenda uma palavra de espanhol.

Ficha técnica

Aqui Hay Mucho Tomate

Repórteres:

RAÚL GARCÍA, SARA LOZANO Y JUÁN CARLOS CUEVAS.

Direção:

SILVIA SÁNCHEZ, CÉSAR P. GOZALO, DANIEL GALINDO.

Read More

Monsanto v. Food Inc. over How to Feed the World

Anyone who’s seen the documentary Food Inc. knows that Monsanto comes across as a thug. Its bioengineered soybeans, designed to be unaffected by Monsanto weedkiller Roundup, command 93% of the U.S. crop, yet there’s Monsanto in the 2008 movie, heartlessly hauling farmers into court to jack up its market share even further. Monsanto execs declined to comment then. In retrospect, CEO Hugh Grant now says he should have. He might have blunted the film’s impact if he had.

Grant has a different take on Monsanto’s role in agriculture, of course. From his point of view, the company is working on the side of angels, helping to create commodity crops to feed today’s population and the 2 billion more people who might occupy the planet by 2030. He is proud that Monsanto scientists were among the first to have a patented genetically modified plant on the market—Roundup Ready soybeans were introduced in 1996—and he is excited about new efforts to bioengineer wheat and vegetables, too, as well as the next generation of super beans and corn.

I got a chance to hear Grant’s perspective when he swung through Bloomberg’s office in Chicago the other day. (My colleagues at Bloomberg News posted this story on Monsanto’s patent strategy, and its legal fight with sometime partner/sometime rival DuPont.) Grant, 51, a big man with a Scottish accent and a shaved head, was joined by Robert Fraley, Monsanto’s chief technology officer, 56, a former Illinois farm boy who coincidentally wears the same haircut.

Monsanto’s goal within the next 20 years is to create plants that will produce twice today’s harvest. Fraley notes that when he went off to college in 1970, his family farm produced 75 bushels of corn from each acre. Today that average in the U.S. has more than doubled to 160 bushels an acre, and he predicts Monsanto scientists will come up with plants that will yield 300 bushels an acre. Moreover, farmers would use a third less nitrogen fertilizer than they add today.

“This isn’t a Jetson’s scenario,” Grant says.

Monsanto’s scientists employ two methods to devise more productive plants. One is traditional cross-breeding, though Monsanto has computerized much of the process so researchers don’t have to wait for crops to mature to know which combination will boost photosynthesis, say, or make a plant resistant to drought. A quick analysis of each plant’s DNA can tell them instead. The other method is bioengineering, or inserting new genes into a plant. They employ each technique roughly half the time.

One such genetic modification that excites Grant is a soybean that can produce Omega 3 fatty acids which are believed to reduce the risk of heart disease and have a number of other health benefits. For now, Omega 3 is found only in oily fish. This new and improved soybean also would be cleansed of trans fats and other saturated fats and become essentially as healthful as olive oil. Monsanto plans to have this patent-protected seed on the market in two years.

Further out: drought-resistant wheat and—cue the applause—winter tomatoes that taste like summer tomatoes.

Most of this research assumes, of course, that consumers and governments will OK more genetically modified organisms. Grant thinks that they will. Food scarcity has re-emerged as an issue, particularly in Asia and Africa. Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, India, and China have all opened the door to bioengineered crops or research in the 18 months, he notes. Even Europe might be becoming more accommodating, he adds. “Biotech isn’t a panacea,” he says. “But biotech has a role to play. We need more yields.”

This isn’t the story that appears in Food Inc., which is why Grant says he erred by not cooperating with the movie’s makers.

Source: Businessweek

Read More