Hacker News Reader

Comment by niek_pas | Hacker News Reader

As I said in another comment, most of the food produced by these farmers is destined for export.

But again, so it’ll just be grown elsewhere with the same or more emissions?

The problem is currently with localised pollution, either near nature preserves or near places where construction is planned.

Other European countries using much less intensive food production methods over much larger areas of land can take the increase in emissions quite well.

This isn't a about global warming, though these compounds are definitely not helping the situation; this is about nitrogen rich compounds ending up in the ground where it shouldn't be.

Yes and no. Not all land are equal & not all surrounding ecosystem are same. For example growing palm trees has more bad effects in Indonesia compared to growing in country like India.

So the lack of food being imported from this export needs to be balanced somewhere else, no? This would mean no reduction in emission. Only emission within this locale. I guess that's a win to make local numbers look good. This is so pointless. Not to mention we are taking away livelihoods from people.

No, it is a local problem regarding local concentration. If the production elsewhere spreads out, they won't have these problems with their soil.

> a local problem

So now it'll be a local problem... just for some other poorer people.

Not necessarily. The problem is concentration, too much nitrogen oxides and ammonia compounds distributed over a small area. If production here is replaced by increased production spread out over the rest of the world, the problem is solved.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com