The Crash Course - Chris Martenson [102]
This silent tragedy, converting rich soils into tract housing, is happening all across the United States and elsewhere in the world and is, again, driven by financial—not necessarily thoughtful—decisions. Civilization has always grown up around and depended on the thin layer of soil that covers the earth, and we’re as dependent on it today as we’ve ever been. Without soil, food won’t grow. We would do well to remember that without primary wealth, there’s no secondary wealth, and without that, nothing else really matters, certainly not your stocks and bonds.
The Coming Food Challenge
In 2010, a United Nations (UN) commission reported on the state of the world’s food situation and made these statements:
. . . satisfying the expected food and feed demand will require a substantial increase of global food production of 70 percent by 2050.
Much of the natural resource base already in use worldwide shows worrying signs of degradation. Soil nutrient depletion, erosion, desertification, depletion of freshwater reserves, loss of tropical forest and biodiversity are clear indicators.1
One-tenth of the world’s land mass is suitable for growing crops, while another four-tenths is only suitable as range land due to the thinness of the soil, steepness, dryness, or some combination of those factors. The remaining half of the world’s landmass is unsuitable for food production. The UN report examined the issue of how we will manage to feed 9.5 billion people (a 46 percent increase), given that virtually all the world’s available farmland is already under production. Increased demand is expected to require an enormous increase in crop production.
Over the past few decades, improvements in irrigation, use of fertilizers, and better crop varieties have combined to dramatically improve crop yields on a per-acre basis. But can we complacently assume that another 46 percent can be wrung out of the system over the next 40 years? What might happen if petroleum energy in the future costs too much to support the use of ever-increasing quantities of fertilizers, irrigation, and pesticides?
The Important Difference Between Soil and Dirt
Our modern, industrial agriculture system feeds more people while employing fewer people than at any time in history. Even more remarkably, crop science has delivered ever-increasing yields on a per-acre basis at ever-lower costs. As impressive as this is, you probably won’t be surprised to learn that such gains come with hidden costs. One of the most important costs has been incurred by the soil itself.
There is an important distinction between soil and dirt made here:
What is the difference between soil and dirt?
Soil is alive. Dirt is dead. A single teaspoon of soil can contain billions of microscopic bacteria, fungi, protozoa and nematodes. A handful of the same soil will contain numerous earthworms, arthropods, and other visible crawling creatures. Healthy soil is a complex community of life and actually supports the most biodiverse ecosystem on the planet.
Why is it then, that much of the food from the conventional agricultural system is grown in dirt? The plants grown in this lifeless soil are dependent on fertilizer and biocide inputs, chemicals which further destroy water quality, soil health and nutritional content.2
In our quest to grow more food, more cheaply, on the same amount of land, year after year, we have been strip-mining the soil of its essential nutrients and qualities and converting it into lifeless dirt. What would happen if modern farming suddenly had to make do without fertilizers, pesticides/herbicides, and other petroleum inputs? Yields would fall, probably by quite a lot. Our increased yields have less to do with better technology and understanding,