It’s easy to forget, as we stroll through our local grocery store shopping for your next meal, that we all need to address how to feed the world’s population to come. I believe it is something we should all stop and think about.

Right now, by some accounting, agriculture emits more greenhouse gases than all our cars, trucks, trains, and airplanes combined. Large amounts of methane is released by cattle and rice farms, nitrous oxide from fertilized fields, and carbon dioxide from the cutting of rain forests to grow crops and raise livestock. Despite our own excessive rain and snow fall, the world as a whole has a very limited water supply. As well, runoff from fertilizers and manure disrupts the ecosystems of fragile lakes, rivers, wetlands and the coasts across the globe. Agriculture accelerates the loss of biodiversity. The more grasslands, marshes and forests are cleared for farms, the more crucial habitat is lost. This makes agriculture a major driver of wildlife extinction. And…we all have to eat!

The environmental challenges posed by agriculture are huge, with mounting pressure under our current course expanding to meet the growing need for food worldwide. Current estimates tally 2 billion more mouths to feed in the next 30 years. Population growth isn’t the only reason we’ll need more food. As I write, the spread of prosperity across the world, especially in China and India, is driving an increased demand for meat, eggs, and dairy. When people have more money, their diets and buying habits will require us to roughly double the amounts of crops we grow by 2050. In turn this creates pressure to grow more corn and soybeans to feed more cattle, pigs, and chickens. A double whammy of population growth.

Unfortunately, we have a very polarized debate over how to address the global food challenge. Basically, conventional agriculture and global commerce vs. local food systems and organic farming. The arguments can be fierce, and like our politics in this country and others, we seem to be getting more divided rather than finding common ground. One side favors conventional agriculture, all about how modern mechanization, irrigation, fertilizers, and improved genetics can increase yields to help meet demand. And they’re right. Meanwhile proponents of local and organic farms counter that the world’s small farmers could increase yields by adopting techniques that improve fertility without synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. Their point offers very strong positions as well. This shouldn’t be an either-or proposition. Both approaches offer badly needed solutions and, unfortunately, neither one alone will feed us all. As I see it, we would be wise to explore all of the good ideas, from both sides of the ag fence and blend the best of both. The situation seems daunting, but we need to rise to the challenge for our future generations.

What do you see from your vantage point? What can we do as American grocery shoppers to help lighten the ag load? Please share your thoughts.

Live well…

Remembering all that serve to keep us safe in our great country. Have a wonderful Memorial Day!

How to feed a growing population is not an either-or proposition

Join for free* to continue reading.