RE: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the cost of climate change?

From: Robert Ramsay <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 15:09:44 +0000

For many years, Alberta Gas Trunk Line (subsequently Nova and now TC Energy),
had a greenhouse operation at its Princess Compressor Station, using waste heat
from the compressors. They grew tomatoes all year.  This was an excellent use
of energy, and a model that should be considered in much of Alberta. For
certain crops, however, the short hours of daylight in Alberta also require an
artificial light source. It does require cooperation between growers and
operators of facilities that have waste energy; it was a nuisance activity for
the compression operations.  Significant on-going hail damage was also a
problem.

Bob Ramsay

From: dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Wynn Payne
Sent: July 31, 2022 10:55 PM
To: dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

This may have been the website I saw.
https://www.greenhousecanada.com/new-alberta-grow-centre-unveiled-by-cubicfarm-systems/

Wynn

On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 2:59 PM Bob Thomlinson
<bthomlinson@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:bthomlinson@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Jim,

Very good points but I am not convinced that is still the case everywhere. The
marijuana market was supposed to be a winner but has been a continual
disappointment for investors.  Sales volumes have not materialized according to
the optimistic business plans and the retail sales still has to compete with
the legalized home-grown products as well as the illegal market which I believe
did not disappear as predicted, but just changed their marketing strategies.

I also don’t agree that hot houses can not be viable in Albert’s weather. The
current major source of fruits and vegetables in the USA and Canada is the
Imperial Valley which lies east of the Salton Sea in California and extends
down into northern Mexico. The valley is part of the Sonoran Desert and relies
on massive irrigation projects fed from water sources that are drying up, like
the Colorado River which flows through the valley but is now almost entirely
underground in Mexico. Water in the western USA is a bit of a hobby interest of
mine and I have commented on it before in this chat group.

The difficulties with drought and over consumption have been long predicted. So
it’s no surprise that investors have looked for opportunities elsewhere. The
area I mentioned east of Gull Lake has at least three successful hot house
vegetable operations that have been running for years. Alberta seems to have
adopted a Buy Local culture and so Farmer’s Markets boom in the summer. But the
successful Alberta hot house vegetable producers are operating year round and
their products are on the shelves in Sobeys, Superstore, etc.

Maybe the time was not right for your buddy’s operation in the lower mainland.
But we are already seeing common fruits and vegetables disappear from the store
shelves here. We can’t find our usual apples and our favorite organic Sriracha
sauce manufacturer had to shut down this summer because there wasn’t enough
water to sustain the hot pepper crops. When we are in California in the winter,
we hear about lots of businesses trying to adapt to these challenges. For the
first time California is declining in population as people move out. So there
has been a long-standing prediction that we will eventually not be able to get
cheap fruits and vegetables from California or Mexican anymore. Worse than that
is the forecast that we may not be able to get any of these products anymore if
US domestic consumption takes them all first and the export market collapses.

Although I may be totally wrong, it makes me very happy to see greenhouses
being built in Alberta. The builders may have considered a future switch to
marijuana as a hedge on the vegetable risk, but I think year-round vegetables
could be a pretty good cash crop that’s time has come. Maybe marijuana will be
switching to Vegetables where there is less over supply, less government
regulations and no complicated sin taxes.

Just my thoughts,
Bob T

From:
dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Jim Mann
Sent: July 31, 2022 1:12 PM
To: dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

I find it interesting to hear about the increasing number of hot house
buildings/green houses coming into production in Alberta.  I am assuming that
virtually all of them use natural gas.

I have a friend who was the largest producer of bell peppers in Canada (green,
red, yellow and orange).  He had many greenhouse operations in the lower
mainland/Fraser Valley as well as in California.  He was driven out of business
by the cost of fuel to heat the greenhouses and by the massive importation of
cheap bell peppers from Mexico.  He eventually had to sell his operations to
one of Canada’s largest marijuana producers and now are dedicated to producing
medical grade marijuana for export to the United States which is kind of ironic.

I highly suspect that the individuals that are constructing and operating
massive greenhouse complexes in Alberta have NO INTENTION of remaining in the
vegetable production business for very long and, if they did, as the cost of
fuel rises, their operational financial statements will be swathed in red ink.
I would suggest that the owners of these facilities plans are actually to get
licenses for the production of marijuana as soon as they can satisfy regulatory
requirements.  There is NO long term financial viability for the operation of
greenhouses for growing tomatoes, cucumbers and peppers in Alberta.

Cheers, Jim

From:
dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Wynn Payne
Sent: July 31, 2022 11:40 AM
To: dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

The point is,  reducing production ( by reducing fertilizer use,  for climate
change does not appear to be a reasonable approach to agriculture.

There is a growing operation up toward Westlock that produces a significant
volume of fresh produce in hot house buildings. I'm hesitant it saying numbers
but very large.
Wynn

On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 12:29 PM Bob Thomlinson
<bthomlinson@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:bthomlinson@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi Wynn,

Your comment about “… lower food production means reduced exports and hence a
poor country in the world of trade” would immediately be attacked as an
Economic Greedy Bugger defense. If your support for this endeavor used the
justification “ … would allow Canada to grow food for the world’s desperate and
starving peoples” then you would either be a marketing genius, or a politician.
Either way Greenpeace would have a hard time attacking the position as they so
love to attack our energy sector.

On a side note, over the past year I have watched the construction of a massive
greenhouse complex on the east side of Gull Lake, Alberta.  I have been told,
but have not verified, that Alberta’s gas export woes have made heating
greenhouses with natural gas for food production a viable business. Wouldn’t it
be funny if eventually we were exporting lettuce to consumers in California’s
drought stricken Imperial Valley.

Cheers,
Bob T

From:
dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Wynn Payne
Sent: July 31, 2022 9:11 AM
To: dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

Hi Bob
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
You are right there are  two issues being addressed. I was more concerned with
the regulation to use less fertilizer to satisfy a climate change target. As
mentioned lower food production means  reduced exports and hence a poor country
in the world of trade.
Wynn

On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Bob Thomlinson
<bthomlinson@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:bthomlinson@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
From reading the responses I am wondering if we are not confusing two different
things that are going on here.

Firstly, my understanding is that Canada has put tariffs on the import of
Russian nitrogen, which is one of the three primary ingredients in fertilizer.
The reason given was to “punish” Russia for its war in Ukraine. The use of a
tariff has been widely criticized because a tariff is not an embargo, so it
does not punish anyone other than domestic consumers. Tariffs are primarily
used to protect domestic producers of products from foreigners “dumping”
cheaper products into our market. The term “dumping” is subjective, but it is
the common government marketing term applied to make consumers think they
should stop benefitting from cheaper prices to support our hard-working
Canadian brothers and sisters who are getting squeezed out unfairly. So Canada
is “punishing” Russian by forcing our farmers to pay more for fertilizer
ingredients. It really doesn’t matter if Russian producers pay the tariff and
pass on the increase, or Canadian fertilizer produces switch to other sources
of Nitrogen, like from the USA. As Peter points our, the USA is our primary
source of fertilizer and Russia is a small player, so the tariff impact will
not be massive. However, farmers are already calling for subsidies. On the
surface subsidies sound easy, we just take the tariffs collected and distribute
them to the affected Canadian producers. Subsidies could be paid to the small
number of fertilizer manufacturers but of course there are better political
optics if the government sets up a complex administration and application
process to distribute payments directly to our beloved farmers. The small
problem is that if market conditions change, Russian producers just stop
selling nitrogen to Canada, or we switch to buying from other higher cost
sources, there are no tariffs collected to pay the subsidies. When subsidies
are introduced, it’s really hard to stop paying them and eventually falls on
the Canadian taxpayers to fund the subsidies (sometimes long after the original
justification conditions have disappeared).

Secondly, I understand that Trudeau is proposing to put targets on reducing
fertilizer use in Canada, as part of our climate change action plan. As Don
Hoyda pointed out there has been a dramatic increase in crop yields from
fertilizers. However it is not just fertilizer use that should get the credit.
The move to “precision agriculture” means farmers are doing upwards of 20 soil
samples per 40 acres (instead of one test per field) and using computer and GPS
controlled tractors and spreaders to improve the effectiveness of fertilizer
application to reduce waste. This fertilizer reduction proposal is what is
causing widespread protests in the Netherlands and the appearance of farm
equipment in downtown Ottawa.

I think we are all starting to realize that Climate Action will translate into
direct impacts on our own daily lives. It will affect our incomes, our cost of
living, the conveniences we take for granted (and thereby assume are some
protected right) and, above all, our individual rights and freedoms. Yes, the
reduction in fertilizer will reduce crop yields and farm profits in Canada.
However Canada has abundant water supplies and a vast area of productive
agricultural land where other places in the world are experiencing droughts,
insect infestations on top of poor soil conditions to begin with.

I believe Canada should be stepping up to help feed the world, not going in the
other direction. It is something we know how to do and are already good at. I
believe if we wanted to punish Russia, we should have imposed an embargo and
not wimpy tariffs. I also believe Canada needs to be at the forefront of
effective and efficient food production. We should also recognise global
climate efficiencies too. If other countries have already reduced the use of
fertilizers because of droughts (including the western half of the USA) then
perhaps we should be creating and trading Fertilizer Carbon Credits
internationally to make more food production to Canada politically acceptable.

Wynn asked for our thoughts, and these are mine,
Bob T

From:
dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Peter Aylen
Sent: July 30, 2022 4:27 PM
To: dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

The amount Canada imports is not large.  This was one of a many items that were
sanctioned because of the Ukraine invasion by Russia.

My understanding is that it was selling at low prices to get foreign exchange.

Fertilizer improves the yields and reduces costs of food.  Like most people the
lower price is an attraction.  Canadian fertilizer is more expensive so the
farmers were looking for some economies in the production cycle.

The chemical fertilizers are much more efficient than manure so, again it
becomes a matter of economics.

I did a lot of work on fertilizers at one time when I was developing a patent
for the production of urea prills without the use of urea formaldehyde. Got a
patent but the urea formaldehyde helped prevent the prills from sticking
together so people continued to use the existing formulations.

Canada imports Fertilizers primarily from: United States ($1.08B), Russia
($74.1M), Netherlands ($62.4M), Morocco ($49.1M), and Germany ($22.7M). The
fastest growing import markets in Fertilizers for Canada between 2019 and 2020
were Turkmenistan ($7.87M), Poland ($5.05M), and Indonesia ($4.56M). Latest
Trends April 2022
Fertilizers in Canada | OEC - The Observatory of Economic
Comple…<https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=6f4a253cb60af4ffJmltdHM9MTY1OTIxOTEyOCZpZ3VpZD04ZGU1NGU2ZS03MmRiLTQ0YTEtYjJjNC0yMmY3ZjkyMWRjNTQmaW5zaWQ9NTM3OA&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=a6e6c36e-1054-11ed-9336-f53655ce476b&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly9vZWMud29ybGQvZW4vcHJvZmlsZS9iaWxhdGVyYWwtcHJvZHVjdC9mZXJ0aWxpemVycy9yZXBvcnRlci9jYW4_cmVkaXJlY3Q9dHJ1ZSM6fjp0ZXh0PUNhbmFkYSUyMGltcG9ydHMlMjBGZXJ0aWxpemVycyUyMHByaW1hcmlseSUyMGZyb20lM0ElMjBVbml0ZWQlMjBTdGF0ZXMlMjAlMjglMjQxLjA4QiUyOSUyQywlMjglMjQ1LjA1TSUyOSUyQyUyMGFuZCUyMEluZG9uZXNpYSUyMCUyOCUyNDQuNTZNJTI5LiUyMExhdGVzdCUyMFRyZW5kcyUyMEFwcmlsJTIwMjAyMg&ntb=1>
[cid:image001.png@01D8A582.D2BC58C0]
oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/fertilizers/reporter/can?redirect=true

From:
dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
On Behalf Of Chessor, Edward
Sent: July 30, 2022 11:09 AM
To: 'dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>'
<dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

Okay, I am not advocating a sudden elimination of all fertilizer use.  I am
asking how much of the fertilizer Canadian farmers use comes from Russia.  I
remember there being phosphate mining in Saskatchewan, and exports from there
through Vancouver.  I also remember a fertilizer plant in BC, using sulphuric
acid from the Trail smelter, and I understand Nutrien is producing urea in
Alberta.  I doubt we are totally dependent on Russian fertilizers.

I am also old enough to remember a time when crop land was fertilized with
manure from livestock. What yields did that produce?  Were input costs lower?
Spatial separation of livestock and grain production has made that more
difficult.

Ed

From:
dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Donald Hoyda
Sent: July-30-22 10:12 AM
To: dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

[CAUTION: Non-UBC Email]
Gentlemen: At Fort Saskatchewan, which has some of the best soil and rainfall
in Alberta if you plant a cereal crop without fertilizer the yield will be 12
to 15 bushels per acre. With currently applied amounts of nitrogen and
phosphate fertilizer the yield will be 90 to 100 bushels per acre. This has
been true for many years.
Regards, Don Hoyda

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 29, 2022, at 12:13 PM, Chessor, Edward
<echessor@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:echessor@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Looks like over the top rhetoric to me.  How long have we been importing
fertilizer from Russia?  Were Canadian farmers able to grow good crops for many
decades without it?  Can they figure out how to do it again?

Ed Chessor

From:
dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:dsp-ea-general-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ;
DSP.EA.Large.Messages@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:DSP.EA.Large.Messages@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: July-29-22 6:29 AM
To: DSP-EA-General@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:DSP-EA-General@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: FW: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the
cost of climate change?

[CAUTION: Non-UBC Email]

From: Wynn Payne <wynn.payne@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:wynn.payne@xxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: July 28, 2022 5:20 PM
To: DSP.EA.Large.Messages@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:DSP.EA.Large.Messages@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the cost
of climate change?

Thoughts?
Wynn
https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/07/trudeaus-fertiliser-ban-threatens-to-create-a-food-crisis/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the cost of climate change?
  - From: Don Logan

References:
- Re: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the cost of climate change?
  - From: Wynn Payne

RE: Is this right wing rhetoric or are we reducing farm output at the cost of climate change?

Other related posts: