Richard Higgins comments on Jay Raynar’s Post Brexit synopsis

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04x53v5

Jay Raynar gives a two minute synopsis of  a Post Brexit food economy, in 2017

Jay’s first point….if you grow potatoes in the Fens you’ll get 20 tons an acre. If you grow them in the clay soils of the Thames Valley you’ll get 16 tons an acre, so you will need 25 % more land or shed loads of carbon inputs to get the same result

Richard Higgins There is shed loads of carbon inputs  everywhere and plenty of land – all over Wales, for example, there are millions and millions of sheep. The hillside farms could all be used for growing Potatoes etc., So the land is not a problem. We know from previous announcements that it is 98% more efficient to grow food to feed humans than to grow food to feed animals and eat them. So FIRSTLY    We’re doing the wrong thing here

Carbon inputs. All over the UK there are horse stables that are throwing away their used horse bedding. This is the carbon input that is being wasted. Wasted everyday on a massive scale. This with a few other on farm inputs will totally solve the food problem of the UK if it were properly utilised

next point, please

He says local is not a solution to the carbon footprint problem

Richard Higgins…  Even a small set up will cost  in excess of 300,000 pounds for equipment alone. And the cost of chemicals to run a 1,000 acre farm is in excess of 250,000 per year……There’s your carbon foot print in manufacturing, distribution and fossil fuel running costs. Local IS a solution to the carbon footprint problem and it is very much a total solution to the carbon footprint problem. IE., you won’t need any gas imported from Russia to make synthetic fertilisers and pesticides. You won’t need the massive machinery to unnecessarily cultivate the land and LOCAL MEANS FRESH. You will solve the problem of Supermarket food needing so many preservatives to preserve it and the production of so much processed food that is categorically  one of the main reasons people are obese and diabetic, which is costing the NHS Billions of pounds a year to treat.

Jay…..Organic farming is not sustainable because of an interest in lower yields….

Richard Higgins….This is simply not true. If organic farming is done right it will often get 300 % increase in yields WITH NO EXTERNAL INPUTS. But more to the point is that this food could be grown everywhere instead of on just a few farms by one man on a tractor and equipment that costs in excess of 300,000 pounds per farm.

Jay….because organic farming is done with a bigger labour force you end up with a larger carbon footprint

Richard….. how does a large work force create a larger carbon footprint?  It doesn’t. It educates people, and reduces the chemical inputs to zero . The use of chemical fertilisers is the VERY CAUSE OF AN EXCESSIVE CARBON FOOTPRINT

Jay….The other assumption is that the food is going to be better for you…there is no evidence for that…

Richard….I think you will need to look again at the data, the NHS rising health costs etc etc.,

Jay… IF we have lower yields we have to annex land in other Countries….

Richard…  this is simply not true. All the millions of acres that are used for sheep and cattle rearing could be used for food production..which is 98% more efficient than meat production.

Jay… 70% of UK’s food and animal feed is grown out side of the UK

Richard…. this need not and should not be happening. This is just the wrong policy for sustainable food production

Jay… if organic production exacerbates problems …  it is not a solution

Richard… Organic will not exacerbate any problems it will only help the problems disappear. The Chemical and massive developments on the high tech approach indeed exacerbates the problem of carbon footprint, depletes the soil and depletes the nutrition in our food.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04x53v5