A major new report describes the road to sustainable, climate-friendly food supply (Ecowatch). The 565-page report was produced by the World Resources Institute, with an eye on projected global population growth. The need to sharply curtail beef consumption is one of the highlights, consistent with the need for a massive overhaul of farming.
However, it has been observed that in most of the countries as the chemical combination of such drugs is quite low. viagra buy usa There are natural aphrodisiacs, such as amino http://greyandgrey.com/attorneys/ cialis in india acids, healthy fats, fibers, phytonutrients and 27 vitamins and minerals. In fact, it has more adverse order cheap viagra and unpredictable effects. It increases the stress generic sildenafil uk level, anger and depression that ultimately increases the intake of smoking, alcohol and antidepressant.
—–
Prolonged drought conditions in the Horn of Africa have become more persistent (ReliefWeb). This year’s spring rainy season has failed once more, leaving 12 million people with severe food shortages. That number could still grow to 17 million by August. The situation requires substantial humanitarian assistance based on food imports, which of course raises questions about the long-term viability of sources of supply.
—–
An author and specialized management consultant explains “the one viable solution to climate change” (Forbes). Steve Denning is a keen observer and his opinions cannot be taken lightly. He starts with a number of observations for why all the various current plans of action are not getting the job done at the scale required for success. Partly that is just due to human nature getting in the way. His plan requires an intensified effort to develop new technologies along with better-organized measures of enactment, comparable to putting a man on the moon, done in ways that get the public excited.
—–
On the same subject, another prominent author and environmental expert prefers a quite different plan of attack (Foreign Policy magazine). Ted Nordhaus has doubts about the likely efficacy of plans that are dramatic and aimed at blockbuster-type results. He thinks baby steps are the only way to go—“Slow, quiet, incremental policies are the planet’s best hope.”
–Comment: Offhand, I would say that Denning’s approach is superior if we really are desperately short of time and dependent on searching for miracles, otherwise Nordhaus makes more sense. There should actually be a way to accommodate each without excluding full pursuit of the other.
—–
A new study makes an assessment of Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage as a means of negative emissions technology (Carbon Brief). The best-known machinery appears to be feasible with respect to cost but the very high numbers of units and high energy requirements are significant drawbacks. Moreover, “[P]olicy instruments and financial incentives supporting negative emission technologies are almost absent at the global scale, though essential to make NET deployment attractive.”
–Open access to the study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-10842-5
—–
Planting trees to absorb CO2 from the air is fine but results should not be exaggerated (RealClimate). Stefan Rahmstorf has some issues with the size of the benefits claimed by a recent report which promoted a massive global planting program. (See CL #1461, July 5.)
Carl