Today, all kinds of environmentally harmful issues are mentioned in the climate debate. The issues are usually put in the shoes of the farmers, because they don't say anything back anyway. But, I don't hear anyone say what it really is about.
We use all natural resources that nature can supply, but what do we give back to nature? Only products that are not biodegradable. There are so many pollutants in the faeces that it is chemically contaminated. In short: there is only one threat to nature and that is man himself. In order to alleviate the threat to nature, the following 1 points must be observed.
1. Products that can be included
First, we just need to create and apply products that can be absorbed by nature at some point. Our scientists have invented all kinds of products and substances, without looking at whether that product can be returned to nature. If man had only used products that nature could break down, there would have been no pollution.
2. Improve faeces
Second, we need to improve our faeces so that the nitrites can be returned to agriculture. Of all the raw materials that are in our food, we (humans) do not return anything to the farmer. Recently, the road with sewerage and utilities has been renewed. A double sewage system (with rainwater drainage) and a wastewater drainage system has been made. What a pity. Why not start with a double sewage system with polluted water and unpolluted water?
By unpolluted water I mean: the rainwater, the water that is used in the household (100% biodegradable detergents) and the faeces of people who do not use medicines. Here, the nitrites can easily be removed via the water boards and returned to the agricultural sector. After all, this is not contaminated with all kinds of chemical medicines.
We must keep the waste water of the people who use medicines separate. This is because it costs a lot of money to purify. For this we have to place 2 separate toilets in the house to separate these systems. We need to improve the waste water of people who use medicines as much as possible.
3. Customize transport movements
Thirdly, we need to adapt our transport movements. There are already several alternative clean raw materials (e.g. hydrogen). We build large solar parks in the desert that produce hydrogen, and we return food. Hydrogen is easy to transport. So clean energy is not a problem.
I also believe that we should not continue with 'Lithium Ion batteries', because those types of batteries cannot yet be returned to nature.
Circular pointer of man
When these 3 points are solved, the cycle pointer of the human being is correct and I regain confidence in the future. In The Hague there is no political party that talks about this. incomprehensible. To my greatest surprise, even parties like D66 and GroenLinks want to ban the first necessity of life (food for humans) from the Netherlands: our Dutch farmers.
They produce our food with the least environmental impact and the greatest efficiency. Do parties such as D66, GroenLinks and environmental organizations realize that for every hectare of land that is withdrawn from agriculture in the Netherlands, at least 15 hectares of land in the world must be extracted from nature in order to carry out agriculture there to feed the population?
I don't even know which country can fill that gap. Politics The Hague: you are completely on the wrong track and you do not have a vision for our environmental problem (which is very large) at all. Of all the problems on earth, only 1 is to blame and that is us: humans.
Jaap Major
Low Zuthem
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.
This is in response to it Boerenbusiness article:
[url=http://www.boerenbusiness.nl/column/10884102/niet-de-boer-maar-de-mens-endreigt-de-natuur]It is not the farmer, but humans that threaten nature[/url]