Dutch Farmers - Problems Going Green

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
🔥 The Dutch aren’t messing around. The Netherlands are burning. Well, parts of the Netherlands. Parts owned by someone named Gill Bates or something:





At least it’s finally making the news. The Dutch farmers have caused enough of a ruckus that corporate media has had to tentatively recognize them. The AP ran a barely-informative story this weekend headlined, “Anger Simmers for Dutch Farmers Who Oppose Pollution Cuts.”

Simmers.

The AP tentatively labeled the national shutdown in the Netherlands as merely a “summer of discontent” for peeved farmers: “Dutch farmers are embroiled in a summer of discontent that shows no sign of abating.” The news service almost immediately tipped its hand though, when it said the Dutch experience could “foreshadow similar reforms — and protests — in other European nations whose farmers also pump out pollutants.”

Haha. Farmers, pumping out pollutants. Good one. But .. WHAT ABOUT FOOD, you idiots?

And exactly what is the pumped-out pollutant? The AP said, “Airborne nitrogen leads to smog and tiny particles that are damaging to people’s health.”

Airborne nitrogen. Hmm. What’s the atmosphere made of again? Dummies. You know where nitrogen for fertilizer comes from in the first place? It’s distilled out of THE AIR.

Quoting the Dutch government, the AP said it “sees three options for farmers: become (more) sustainable, relocate or stop.”

Stop? Stop farming? Then what happens after the farmers stop farming? Oh, wait … is Joe Biden running the Netherlands too?? That would explain a lot.

After the United States, the Netherlands is the world’s second-largest food exporter. Or, was. WAS the world’s second-largest food exporter. Not this year, is my guess.



 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

Pay Attention To The Dutch Farmer Protests Because America Is Next



The genesis of the scheme was a court ruling from 2019 that said the Dutch government’s plan for reducing nitrogen emissions violated EU laws protecting its Natura 2000 network of supposedly vulnerable and endangered plant and animal habitats — basically a bunch of EU-governed wildlife preserves. These sites span the EU, covering 18 percent of the bloc’s land area and 8 percent of its marine territory.

To protect these wildlife preserves, Dutch farmers are being told they must submit to their government’s ruinous emissions plan.

But the Natura 2000 preserves are only part of the story. European leaders such as Rutte are environmental ideologues who want to transform global food production and eliminate private land ownership, and he sees an opportunity in this court order to reshape agriculture and land use in the Netherlands.

Indeed, Rutte — a walking embodiment of the Davos Man if there ever was one — is a big proponent of the United Nations’ “Agenda 2030” and its Sustainable Development Goals, which aim to squeeze farmers and ranchers around the world in order to reduce “emissions.” The policies that flow from these goals, such as drastically reducing the use of fertilizer, contributed to the recent economic collapse of Sri Lanka, which triggered mass protests that toppled Sri Lanka’s government and ousted its president earlier this month.

Last year, Rutte spoke to the World Economic Forum about “transforming food systems and land use” at Davos Agenda Week, announcing that the Netherlands would host something called the “Global Coordinating Secretariat of the World Economic Food Innovation Hubs,” whose job would be to “connect all other food innovation hubs.”

In Davos-speak, that means agricultural production and the supply of food will be centrally controlled by intra-governmental bodies and “stakeholders” consisting mainly of the world’s largest food corporations and international NGOs. Private farms and independent farmers will be a thing of the past, supplanted by global bodies making decisions about how much and what kinds of food are produced. The private sector and the independent farmers will have no place in the future that the UN and the WEF are planning.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

U.S. Farmers Grab the Lobbying Pitchforks as Greens Sow Costly New Reporting Mandates




Agriculture industry supporters contend the pending SEC rule will hinder an already struggling food supply chain, driving up prices while harming small communities reliant on agriculture, and forcing many small and mid-sized operations across the U.S. to close.

Gary Gensler, the Biden-nominated chairman of the SEC and a long time progressive, said in announcing the plan that “it would provide investors with consistent, comparable, and decision-useful information for making their investment decisions.”

But the plan drew “an extraordinarily high” number of substantive comments to the agency – around 14,000 – during the 60-day requisite comment period, according to Ropes & Gray, a law firm that compiled a report on public comments submitted to the SEC on the climate disclosure proposal. Because of that, the comment period was extended an extra 30 days and closed on June 17.

Agribusiness represented 20% of the total comments received by the SEC, mostly opposing the rule. The SEC was scheduled to adopt the plan in October, but it is expected to finalize the rule later due to the volume of comments and pleas for reconsideration.

Among the comments was the promise of litigation from a group of 24 Republican state attorneys general, which cited this year’s U.S. Supreme Court decision in West Virginia v. EPA that a federal agency does not have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

“If the Commission insists on taking the same inappropriate course, we will be ready to act once again,” the letter stated. “We urge you to save everyone years of strife by abandoning the Proposed Rule.”

[clip]

Walmart is the lone ranger among large corporations stepping into the fray, stating in public comments to the SEC that it could not correctly determine the emissions footprint, for example, from a T-shirt.

“To accurately calculate those emissions requires information from multiple parties about the agricultural practices of the cotton fields providing raw materials, the energy used in the fabric mills and sewing facilities that assemble the garment, the fuel sources of the vehicles used at each stage of transportation, and the choices a customer made regarding how to wash and dry the item over the product’s lifecycle,” the company wrote in a 10-page comments letter, signed by three corporate officers.

Few food and ag-related groups now report scope 3 emissions, although Archer-Daniels-Midland and Campbell Soup Co. do so. China-owned Smithfield Foods promises that it will report them in its annual report starting this year.

Archer-Daniels-Midland and Smithfield, which produce annual individual “sustainability” reports along with their yearly financial summaries, did not respond to interview requests.

A Campbell spokeswoman in an email said that “Campbell began reporting itemized Scope 3 emissions earlier this year. We also announced science-based targets at the same time that include reductions in Scope 3 emissions from purchased goods and services, including agricultural ingredients we buy from producers and suppliers.”

The proposed SEC rule is one of many from the Biden administration in its pursuit of “carbon-free electricity” by 2035, according to a 2021 executive order from the White House.
 
Last edited:
  • Angry
Reactions: TPD

TPD

the poor dad

U.S. Farmers Grab the Lobbying Pitchforks as Greens Sow Costly New Reporting Mandates




Agriculture industry supporters contend the pending SEC rule will hinder an already struggling food supply chain, driving up prices while harming small communities reliant on agriculture, and forcing many small and mid-sized operations across the U.S. to close.

Gary Gensler, the Biden-nominated chairman of the SEC and a long time progressive, said in announcing the plan that “it would provide investors with consistent, comparable, and decision-useful information for making their investment decisions.”

But the plan drew “an extraordinarily high” number of substantive comments to the agency – around 14,000 – during the 60-day requisite comment period, according to Ropes & Gray, a law firm that compiled a report on public comments submitted to the SEC on the climate disclosure proposal. Because of that, the comment period was extended an extra 30 days and closed on June 17.

Agribusiness represented 20% of the total comments received by the SEC, mostly opposing the rule. The SEC was scheduled to adopt the plan in October, but it is expected to finalize the rule later due to the volume of comments and pleas for reconsideration.

Among the comments was the promise of litigation from a group of 24 Republican state attorneys general, which cited this year’s U.S. Supreme Court decision in West Virginia v. EPA that a federal agency does not have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

“If the Commission insists on taking the same inappropriate course, we will be ready to act once again,” the letter stated. “We urge you to save everyone years of strife by abandoning the Proposed Rule.”

[clip]

Walmart is the lone ranger among large corporations stepping into the fray, stating in public comments to the SEC that it could not correctly determine the emissions footprint, for example, from a T-shirt.

“To accurately calculate those emissions requires information from multiple parties about the agricultural practices of the cotton fields providing raw materials, the energy used in the fabric mills and sewing facilities that assemble the garment, the fuel sources of the vehicles used at each stage of transportation, and the choices a customer made regarding how to wash and dry the item over the product’s lifecycle,” the company wrote in a 10-page comments letter, signed by three corporate officers.

Few food and ag-related groups now report scope 3 emissions, although Archer-Daniels-Midland and Campbell Soup Co. do so. China-owned Smithfield Foods promises that it will report them in its annual report starting this year.

Archer-Daniels-Midland and Smithfield, which produce annual individual “sustainability” reports along with their yearly financial summaries, did not respond to interview requests.

A Campbell spokeswoman in an email said that “Campbell began reporting itemized Scope 3 emissions earlier this year. We also announced science-based targets at the same time that include reductions in Scope 3 emissions from purchased goods and services, including agricultural ingredients we buy from producers and suppliers.”

The proposed SEC rule is one of many from the Biden administration in its pursuit of “carbon-free electricity” by 2035, according to a 2021 executive order from the White House.
This is the first time I've heard of this new reporting proposition. People better wake up and realize what thin ice the food supply is on right now. One wide spread drought in the US or South America will send food prices much higher than you have seen in the last year with Biden's inflation reduction. Where will these government regulators stop?!
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
This is the first time I've heard of this new reporting proposition. People better wake up and realize what thin ice the food supply is on right now. One wide spread drought in the US or South America will send food prices much higher than you have seen in the last year with Biden's inflation reduction. Where will these government regulators stop?!
Regulators is the secret word.
Laws are easy it's the regulations that are killing America, and they don't come from Congress or any law making body. They come from some power mad bureaucrat ass-hole
 

BOP

Well-Known Member
Poor AP...don't know the difference between Nitrogen (which makes up 78% of the Earth's atmosphere), and NOx -which includes Nitrogen Monoxide (Nitric Oxide - NO) and Nitrogen Dioxide - NO2. NOx is formed from lightning (quick! Ban lightning!) and both cars (gas and diesel-powered) and such things as electrical plants.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

This is the first time I've heard of this new reporting proposition. People better wake up and realize what thin ice the food supply is on right now. One wide spread drought in the US or South America will send food prices much higher than you have seen in the last year with Biden's inflation reduction. Where will these government regulators stop?!
Well, there are a lot of people here in the US that do need to lose a bunch of weight. Higher food prices will give them the incentive to eat less and not buy as much food. Maybe the government is just playing a kind of tough love with its citizens? Being altruistic and all that?


end /s
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

Netherlands to close up to 3,000 farms to comply with EU rules



The Netherlands is attempting to cut down its nitrogen pollution and will push ahead with compulsory purchases if not enough farms take up the offer voluntarily.

Farmers will be offered a deal “well over” the worth of the farm, according to the government plan that is targeting the closure of 2,000 to 3,000 farms or other major polluting businesses.

Earlier leaked versions of the plan put the figure at 120 per cent of the farm’s value but that figure has not yet been confirmed by ministers.

“There is no better offer coming,” Christianne van der Wal, nitrogen minister, told MPs on Friday. She said compulsory purchases would be made with “pain in the heart”, if necessary.



Bring on the higher prices and shortages
 

spr1975wshs

Mostly settled in...
Ad Free Experience
Patron
^Another good reason to stay away from international organizations, which endanger national sovereignty.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member

EU ensures Dutch farmers booted FOREVER from farming








And it is a “scheme” between the EU and the Dutch government, which knows it’s in real trouble with its citizens (witness the stunning farmers’ party gains in March) and had better ram this through before another election throws them out of power. Where the skullduggery and collusion comes in between the EU and Dutch government is the language in this agreement. The EU is allowing the Dutch to offer up to 120% of a farm’s value, an over-valuation that would normally be considered an “illegal government incentive.” They’ve come up with a semantics workaround or trade-off by demanding that farmers who take the “offer” then agree to be banned from farming forever in Europe. And the “voluntarily give up their farms” is a hoot because there’s no “voluntarily” about it. It’s an offer so good you can’t refuse because they are taking your farm, one way or the other.

Odd those particular details haven’t made any of the wire services reports.






 
Top