LETTER: Fertiliser facts
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mrs Joyce Unwins
Sir: While agreeing with David Bellamy's views on world population, I was concerned to noteerrors in his article on China today ("Is China really so bad?", 12 January). The fall in world grain output is mostly attributable to the disastrous agricultural situation in most of the countries in the former Soviet Union and central Europe rather than "ever-rising levels of fertiliser application". In fact, world fertiliser consumption has dropped dramatically since 1990.
Furthermore, although China is a large user of organic fertilisers, it is also the world's largest consumer of mineral (or chemical) fertilisers. That China can feed itself is mainly due to the low per capita consumption of meat: increasing prosperity among the Chinese population means that demand for meat will rise, necessitating substantial increases in grain output for feedstock.
Yours faithfully,
Joyce Unwins
London, N8
12 January
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments