After reading so much thinly supported junk from the AEF, I expected this to be more of the same. Instead what Max gives me something I wish I saw a lot more of on OLO - a clear definition of the issue he is addressing, a clear description of the course of action he thinks we should take, a list of facts he bases his opinions on and most importantly a healthy sprinkling of links to background reading supporting those facts. I don't agree with his conclusions, but the article made me think and taught me things I wasn't aware of before. I can't ask for more. Thanks.

The FAO link was great. You know a link is good when you find yourself wasting a lot of time looking for more of the same. I was totally unaware of how much the worlds food situation had improved during my lifetime. I was also unaware of how much unused arable land was available. These things are all good news. But Max seems to of ignored some of the other statements in that same article. It appears land isn't the major limiting factor in food production. It is water, and from the sporadic reports I see in many places in the world many places (eg China and India) are pushing the limits of what is available.

As others have pointed out the price of petroleum based fertilises are going through the roof right now, and phosphorous doesn't appear to be far behind if our local retail prices for phosphorous based products are anything to go by. According to Max's links, without tractors, fertilisers and phosphorous production per acre of land falls by a factor of 10. Indeed, its lightly the high prices of these inputs are already effecting productivity in poorer nations.

So after reading the links provided by Max I don't see the same rosy picture he does. Perhaps Max is a optimist. I recall a lecturer saying optimists are generally happier people than pessimists. In the long term though, the pessimists usually have the consolation of being proved right.

The present limiting factor in food production is a shortage of money that people in need have to have to buy food that agriculture is capable of producing.

I am amazed that authors here do not mention shortage of money together with shortage of fertilizer and water.

Plant and animal life obviously needs adequate nutrition and water. Consumers need adequate money and nobody wants to die due to malnutrition or starvation. The customers exist, farmers exist, transport companies and retailers exist, adequate money does not exist amongst the majority of people.

There is cleary an economic problem that needs to be addressed to feed the world on a sustainable basis. Yes, feed the world, animals also need food.

Tut tut Max Rheese

I see you're at it again and not a mention of the urgent requirement to remediate our seriously depleted soils in Australia.

Max, if you wish to be taken seriously you'd best cease masking your "free" market, pro-industry strategies under green titles. AEF indeed!

Altruistic philosophies or conservation have nothing to do with your push for GM foods and the international restrictions now on carcinogenic, chlorinated chemicals are impacting the profits of Monsanto, Dow et al. As a result, they've implemented a global push to flog off glyphosates to keep their snouts in the trough but not so fast Max.... not so fast man...we're onta ya buddy.

And those who forget Monsanto's ignominious past, could be forced to witness a repeat!

http://www.foe.org.au/sustainable-food/media/news-items/front-page-news-feed-1/new-report-gm-crops-increase-pesticide-use?searchterm=GM+crops

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:q3Z3oXAcMScJ:www.foe.org.au/news/2007/burkes-backyard-the-new-face-of-greenwashing-in-australia+max+rheese+profile&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=au&lr=lang_en