Go read about Haber Bosch.
The natural systems of letting the land lie fallow are too slow - and would make BILLIONS of us starve. Go away.

One could also argue that using fertilizer saves energy and increases calories produced,
- Because 'not using fertiliser' means you'd have to produce 5 times as many crops with 5 times as much energy expended to get the same yield.

And that's why we use it fertilizer.
Because it's more efficient than not using it.

And that's why the argument is flawed, because its base unit is measurement of emissions, not calories produced, or energy used.

"The natural systems of letting the land lie fallow are too slow - and would make BILLIONS of us starve."

Yes, exactly.
So using fertilizer is actually far more efficient than not using it, right?
Meaning it uses less energy for greater output.

Less energy used (input) for more calories produced (output)

Arguing against fertilizer use is an argument to use more energy for less output.

You say I'm stupid because I don't understand these complex ideas.
Maybe science is stupid if it can't easily make an argument to explain itself.

Armchair,
Energy can be measured in calories. They're an obsolete metric unit (replaced by Joules) but are still widely used to display the energy content of food.

The notion that it generally takes ten times as much energy input (by humans) to grow food as is in the food itself is wrong. However it often takes ten ears of corn to produce the equivalent amount of beef as one ear of corn.

Syphon pumps are not a source of free energy. There a way of getting water flowing, but it ALWAYS flows more down than up. You canna change the laws of physics!

Dams can be used like batteries if you have the means to collect the water and pump it back up. But it's often cheaper to let rivers refill them.

The US did not stage a coup in Ukraine. Their old president fled to Russia during mass demonstrations against him, and the Ukrainians installed a replacement.
Allegations from a pro Russian stooge in Ukraine that America's going to start a civil war there do not constitute proof that it actually was. But it is likely Russia was trying to do just that; when separatists did try to break away, Russia not only armed them but clandestinely sent its army to fight for them.

The Russian language was not outlawed in Ukraine. There were some restrictions on its use, and partly as a reaction against this, the Ukrainians elected a pro Russian language PM named Volodymyr Zelensky.

AC - Let's try a wiki for kids - and I'll add a comprehension question to keep it lively. My question is - how many people does this energy intensive process feed?

"The Haber process or the Haber-Bosch process is a chemical reaction that uses nitrogen gas and hydrogen gas to create the chemical compound ammonia. The Haber process uses temperatures ranging from 400°C to 450°C under a pressure of 200 atm. The Haber process uses a catalyst mostly made up of iron.

Fritz Haber, 1918
The Haber process is named after the German scientist Fritz Haber. Haber was the first person to successfully complete the process. In 1909, Haber's process could produce about one cup of ammonia every two hours. Carl Bosch helped to develop the Haber process for industry. In 1913, the German company BASF started using the Haber process to make ammonia. During World War I, the Haber process was used to make explosives. The Germans kept this a secret until after the war. In 1918, Haber won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, and in 1931, Bosch also shared a Nobel Prize.

The Haber process is still important today because it produces ammonia, which is needed for fertilizer and for many other purposes. The Haber process produces about 500 million tons (453 billion kilograms) of fertilizer every year. This fertilizer helps to feed about 40% of the world's population."
https://kids.kiddle.co/Haber_process

Hey Aiden,
"However it often takes ten ears of corn to produce the equivalent amount of beef as one ear of corn."

That's something I can make sense of.
If someone wants to say that producing corn produces x amount of emissions per tonne, whist producing beef produces y amount of emissions per tonne, I can follow this.

Saying all food requires 10 times the input for a single unit of output;
Or that the input only produces 1/10th of the output.
Hard to make sense of.

It's like some strange calculation of 'energy used' for 'food produced' displayed as calories with some added emission calculation component, I assume.

Humans will generally find the most efficient way to mass-produce anything, more a matter of profitability rather than environmental or emission concerns.

"Syphon pumps are not a source of free energy. There a way of getting water flowing, but it ALWAYS flows more down than up. You cannot change the laws of physics!"

A normal syphon won't flow up, I know this, but this gadget seems to somehow achieve it.
The best I can figure out is that the weight of the water in the horizontal outflow section weighs more than the water in the raise section, so it will flow out from the tank and also create enough pressure from the vacuum within the tank to raise water from the well?

I'm not an engineer, and don't know if I'm being had by fake videos chasing viewer revenue.
I wish there was a engineering faculty that did a mythbusting video on it.
As for Ukraine, we can agree to disagree, it's ok.

Hey Max Green,
I'm running out of comments for today on this thread.
I appreciate you sharing the info about the ammonia process, but I just don't understand how it conflates to requiring 10 times the input for a single unit of output. (food)
Surely using fertilizer is more efficient than not, meaning you only need grow 1 acre of crops instead of however many you would otherwise need to produce the same amount without it.