Planet Earth, Planet Desert?

Planet Earth, Planet Desert?

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

By Dominique Guillet

The only terrorism is food and they are the ones who installed it, with the complicity of the multinationals. Could it be that the planet "deserted" humanity?

While some puppets are frantically excited in the electoral arena, the real arena inexorably covers the land with its sterile mantle. Demagogues of all kinds always promise more growth: more salaries, more vacations, more work, more consumption and, of course, more security against a nonexistent enemy.

The only terrorism is food and they are the ones who installed it with the complicity of the multinationals.

The planet dies of extraction, it dies of combustion. Planet Earth begins to settle accounts with humanity: after so many subtractions, now it presents the addition!

Earthling, get out of your dream! Planet Earth is stuck, sinks, becomes desertified. Could it be that the planet "deserted" humanity? The word "desert" comes from the Latin "desertus", from "deserere" which means "to abandon".

Dune: the fate of the planet?

In 1957, journalist Frank Herbert was posted to Florence, Oregon, in the United States. in order to write a report on a government project to combat sand dunes through the planting of plant barriers. He came back fascinated by the ecology and the sand dunes.

In 1965, Frank Herbert became one of the great masters of ecology-fiction and science-fiction by publishing the first work of his great epic known under the name of "Cycle of Dunes." Did Frank Herbert sense the ineluctable destiny of our planet? Can we consider Dune as an allegory?

What are the limiting factors of the planetary ecosystem of Dunas that are also limiting in ours or could be in the very short term?

- The sand winds are unleashed on Duna at 700 km. /hour.

- Gigantic worms share the dominion of this planet with the "Fremen" (Free Men). They are hundreds of meters long and are the source of the "Spice".

- Dune is a desert planet. The sand buries everything.

- Duna is a planet without water: all water is recycled, including urine, perspiration and even the "water" of the deceased.

Humus storms, sandstorms

In 1932, the "Dust Bowl" hit the great plains of the southern United States. and is installed for about ten years. Large sandstorms (sometimes 3000 meters high) brought ruin and devastation: they were 70 in 1933, 73 in 1936 and 134 during the first 9 months of 1937. On May 9, 1934, a sandstorm came out of Montana and Wyoming and took 318 million tons of soil. The year 1938 saw the loss of nearly a billion tons of soil. In March 1939, an Oklahoma sandstorm swept away enough soil to cover an area of ​​2.5 million hectares with a layer 12 inches thick (one-tenth of all agricultural land in France).

Sand dunes invaded the fields, sometimes measuring 500 meters long and 7 meters high. Agriculture was annihilated: 30 million hectares were abandoned. It was the exodus for 3.5 million American citizens.

During this period, numerous natural cataclysms aggravated the cycle of sand winds and drought: hail storms, extreme temperatures, static electricity, floods.

According to experts in paleoclimatology, who studied the 2000-year drought cycles in the U.S., the drought periods of the 20th century are not by far the most severe in the history of this part of the continent.

So why was the "Dust Bowl" so dramatic? Quite simply because the region should never have been tilled. For thousands of years, these vast spaces of semi-arid grasses have been windswept and subjected to drought cycles that could last from 25 to 70 years. And yet the settlers had been warned by the Amerindians who advised them not to open the land with their plows and especially not to touch the grass.

Was the lesson of the “Dust Bowl learned? Not at all. World War II pushed up agricultural prices and farmers returned to plow marginal land. The sandstorms returned from 1954 to 1957 and the devastation spread over twice as much land as in the 1930s. In the 1970s, the U.S.A. they sold wheat to the USSR and prices went up. The farmers redoubled their efforts (and the plows quadrupled them) and the sandstorms returned.

The lesson of the "Dust Bowl" also did not serve the farmers of Kajarstan. From 1960 to 1980, they destroyed the grasslands to replace them with wheat cultivation: 26 million hectares. The equivalent of the total area of ​​wheat grown between Canada and Australia! Since 1980, terrible wind erosion has shut out the economic viability of farms as a result of a drastic drop in productivity. In 2000, the area sown to wheat was only 13 million hectares with yields of the order of 1 ton per hectare! Thus, within 20 years Kajarstan abandoned wheat cultivation on an agricultural area equivalent to that of wheat cultivation in Canada. How many millennia will it take to regenerate these soils destroyed by wind erosion?

Wind erosion can also manifest itself by inter-continental transits. In the same way that the Swiss border did not stop the Chernobyl cloud (coincidentally, at that time it was a certain Mr. Nicolás Sarkozy who was in charge of the fight against chemical and radiological risks), sandstorms do not recognize any border and they export precious raw materials without any customs duty being collected.

In April 2001, a 1800 km "ground storm". of amplitude flew out of China (carrying millions of tons of soil) to land in North America: it covered with its mantle the entire western part, from Arizona to Canada.

Also South Korea is periodically paralyzed by immense sandstorms that come from China. In late April 2007, one of those storms hit the country. On April 1, 2007, another sandstorm arrived from the Kubugi Desert, China's seventh desert and wreaked havoc on the Korean peninsula. These storms are even more dramatic because they also carry a large amount of pollutants from eastern China's industries, causing respiratory and skin diseases, and throwing agricultural activities out of balance.

The Kubugi Desert in Inner Mongolia has been a desert for only 30 years: it was once a green pasture area for the Mongols and their herds.

China is waging a battle, surely lost in advance, against the advance of the deserts, the old and the new that are being created. According to Wang Tao of the Chinese National Academy of Sciences, during the last half century, 24,000 villages have been totally or partially abandoned. From 1950 to 1975, China lost 175,000 hectares each year. Between 1975 and 1987, desertification took over 200,000 hectares each year. From 1987 to 2000, desertification took hold of 300,000 hectares per year. At this rate, China will lose 400,000 hectares of land each year starting in 2012.

In China, over the years, sandstorms get worse in season early, in intensity and in quantity. They have become one of the main calamities in this country. In 2006, they affected air quality in half of China's big cities. They covered 4 million square kilometers, double the area of ​​the previous year.

On April 20, 2006, a storm covered the Chinese capital with 300,000 tons of sand and dust.

This year, in Tibet, the sandstorms arrive two months in advance of the normal season.

In view of the ever-growing damage caused by industrial and militarized agriculture, in view of climatic disruptions (whatever the causes), wind erosion is going to intensify in Africa and Asia, and return to North America. North.

Humus storms are not to be feared on certain continents as much of the precious humus is already at the bottom of the oceans, thanks to the barbaric practices of modern agriculture. They are the sandstorms that will become one of the greatest calamities on our planet… Tomorrow.

The planet abandoned to the deserts

According to Professor Pimentel, from 1956 to 1996, there are 1.5 billion hectares of arable land that have been abandoned due to erosion. That is, a third of the arable surfaces of the planet.

Over the last 20 years, around 300 million hectares (six times the area of ​​France) of tropical forests have been destroyed to establish farms and ranches or large-scale plantations of palm oil, rubber, soybean , of sugar cane and other crops.

On a planetary scale, there are 1,370 hectares of land that are desertified forever every hour, that is, 12 million hectares each year, the equivalent of half the agricultural area of ​​France.

In India, for example, there are 2.5 million that are desertified every year. By the year 2000, the agricultural area in this country was estimated at 150 million hectares. That means that by 2060 there will not be a single gram of arable land left in India. In fact, an even more catastrophic scenario may emerge if the desertification process accelerates, due to climatic changes: increased temperatures, droughts and the disappearance of the Himalayan glaciers.

On a planetary scale, what is the exact amount of soil that is lost each year due to wind and water erosion? The lowest estimates are of the order of 25 billion tonnes of soil per year. According to the highest estimates, there are 2,400 tons of soil, every second, that is blown away or lost in the oceans, that is, 76 billion tons of soil per year.

High estimates seem much more likely to us since each year Costa Rica loses one billion tons of soil, the island of Java loses one billion, Ethiopia one billion, etc.

In his writings, John Jeavons evoked the loss of soil in relation to food production: for every ton of food that is produced, there are 6 to 8 tons of soil that is lost forever.

A Westerner consumes about a ton of food per year. In certain countries, the consumption per person is half. In other regions, or according to populations or social strata, the amount of food consumed tends towards zero, which “explains” the fact that 36,000 people die of hunger every day.

In China, erosion would be maximum since the figure of 18 tons of soil lost per ton of food produced is cited. Official figures mention the loss of 5 billion land each year. It is a strictly minimal estimate. According to satellite images, the Taklimakan and Kumtag deserts are merging. The same is happening with two deserts in the north-central region that are spreading over the provinces of Gansu and Mongolia itself.

In Iran, according to Mohammad Jarian, head of the department to combat desertification, 124 villages in the Sistan-Baluchistan region have been buried in 2002 and abandoned.

In northwestern Afghanistan, 15-meter high sand dunes invade everything, including highways.

In Nigeria, 350,000 hectares are desertified every year, just like in China. From 1950 to 2005, the human population increased from 33 million to 132 million while the number of cows, goats and sheep grew from 6 million to 66 million.

Many African countries are desertified very quickly due to different factors: non-durable agricultural practices, overgrazing and roaming of herds, savanna fires and the trade in wood charcoal destined for more and more city dwellers.

Madagascar loses up to 400 tons of soil per year and per hectare.

In Mexico, desertification expels 700,000 peasants each year to the cities or the United States.

As for Australia, to speak of a catastrophe is at best an understatement. This country is preparing for its seventh consecutive year of drought. Australia will undoubtedly be the first "western" country to be ruined by the processes of salinization and desertification: certain Australian lands have concentrations of salt three times higher than those of the ocean.

Western society took a century and a half of intensive farming and breeding to transform Australia into a desert. Fast-food and fast-destruction! Should I wrap it up or is it to "consume" right away?

A record that even the U.S.A. they could not overcome: they only lost in 150 years of colonialism 75% of their humus! They are 1m50 (150 cm.) Of humus that has gone forever in the oceans. In temperate places, it takes 500 years to naturally produce 2.5 cm. humus. This means that nature will need 30,000 years to regenerate this humic heritage in the United States.

In Europe, the median rate of soil erosion is 17 tons per hectare per year while the rate of soil formation is 1 ton per hectare per year.

In France, for example, according to the Pas de Calais Chamber of Agriculture, farmers in this region lose between 10 and 100 tonnes per hectare per year.

When the erosion is 100 tons of soil per hectare and per year, this means that it takes 100 years to replace 1 year of intensive beet agriculture and that it takes 2000 years to replace 20 years of intensive agriculture of the same crop.

Added to erosion is the destruction of soils burned by toxic agriculture. Make no mistake: many French regions may not be sandy deserts, but they are developing deserts. What if, today, all synthetic fertilizers and all pesticides were banned from agriculture? The lands have become barren: the autumns would have no crops.

Modern Western agriculture is a "soilless" agriculture that produces food-poisons. It is a militarized agriculture that bombards the soil with a whole arsenal of toxic products.

Who remembers that 2006, last year in fact, was declared by the UN the "International Year of Deserts and Desertification?"

Who knows of the existence, within the UN, of a commission in charge of the fight against desertification?

Few people without a doubt and it is fine that way since that commission has no financial means! A screen, a slight smoke screen, nothing more.
What will Planet Earth be seen from the cosmos in 2050? Great deserts surrounded by some oceans, a small yellow and blue ball. The green will have disappeared ... The day after tomorrow ...

Lack of water

There is a "World Water Day" as there is also a world day for women, a world day for children and possibly soon a world day of humus or a world day of worms.

It is the occasion, for all hypocrites, to let some crocodile tears escape on the fate of women, on the fate of water, on the fate of children, in short, on the fate of all the oppressed.

This year, the theme for this world water day was “Coping with water scarcity”. The shortage will soon give this new underdog the status of award-winning water. Water will soon be more expensive than oil (which will ruin all the hopes of the water engine inventors) or more expensive than wine (which will exacerbate the ravages of alcoholism).

In short, according to the FAO, water scarcity represents the position of the 21st century. "The gamble essentially lies in the need to find more efficient means of conserving, using and protecting the Earth's water resources."

This kind of hollow speech has only been heard for some ten years.

Today, and for a long time, there are 2.6 billion humans who do not have sanitation, and there are 1.3 billion humans who do not have access to drinking water. Every year, 2 million children under the age of 5 die from diarrheal diseases related to the lack of clean water.

Let's talk money and run some numbers. There is a “Global Environment Facility” (WEF) which, as the UN states, “has been established in 1990 in order to provide additional financial resources to deal with global environmental issues of developing countries and economies in developing countries. transition". This fund only has 2 billion dollars per year for the entire planet.

For example, it would take an investment of US $ 1.5 billion over 10 years so that the 300 million Africans, who do not have clean water, could have access to it and so that 80% of them could have access to sanitation.

By comparison, every year Western countries subsidize their farmer with $ 350 billion. And every year, world military spending is about $ 900 billion.

You have to see things as they are: the international community decided to let a whole part of humanity die of thirst, or diseases related to polluted waters.

The pious vows and tearful speeches of international institutions are only covers.

And this is understood. It is a question of survival for the wealthy. It is a question of survival for its modern agriculture that consumes almost 90% of the fresh water of the entire planet.

The choice is simple: either water is given to all of humanity or an attempt is made to make non-durable modern agriculture endure. The wealthy who control the planet have decided to privilege the agriculture of the rich.

Modern agriculture not only desertifies soils, it not only poisons humans and animals but also depletes fresh water reserves.

Modern varieties of corn are the quintessence of this agricultural delusion. One hectare of corn requires, in the U.S.A., at least 5 million liters of water, but due to evaporation, there are 8 million liters of water that must be irrigated per hectare. This gives a consumption of 1000 liters of water per kilo of corn produced, and it is also only a median since certain studies mention up to 1500 liters of water per kilo of corn.

It should be noted that this shameful waste of fresh water for growing corn has nothing to do with corn, which is a C4 plant, that is, a drought-resistant plant. Traditional varieties of corn could grow in the desert of Mexico or Arizona. For example, the Hopi sowed their corn at 30 or 40 cms. deep in the desert sand with some canes to sow. It is modern agronomy that made maize a water bomb, and as water supplies are dwindling across the planet, the wizard-apprentices of genetic bungling promise us new chimerical drought-resistant maize varieties. The circuit is closed ...

Corn is the main irrigated crop in France, especially in the Southwest. But he is not the only one: wheat, beet, vine, meadow, etc. they are also irrigated.

Here are some estimates, as to the amount of water needed for US agriculture, given by the very renowned Professor Pimentel, of Cornell University, in his book: "Ecological Integrity", Integrating Environment, Conservation and Health, (Island Press, Washington, DC, 2001)

For 1 kilo of potatoes: 500 liters of water
For 1 kilo of wheat. 900 liters of water
For 1 kilo of forage: 1000 liters of water
For 1 kilo of corn: 1500 liters of water
For 1 kilo of rice: 1900 liters of water
For 1 kilo of soy: 2000 liters of water
For 1 kilo of beef: 100 300 liters of water

Within the catalog of irrigated agricultural follies, meat production has the record of non-durability and waste.

At the planetary level, let us remember that meat consumption went from 44 million tons in 1950 to 265 million in 2005. And this trend continues to grow.

The amount of water used per kilo of meat differs depending on the studies.

According to Georg Borgstrom of the University of Michigan, it takes only 21,000 liters of water to produce 1 kilo of beef.

According to the University of California, it takes 44,000 liters of water to produce 1 kilogram of beef, 13,700 liters of water to produce 1 kilogram of pork, and 6,800 liters of water to produce 1 kilogram of chicken meat.

A study published by a United Nations commission in 2004 ruled 70,000 liters of water per kilo of beef.

This figure is not far from that of Professor David Pimentel whose calculations are based on the feeding of a beef in the U.S.A., that is, 100 kilos of forage and 4 kilos of grains per kilo of meat produced.
In the United States, 65% of agricultural production is used to feed livestock (against 1% in India).

Worldwide, grain production is 1985 million tons of which 60% are consumed by man, 36% are used as feed for livestock and 3% are burned as fuel.

If we reason in terms of calories, it takes 50 times more water to produce a calorie of meat than a calorie of potato.

Let us now reason in terms of showering. We admit that we take a 5-minute shower every day at the rate of 18 liters of water per minute. What is the equivalent of a kilo of beef, according to Professor Pimentel's calculations, in terms of shower?

Three years of daily showering equals 1 kilo of beef!

These figures help us better understand the dilemma of the planet that could (almost) be summarized as the choice between water for the poor and meat for the rich.

In fact, the dilemma is complicated since the rich now not only want meat, more and more meat, but they also want agro-fuels to run their cars.
Thus the madness of necro-fuels is spilling like a plague over the entire planet. The scarcity of water is increasing even more since it takes up to 3,600 liters of water to produce one liter of ethanol (from 2.5 kilos of corn). In 2006, in the United States, 20% of the national corn production (that is, 55 million out of the 270 million tons produced) was burned in ethanol plants.

Even more water scarcity

The balance sheet of modern agriculture is even worse than one might imagine since it is only the direct effects that we have just described.

Now we must address the indirect consequences of this non-durable agriculture on water management.
The first aspect concerns the destruction of vegetation cover in the great prairies, particularly in the past in the USA. and in Australia and more recently in countries like Kazakhstan. In the USA, a new agronomic concept, as foolish as that of "Hybrid Vigor", was born in the years 1860-1870. According to this concept, the rain was going to follow the plow, that is, (what?) The destruction of the vegetation cover of the great plains was going to increase the rainfall regime.

Any child from a tribe of Amerindians could have shown the US agronomists that they had lost the compass. Cycles of drought and sandstorms, including the "Dust Bowl," put an end to this almost mystical raving delusion. But the damage was considerable.

The second aspect, many times related to the first, concerns the destruction of humus in the soil. The loss of humus makes the soil a true drain, or a layer of cement on which everything runs off, depending on the nature of the soil. In short, the soils of modern agriculture have lost all balanced water retention capacity for harmonious growth of food plants. This problem is even more serious as the worm populations have been slaughtered by dozens of years of mechanized and toxic agriculture.

Intensive crop irrigation owes its existence to the fact that the soil structure has been completely destroyed and also because the industry invented mechanical sprinklers. Intensive irrigation of agricultural lands causes, incidentally, a huge salinization problem on the entire planet.

The third aspect is linked to deforestation. The 300 million hectares of tropical forests that have been destroyed in the last 20 years, have been largely destroyed to make room for agricultural productions. It is a planetary catastrophe since not only the forests are a lung but also an immense reserve of water.

The tree, by essence, calls the rain. And when it arrives, the rain seeps into the ground without running off.

Deforestation drives away rain and brings drought. And if the rain does come one day, it no longer infiltrates, it just runs off and generates floods that aggravate soil erosion. It is a vicious circle.

And it will not be easy to get out of this vicious circle, given the climatic disorders that have been sowing chaos on the planet for several years and are becoming more severe. These upheavals might not have been so “disruptive” if natural ecosystems had been respected, and agricultural activities had been managed harmoniously.

It is too late and the planet exhausted its ability to take hits without reacting.

The great planetary glaciers are melting. In April 2007, India was totally upset to learn that, possibly, by 2025, all the glaciers in the Himalayas will have disappeared.

The Himalayan glaciers are the source of 7 great rivers: the Ganjes, the Indus, the Brahmaputra, the Mekong, the Thanlwin, the Yangtze and the Yellow River. Melting glaciers will first cause massive floods and catastrophic landslides, and then create merciless water shortages.

Governments plan to relocate hundreds of millions of their peasants in the medium term. What it is to talk for the sake of talking and just to amuse journalists. Transfer them to where? Especially if the rising oceans flood the great deltas and a good part of Bangladesh.

The same problem arises in South America. The total melting of the glaciers in the Andes could make much of this continent completely uninhabitable. In fact, glaciers previously constituted 70% of the planet's fresh water reserve. Its disappearance on all continents will cause enormous catastrophes whose nature is very difficult to imagine.

Let's finish on an optimistic note, a little cherry on the sand cake: in France, despite 70 years of intensive chemistry, all water reserves are not yet irretrievably contaminated. This is celebrated!

Indeed, according to the surveys published by IFEN in 2005, 96% "only" of the rivers and 61% "only" of their water tables are contaminated by "only" 230 pesticides: atrazine being the most frequent molecule, which generates cancers (of the breast and ovaries), cardiovascular diseases, muscle degeneration, lesions in the lungs and kidneys, etc.

In the U.S.A. and in Canada, serious studies revealed the presence in the waters of very numerous substances: ethinylestradiol (which comes from contraceptive pills), anti-inflammatories, anticancer drugs, tranquilizers, etc. In the U.S.A. each year one million cancer patients are treated with chemotherapy. These patients generate approximately 650,000 tons of excrement each year, which are discharged into the sewers. Researchers realized that all the substances used in chemotherapy left the water treatment systems intact. All of these substances are mutagenic, carcinogenic, teratogenic, and embryotoxic.

In Canada, in 1998, two researchers, White and Rasmussen, calculated that the genotoxicity present in the Montreal wastewater treatment unit on the one hand and in the Saint Lawrence River on the other, was solely attributable to the industry at a rate respectively 15% and 10%. The remaining 75% had a "mysterious" origin according to their comments.

In 2005, in Switzerland, a doctoral thesis dealt with the pollution of the environment by pharmaceutical substances. (Search for Tauxe Würsch, Annick; Tarradellas, Joseph). "In the first part of this search, the presence and future of five widely used medicines (Clofibric acid, Ibuprofen, Ketoprofen, Mefenamic Acid and Diclofenac, have been analyzed in three steps for 4 to 7 days. Ibuprofen, Ketoprofen, Mefenamic Acid and Diclofenac are anti-inflammatory. Ibuprofen and Mefenamic Acid are the best-selling medicines in this study: 17 tons of each are sold per year in Switzerland. Clofibric Acid is a metabolite of clofibrate, from etofibrate and etophylline clofibrate. These lipid-lowering substances are used to lower high plasma concentrations of cholesterol and triglycerides. The analytical method developed to analyze these five medicines generally allows more than 70% of their compounds to be recovered. Detection limits (5- 15 ng / l) allow the detection of these substances in used water samples.

Los resultados del análisis de las muestras confirman que estas cinco sustancias eran persistentes y se encontraban en los efluentes de los pasos.

Para concluir, en resumidas cuentas ¿quién pagará el pato? Estamos en plena escasez de agua y lo que de ella queda puede difícilmente merecer el calificativo de H20.

El agua de beber, el agua de riego, se volvieron un peligroso cóctel de pesticidas, de productos farmacéuticos y de residuos industriales.

Y para acabar, el agua, bien precioso y bien colectivo de la humanidad, se volvió un negocio privado en las garras de algunas multinacionales mafiosas.

Ladrones de agua, ladrones de tierras, contaminadores de tierra, ¡ellos son los mismos!

Las lombrices

En el planeta Dune, las grandes lombrices son los señores del desierto. Son la única fuente de Especia, la Mezcla de longevidad. Gracias a su hoguera interna de digestión, una lombriz de 200 metros de largo puede generar en la atmósfera tanto oxígeno como una superficie cubierta de vegetación de diez kilómetros cuadrados.

En el planeta Tierra, las pequeñas lombrices son ¡Los Señores de los Anillos! Son el intestino y el gran reciclador de nuestro planeta y Darwin pasó los últimos días de su vida estudiándolas. Existen más de 3600 especies catalogadas en el mundo (350 especies viven en Francia). Sin embargo, se estima que su nombre real de especies puede llegar a 7000 y hasta 10 000. Pueden vivir hasta los 15 años.

Algunas especies gigantes (de 60 cms a 1 metro de largo) que existían en Oregón, E.U.A., Driloreirus americanus y Driloreirus macelfreshi han desaparecido totalmente. Estos grandes gusanos blancos exudaban una sustancia con aroma de lis. Una especie de gusano gigante subsiste todavía en Australia. Megascolides australis puede llegar a 1 metro de largo y 3 metros al estirarse.

Las lombrices pueden abundar en las tierras fértiles y sanas. Una pradera no tratada puede tener de 150 a 400 por metro cuadrado, es decir, de 1,5 a 4 millones por hectárea, lo que representa una masa de 1 a 3 toneladas de lombrices por hectárea.

En comparación, una viña o un campo de cereales maltratados por la agricultura industrial y tóxica contiene sólo de 1 a 3 especimenes por metro cuadrado. Es decir, 130 veces menos.

Las lombrices son la clave de la fertilidad de los suelos. Son de tres tipos:

– Los Epigeos (los más chicos, de 1 a 5 cms de largo) trabajan en la superficie y digieren la cubierta vegetal.

– Los endogeos ( de talla mediana, de 1 a 20 cms de largo) están bajo tierra y se nutren de materia orgánica ya descompuesta. Pueden cavar hasta 500 metros de galerías por metro cuadrado. Representan 20 a 50% de la biomasa de las tierras fértiles.

– Los anécicos (los más grandes que tienen de 10 cms a 1 metro de largo) viven en el subsuelo y pueden cavar galerías verticales de 3 metros de profundidad. En la Europa templada, representan 80% de la masa total de las lombrices.

Las lombrices son grandes labradoras: entierran en las capas profundas del suelo los elementos orgánicos que han tomado y fragmentado en la superficie y vuelven a subir a la superficie la tierra de las capas profundas ingeridas al mismo tiempo que las materias orgánicas.

Las lombrices son grandes aireadoras: pueden cavar hasta 5000 km. de galerías por hectáreas, lo que representa una superficie de contacto equivalente a 5 hectáreas.
Las lombrices son grandes percoladoras: todas las aguas de lluvia, incluidas violentas lluvias de tormentas (hasta 160 mm de agua por hora), pueden ser absorbidas por el suelo gracias al mismo trabajo de elaboración de las galerías.

Las lombrices son grandes digestoras: una biomasa mediana de lombrices (aproximadamente una tonelada por hectárea) ingiere, en un año, 400 toneladas de tierra y materia orgánica por hectárea (hasta 1000 toneladas en zonas tropicales).

Así, las lombrices son grandes reguladores biológicos del suelo, gracias a su gran capacidad de interacción con los microorganismos. Producen una mucosidad (sustrato orgánico muy energético) que mezclan en su tubo digestivo con el suelo ingerido (que contiene partículas minerales, orgánicas, y microflora) y agua. Su sistema digestivo mutualista crea así un medio ideal para las bacterias que duermen en el suelo ingerido: reactivan sus capacidades enzimáticas y digieren la materia orgánica.

Sus deyecciones constituyen después complejos organominerales estables. Algunas especies de lombrices producen fitohormonas que favorecerán el crecimiento de las plantas. Las lombrices pueden igualmente aniquilar el efecto negativo de los nemátodos fitoparásitos sobre el rendimiento de los cultivos.

Las lombrices, fuente por excelencia de fertilidad, han abandonado las tierras agrícolas que se han vuelto los basureros tóxicos de la agroindustria. ¿Qué porcentaje de lombrices subsiste en las tierras agrícolas de Francia, por ejemplo? El cálculo es sencillo. Dado que la agricultura biológica no representa más del 2% de las superficies y que las lombrices no sobreviven en las tierras masacradas por la agroquímica, son pues 98% de las lombrices que desaparecieron.

Esa agricultura intensiva e industrial las destruyó de cuatro maneras:
– Por el arado: las navajas de los arados las despedazan y el volteo del suelo las exponen a muy numerosos predadores en la superficie.
– Por el paso de maquinas agrícolas excesivamente pesadas que apelmazan y asfixian los suelos.
– Por el hambre: están efectivamente hambrientas por la falta de aportación de materia orgánica.
– Por todos los venenos esparcidos por las multinacionales Biocidarias: pesticidas y abonos sintéticos.

Por otra parte, las lombrices son potentes concentradoras de veneno. Pueden concentrar plomo en cantidad de varias decenas de veces superior a la del suelo y el DDT en cantidad 150 vez superior a la del suelo.

Posiblemente los grandes mafiosos de la agroquímica están elaborando minuciosamente, en sus laboratorios secretos, lombrices transgénicas resistentes al DDT, a la atrazina, al glifosato, al endosulfán, etc? Pequeñas lombrices quiméricas para la agricultura duradera a la salsa Monsanto…

Tsunamis alimenticios

A riesgo de repetirnos, repitámoslo de todas maneras: todos los días, 36 000 personas mueren de hambre, de las cuales 2/3 son niños. Morir de hambre significa no tener suficiente comida. Como lo diría un celebre presidenciable, puede que esos niños estén programados genéticamente para morir de hambre. ¿Es La muerte por hambre un error del programa genético de la humanidad?

Encontramos todavía en algunos libros de escuela comentarios moralizadores sobre la decadencia de la civilización azteca que sacrificaba algunas victimas sobre sus altares de piedra.

La muerta cotidiana de hambre de 36 000 personas ¿no es un gran sacrificio colectivo puesto en marcha por la sociedad decadente de los ricos y tolerado por las instituciones internacionales?

El director de la FAO, Jacques Diouf, hasta confió un día que su organización podría solucionar la mitad del problema del hambre y de la malnutrición en el mundo con sólo el equivalente de dos semanas de gastos militares norteamericanos, es decir, unos pequeños veinte mil millones de dólares.

Vamos pues a evocar ahora las superficies arables disponibles para la producción de comida, pero sin ilusiones.

Los dados están trucados: no hay ninguna voluntad de solucionar este problema planetario y uno estaría predispuesto a pensar que hay más bien una voluntad sostenida de vaciar algunos continentes de su humanidad. Después de todo, África es inmensamente rica en su subsuelo: cinc, uranio, petróleo, diamantes, níkel…y para la extracción, las máquinas son perfectamente suficientes.

Según la FAO, la superficie mediana de tierra arable por habitante era de 0.32 hectáreas en 1961/1963 (para una población mundial de 3 200 millones de habitantes), de 0,21 hectáreas en 1997/1999 (para una población mundial de 6 000 millones de habitantes) y será de 0,16 hectáreas en 2030 (para una población mundial estimada de 8 300 millones).

Según ciertos expertos independientes, las proyecciones arriba mencionadas son altamente optimistas puesto que la superficie mediana de tierra arable por habitante en los países pobres será solamente de 0,09 hectáreas en 2014. Ya era solamente de 0,08 hectáreas en 1996 en China.

¿Cuál es el estado de la producción de granos a escala planetaria? Un mal estado.

El año pasado, Australia sólo produjo 10 millones de toneladas de trigo en lugar de los 21 millones esperados. En 2007, la situación empeora para este país. El primer ministro John Howard, que no creía en el calentamiento climático, declaró a fines de abril que los agricultores de la cuenca Murray-Darling no tendrían agua de riego si no llovía en mayo. Esta cuenca concentra normalmente 70% de los recursos en agua de riego del país y produce 40% de la comida para Australia. En la primavera 2007, el flujo de agua de esta cuenca es sólo el cuarto de los peores años registrados.

En China, estos últimos años, la producción de trigo está por debajo de 100 millones de toneladas cuando era de 127 millones de toneladas en 1997. Esta baja es imputable a la escasez de agua.

De hecho, los grandes países productores de granos, E.U.A., China, India, Australia, Francia están confrontados a una grave escasez de agua. En el Suroeste de Francia, los agricultores abandonan el cultivo de maíz irrigado.

A nivel mundial, las reservas están a su más bajo nivel desde 35 años. Eran de 57 días a final del 2006. Los precios de los productos alimenticios están a la alza. En los E.U.A., 115% de aumento en el precio del maíz en 15 meses.

Seamos realistas, el Planeta Tierra podrá seguir nutriendo una pequeña parte (cada vez más restringida) de la población humana hasta el año 2050. Después, que corra el telón: cambio de panorama. Y es un escenario optimista (en cuanto al plazo en el tiempo) puesto que no contempla ni el crecimiento de la población mundial, ni el crecimiento del nivel de los océanos, ni claro está un desbocamiento climático que nadie se atreva a imaginar.

Este escenario “optimista” no considera tampoco, claro está, el gran engaño de los agro-carburantes que acabamos de denunciar en nuestro artículo “Ponga sangre en su motor: la tragedia de los necro-carburantes”.

Estos agro-carburantes van a generar una aceleración de la deforestación: Indonesia, por ejemplo, contempla destruir 16 millones de hectáreas de selva para reemplazarles por palmeras de aceite (pronto transgénica). Un monocultivo tal constituye la primera fase del proceso de desertificación puesto que un suelo tropical sin cubierta forestal se vuelve a corto plazo un desierto. Indonesia detiene por otra parte el record mundial de la deforestación con 1,8 millones de hectáreas por año, o si prefiere, 205 hectáreas por hora.

Según los escenarios resueltamente pesimistas, o más simplemente, de hecho realistas, grandes crisis alimenticias se van a perfilar ya des el año próximo y posiblemente este mismo año. Las temperaturas no paran de subir: algunos agrónomos estiman que un aumento de un grado celsius puede provocar una baja de rendimiento de 10% en los cereales.

Todas las antiguas variedades agrícolas, que se caracterizaban por una gran resistencia a los cambios bruscos, han sido erradicados por las multinacionales de la agro-química y del ago-alimenticio y sus cómplices en los aparatos de estado. Antiguas variedades, ¡sálvense quién puede!

El Titánic agrícola se está hundiendo y es un tsunami alimenticio que provocará. El próximo año o quizás mañana.

El monoteísmo: ¿un error de programa genético?

Una civilización que destruye sus semillas, que destruye sus suelos, que destruye sus aguas, que destruye sus niños, es una civilización que se está muriendo. La civilización occidental está moribunda. ¿Se llevará el resto de la humanidad en sus pasos?

En el pasado de la humanidad, numerosas civilizaciones han nacido y después desaparecido, a veces por la desertificación de sus tierras. Sin embargo, lo que caracteriza nuestra civilización occidental es su capacidad de destruir todo lo que toca. Genera un desierto de tamaño planetario.

Es muy interesante percibir que las tres religiones monoteístas han nacido del desierto. Desde hace 2000 años, el monoteísmo generó, en numerosas regiones, un desierto cultural: fuera del monoteísmo no hay salvación. No es nuestro objetivo aquí de discutir sobre las diferencias entre estas tres corrientes monoteístas y de debatir de su participación respectiva en los fundamentos respectivos en la agravación de la pesadilla ecológica que infligimos a la esfera planetaria.

Deseamos solamente subrayar que la sociedad occidental nació del desierto y que regresa hoy al desierto para morir. Desgraciadamente, no regresa sola al desierto cuna de sus orígenes: es todo el Planeta Tierra que está transformando inexorablemente en un desierto mortuorio.

Para los fundadores de la sociedad occidental, el desierto no era valorado como ecosistema. Era justo un vacío, la idealización de un estado de rompimiento, de alienación, un símbolo de la naturaleza humana. Es la sociedad occidental que inventó la historia escrita con todos sus avatares de evolución, de tiempo lineal, de progreso, de crecimiento. Es la sociedad occidental que se hundió en la locura del crecimiento ilimitado sobre un planeta finito. Sin duda porque sus raíces justamente son el sello de la alienación, en el sentido de una ruptura total con el medio ambiente, en el sentido de una falta de respeto total hacia la Naturaleza, en el sentido de un abandono total de las conexiones con el Cosmos. Desierto, desertus, deserere, abandonar.

¿Puede decirse con David Miller que el monoteísmo engendra desde un punto de vista social el fascismo, el imperialismo, el capitalismo; engendra desde un punto de vista filosófico la dualidad, la dicotomía y la no-diversidad; engendra desde un punto de vista psicológico concepciones rígidas, lineales y petrificadas? Y posiblemente podríamos agregar que el monoteísmo engendra desde un punto de vista agrícola el monocultivo, la monoalimentación, la destrucción de la diversidad biológica. De hecho, ¿no sería el monoteísmo la negación misma de la vida?

La relación entre el monoteísmo y el desierto no deja de ser un tema fascinante para explorar. El desierto pues, engendró también magníficas civilizaciones, tal como los Chacos en el Suroeste de los E.U.A., que no se hundieron en el imperialismo. Los aborígenes han sobrevivido en el desierto australiano durante 40 000 años y han sido destruidos en pocos años por los colonos blancos que destruyeron igualmente todos los ecosistemas.

¿Posiblemente la misión de la futura humanidad sobreviviente será de volver a domesticar el desierto?

Dominique Guillet , 3 de mayo 2007 – Association Kokopelli. France
Traductor: René Molteni , Mejico . Fotos de Ananda Guillet – El autor escribió un libro sobre producción de semillas orgánicas de variedades antiguas . Una parte del mismo se puede leer en la pagina de Kokopelli Seed Foundation:

Video: Our Planet. From Deserts to Grasslands. FULL EPISODE. Netflix (June 2022).


  1. Emil

    Certainly. So happens. Let's discuss this question.

  2. Yogrel

    It is remarkable, rather amusing piece

Write a message