Farmland Conversion Impact Rating: Fill & Download for Free

70 years ago, before the founding of the People's Republic of China, a letter from Secretary of State Dean Acheson to President Harry S. Truman said that: The first problem that every Chinese government in modern history must face is to solve the problem of feeding the people. Up to now, no government has been successful to do this." That is to say, the Chinese Communist Party could not feed the 500 million Chinese at the time. Today, how can it feed 1.4 billion people?Let's start with food production.In the past 70 years, China's total grain output increased by fivefold, from 113 million tons (MT) in 1949 to 669 MT in 2020. Grain production per capita doubled, from 209 to 475 kg during the same time period. At the national scale, China has succeeded in maintaining a basic self-sufficiency for grain for the past three decades.China is now the largest producer of rice and wheat. The self-sufficiency rate of rice, wheat and corn exceeded 95 percent. Where does these come from？This picture will tell you.In fact, China has to feed nearly a quarter of the world's population with just 7 percent of its total farmland. Due to construction occupation, disasters and ecological conversion, the area of farmland continues to decrease. For this reason, the central government set a red line that China's total arable land shall be no less than 1.8 billion mu (120 million hectares).In addition to offering enough food, China has also been trying to solve the problem of Eating healthy.Let's take a look at other parts of the Chinese food structure through a few examples. China has long been the world's largest producer of meat, aquatic products, vegetables, fruits, tea and beer.AquacultureChina's aquaculture output exceeded 50 million tonnes in 2018, accounting for over 78 percent of the country's total aquatic products output, making it the world's only country that raises more aquatic products than what it fishes. Among them, there exist more than 100 kinds of freshwater products.At the same time, China has also developed many sophisticated and sustainable agriculture ecosystems. The most famous one is fish-mulberry tree-silk cycle.Besides, such systems are still been developed.Fruit and vegetable plantingAccording to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), China produces and consumes about 700 million tons of vegetables and fruits every year, accounting for 40 percent of the world's total. With the exception of tropical specialties, China leads the world in the production of almost every kind of vegetable. Meanwhile, 1.4 billion Chinese eat about 73 percent of the world's persimmons, 68 percent of pears, 67 percent of watermelons, 58 percent of peaches and plums, and 49 percent of apples in a given year.What lies behind the huge consumptions is China's strong capacity of growing fruit. In 2018, Chinese farmers and scientists grew 250 million tons of fruit, accounting for 31.4 percent of the world's total. In the proportion of fruit in Chinese diet, per capita fruit possession 3 kilograms in 1949 increased to 184 kilograms today.On a high-precision satellite maps, you can see the scenery like this...These are vegetable greenhouses in Shouguang, a major vegetable base in east China's Shandong Province. Inside the greenhouse, the temperature, humidity and gas composition are kept at the optimum level through artificial control, avoiding the impacts of rain, frost and low temperature.While feeding its people well and fully, China has not forgotten to help other countries.Since 2006, China has become the third-largest donor of food aid, after the United States and the European Union. In recent years, China has helped to set up agricultural technology demonstration centers, experimental stations and promotion stations in nearly 100 countries around the world, sending tens of thousands of agricultural experts.

★★★★A palpable macroeconomic book for pleasure reading as well as a major academic accomplishment. His thesis is argued tangibly, consistently, and clearly with equations and numbers to support it. However, he follows this up with a wrong-headed policy suggestion that seems to betray his own approach. Solidly my "book of the year". It is rare to consume a book which arms me with such powerful (nigh on poisonous) facts and arguments.I listened to the audiobook. The pleasure of listening is the way his simple equations begged further speculation. Graphs are referenced, but they were never necessary to understand the point being made. A straight-through listen can convey all the information effectively. The pacing was slow enough to allow reflection. The full range of evidence from historical fiction to statistics come together in harmony.Early chapters were largely foundational, only valuable to people who have little macroeconomic background (myself included). These parts suffered from redundancy, which felt necessary once he got to the point, but required patience since this is not a short book. It gets interesting roughly halfway.One might be skeptical of how a handful of variables and equations can describe all of civilization. Indeed, it is because the equations define many of the variables found within them. At times the book simply states that it is indulging in a tautology. This leads to a persistent nagging that the "r" found in the equation does not directly map to the rate of return you or I may calculate for a certain portfolio or project. This is not neglected by the book, and he goes into the details of how we strip away tax effects and how that impacts the overall trends.His predictions and recommendations for the 21st century are intriguing, but less convincing. The unsustainability of r>g already depends on assumptions about the savings rate, and he's awfully optimistic about after-tax return rates. Clearly, the discussion is more complicated than the common press coverage of it. The "forces for divergence" taken as a whole are still a powerful argument.In fact, there are two stories being told. We now live in the age of the "super manager". But Piketty argues that this age transitions to an aristocratic elite, determined at birth. This is not the Occupy Wall Street 1%. It is a future demographic group, the likes of which we are unfamiliar with. Non-readers miss this detail.For some more pet peeves of mine... He argues that CEO and fund manager compensation is totally disconnected from productivity, but then argues that large funds enjoy extraordinarily high returns because they can afford to hire top money managers. These can't both be true! Next, his proposal (to tax net-worth) targets "robber baron" dynastic family wealth, but he also argued that sovereign wealth funds may similarly grow unsustainably. Thus, even his ideal solution will merely exchange one problem for a different problem later on. Also vitally important, I don't agree that the ability to repatriate capital should be an absolute assumption. Why is global cooperation important if a single nation can control both capital outflow and emigration?Reasonable objections to his wealth tax go on and on. What about the distortions it would cause? People with large amount of financial leverage could attain returns undisturbed by the tax. Perhaps this will give even more power to the financial industry. Furthermore, what is the impact on the capital markets? Less capital will result in higher returns for what's left. If you deflate one balloon, are you just pumping air into another one? A "patrimonial middle class" is a desirable goal, but he never argues how the tax will get us there.Capital of the elite transitioned from farmland to financial assets. The way in which this affects labor vs. capital tensions, entrepreneurs, and governments is a story still being written. As such, the comparisons to 1910 are useful but imperfect. Tax havens (and lack of good data) are an obvious problem, and I agree with the accounting merit of his proposal.A better followup is needed, on that I agree with the author. The book is an eye-opening conversation starter.

A. Advantages:Does not depend on costs of uranium, oil, or other fuelsPollution is rarely createdIt doesn't require as many employeesIt can be set up in many sizesStations can operate and run for long periods of timeReduces greenhouse emissionsRelatively low maintenance costsCan be used throughout the worldIt is renewableHydroelectricity produces no gas emissions or waste.Hydroelectric stations are inexpensive to operate.Makes barely any pollution compare to other ways of creating electricityHydroelectric power is one of the most responsive (easy to start and stop) of any electric power generating source.The conversion of the forces of water to electric energy can be up to 90 percent efficient.Hydroelectric power produces no chemical or waste heat pollution.Hydroelectric power plants require little maintenance.Reservoir lakes can be used for recreation, and can provide considerable flood protection to downstream areas.Groundwater reserves are increased by recharging from reservoirs.Plants usually have an expected life span two to three times longer than conventional thermal power plants.Hydroelectric installations can be used to breed fish and other aquatic productsIt is more reliable than solar and wind power - because water can be stored and there is more of it, more often.Once a dam is constructed, electricity can be produced at a constant rate.If electricity is not needed, the sluice gates can be shut, stopping electricity generation. The water can be saved for use another time when electricity demand is high. The build up of water in the lake means that energy can be stored until needed, when the water is released to produce electricity.Dams are designed to last many decades and so can contribute to the generation of electricity for many years / decades.The lake that forms behind the dam can be used for water sports and leisure / pleasure activities. Often large dams become tourist attractions in their own right.The lake's water can be used for irrigation purposes.When in use, electricity produced by dam systems do not produce green house gases. They do not pollute the atmosphere.Hydropower is a fueled by water, so it's a clean fuel source. Hydropower doesn't pollute the air like power plants that burn fossil fuels, such as coal, oil or natural gas.Hydropower is a domestic source of energy, produced locally near where it is needed.Hydropower relies on the water cycle, which is driven by the sun, thus it's a renewable power source so long as the rain keeps falling on the dam catchment area.Hydropower is generally available as needed; engineers can control the flow of water through the turbines to produce electricity on demand.Hydropower is not only a cleaner source of energy than oil but is it more cost effective as well. The most efficient coal burning plants are only able to convert around 50 percent of their energy into electricity, whereas modern day hydro power turbines convert up to 90 percent of their energy into electricity.Hydropower can cost less than a penny per kWh (Kilowatt Hour) compared to fossil fuel power plants at around 2 to 3 cents per kWh. That may not seem like a big difference, but when factored out over a year and the millions of kW hours Americans burn, it adds up to a huge savings.Hydropower plants also have an added bonus as they create recreational opportunities for people as well as electricity. Hydro power dams provide not only water-based activities, but since much of the surrounding land is public they also encourage numerous other outdoor activities aside from boating, skiing, fishing, and hunting.Hydropower plants provide benefits in addition to clean electricity. Hydro power plants create reservoirs that offer a variety of recreational opportunities, notably fishing, swimming, and boating. Most hydro power installations are required to provide some public access to the reservoir to allow the public to take advantage of these opportunities. Other benefits may include water supply and flood control.Can help regulate river flows (flood prevention), stores water, creates recreational lake (though these uses often conflict).B. Disadvantages:High investment costsDependent on precipitationSometimes messes up wildlifeLoss of fish speciesChange in river or stream qualityCost for constructionHydroelectric power production require flooding of entire valleys and scenic areas.Disrupts natural seasonal changes in he river, and ecosystems can be destroyed.Ends flooding that help to clean out the silt in rivers, causing them to clog (Energy Laboratory).The silt that usually flows down to the Beaches and Estuaries is block by the dam.Studies show that the plant decay caused downstream of major dams produces as many greenhouse gasses as more conventional methods of producing electricity.Dams are expensive to build, and due to drought may become useless, or produce much less power than originally planned.A dam being built in Quebec may end up flooding a land area as large as Switzerland.Dams can break in a massive flash floodConstruction costs of large-scale hydroelectric projects are high.Damming rivers causes changes in ecological cycles and surrounding landscapes; self-regulating ecosystems are changed into ones that must be managed.Sedimentation can progressively curtail a dam's ability to store water and generate energy.There are a limited number of feasible sites for large dams.Damming can cause loss of land suitable for agriculture and recreation.Drought can affect power production.Dams are vulnerable to natural forces. There is a high direct death rate from the failure of dams.River channels downstream from dams are more susceptible to erosion.A disadvantage of hydroelectric power stations is that it destroys wildlife and habitats of any creatures living in the area.Dams are extremely expensive to build and must be built to a very high standard.The high cost of dam construction means that they must operate for many decades to become profitable.The flooding of large areas of land means that the natural environment is destroyed.People living in villages and towns that are in the valley to be flooded, must move out. This means that they lose their farms and businesses. In some countries, people are forcibly removed so that hydro-power schemes can go ahead.The building of large dams can cause serious geological damage. For example, the building of the Hoover Dam in the USA triggered a number of earth quakes and has depressed the earth's surface at its location.Although modern planning and design of dams is good, in the past old dams have been known to be breached (the dam gives under the weight of water in the lake). This has led to deaths and flooding.Dams built blocking the progress of a river in one country usually means that the water supply from the same river in the following country is out of their control. This can lead to serious problems between neighboring countries.Building a large dam alters the natural water table level. For example, the building of the Aswan Dam in Egypt has altered the level of the water table. This is slowly leading to damage of many of its ancient monuments as salts and destructive minerals are deposited in the stone work from 'rising damp' caused by the changing water table level.Hydro power dams can damage the surrounding environment and alter the quality of the water by creating low dissolved oxygen levels, which impacts fish and the surrounding ecosystems. They also take up a great deal of space and can impose on animal, plant, and even human environments.Fish populations can be impacted if fish cannot migrate upstream past impoundment dams to spawning grounds or if they cannot migrate downstream to the ocean. Upstream fish passage can be aided using fish ladders or elevators, or by trapping and hauling the fish upstream by truck. Downstream fish passage is aided by diverting fish from turbine intakes using screens or racks or even underwater lights and sounds, and by maintaining a minimum spill flow past the turbine.Hydro power can impact water quality and flow. Hydro power plants can cause low dissolved oxygen levels in the water, a problem that is harmful to riparian (riverbank) habitats and is addressed using various aeration techniques, which oxygenate the water. Maintaining minimum flows of water downstream of a hydro power installation is also critical for the survival of riparian habitats.Hydro power plants can be impacted by drought. When water is not available, the hydro power plants can't produce electricity.New hydro power facilities impact the local environment and may compete with other uses for the land. Those alternative uses may be more highly valued than electricity generation. Humans, flora, and fauna may lose their natural habitat. Local cultures and historical sites may be flooded. Some older hydro power facilities may have historic value, so renovations of these facilities must also be sensitive to such preservation concerns and to impacts on plant and animal life.By 2020, it is projected that the percentage of power obtained from hydro power dams will decrease to around four percent because no new plants are in the works, and because more money is being invested in other alternative energy sources such as solar power and wind power.Dams usually flood large river valleys, covering a lot of native habitat with water, displacing animals and sometimes people. In China more than one million people were moved when they built their big "Three Gorges" dam. Many archaeological sites are now unreachable under water and there is environmental damage along the banks of the many tributaries of the Yangtze RiverIn brief:Hydro was the first commercial source of power of any size. The uses were understood right away, but there certainly are drawbacks.They destroy farmland and alter the course of rivers. They must also be located at the discretion of the plant rather than our choosing. Much of our power that we use today is not even used constructively. There is a large portion of our energy that is used in transporting it across the country. The major disadvantage I would put against this form of power would be the land and energy consumed in transporting the power away from the plants. Grid loss is a major issue for energy users.It is a renewable energy source. Unlike fossil fuels which will eventually run out, hydro power plants do not use up the energy source. It is also not polluting to the environment. They output power at a relatively reliable rate (compared to solar or wind, especially). On the other hand, they drastically affect all ecosystems upstream of the dam, and are much more environmentally destructive than nuclear power plants.AdvantagesInexhaustible fuel sourceMinimal environmental impactViable source--relatively useful levels of energy productionCan be used throughout the worldDisadvantagesSmaller models depend on availability of fast flowing streams or riversRun-of-the-River plants can impact the mobility of fish and other river life. NOTE: Building a fish ladder can lessen this negative aspect of hydroelectric power.