Bread Causes Global Warming Shock

Bread is killing the planet, a shock study from an environmental research group at a leading university has found.

Though hitherto thought by ignorant fools to be “the staff of life” and an important source of cheap, wholesome nutrition and readily accessible snack material, bread has now been accorded its proper place on the list of deadly, terrible things we should worry about, sandwiched between acid rain, aerosols, and anal warts on one side and cancer, Chernobyl, and Clinton (Hillary) on the other.

This is because bread, too, apparently, causes global warming.

The missing link between bread and global warming was discovered by Dr. Liam Goucher, N8 Agrifood Research Fellow from the University of Sheffield, who says:

“We found in every loaf there is embodied global warming resulting from the fertiliser applied to farmers’ fields to increase their wheat harvest. This arises from the large amount of energy needed to make the fertilizer and from nitrous oxide gas released when it is degraded in the soil.”

But Goucher was by no means the only scientist involved in this valuable research. Here’s his co-author Professor Peter Horton.

What does a staple food such as bread have to do with global warming? For a start, to make loaves on an industrial scale, you’ll need powerful milling and kneading machines and a huge oven, heated to 230? or more. This uses a lot of energy. The flour, yeast and salt must also be shipped in and, finally, the finished loaves are delivered to stores ‚Äì all in trucks powered by petrol.

But it isn’t milling or baking or transport that accounts for most of the environmental impact of bread. In a new a study published in the journal Nature Plants, colleagues and I looked at the entire supply chain of a regular loaf ‚Äì from seed to sandwich, via mill and bakery. We found that more than half its environmental impact arises not from food processing but from the production of the raw material, the wheat grain.

Food causes about a third of total greenhouse gas emissions. Yet the supply chains can be so complex that it is difficult to determine what part of the process is responsible – and without this information neither the industry nor consumers will know what to do about it.

The horror!

Luckily, the team at Sheffield University (which is an actual, proper university by the way, not one of those institutions where you get your degrees by post) ‚Äì all of them funded by a hedge-fund billionaire called Jeremy Grantham who by complete coincidence is heavily exposed to the renewables and sustainability sector ‚Äì know just what the solution is.

We should use less fertiliser. (Even though, obviously, that will make food much more expensive and agricultural land less productive and produce generally scarcer – but hey, who cares about the Third World?)

Read rest…

Comments (7)

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    Is their solution to a non-existent problem mass starvation, or maybe sterilization of the human race? To live on bread and water is a meager existence, yet to these clowns it is sinful.

  • Avatar

    G

    |

    We live in an age where it’s stylish to be a contrarian. Opposing anything and everything just for the sake of doing so is now assumed to be a sign of intellectual superiority.

    It should be no surprise that the arrogant eco-left cannot resist this temptation that is reflexively rewarded by their friends in the media.

    The only form of “contrarianism” that is reflexively condemned by the media seems to be opposition to the man-made climate change meme which itself is certainly not “settled” or universally accepted.

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    “contrarian” is way too polite. Contrarianists have led fools to believe that common sense is wrong. When someone who considers them self to be a member of the intelligentsia attacks the growing of an ancient food staple , we should accuse them of hate speech against humanity. Commit them to an asylum.

  • Avatar

    goldminor

    |

    I would like to see this story posted on msm sites around the globe. The public outcry would lead to a rapid change of heart for many who believe in dangerous AGW, as the insanity of this claim would be easily grasped by the average person.

  • Avatar

    jipebe29

    |

    It is completely absurd. Could you find some common sense and reason?

  • Avatar

    jipebe29

    |

    Global warming ? No, but media warming, yes!

  • Avatar

    David Lewis

    |

    In the 1970’s there were predictions of coming world wide famine. Few realize that these predictions were right based on the farming practices of the time. What has provided one of the most significant changes and headed off the famine was the increased use of fertilizer. Now the eco-do gooders want to reduce its use.

    It appears they are trying to create a world where there are no jobs because there is no energy to run industry, but that won’t matter because everyone will be too weak from starvation to work.

Comments are closed