Elderly rice farmer dies in field blaze in Udon Thani

[0ffshore360]

10 minutes ago, motdaeng said:

 

do i understand you right?

the health of thousands of people are less worth than the farmers income?

 

do you think it's ok if a chemical factory let the toxic waste into the next river, because that is the much cheaper way to do things and it gives every factory worker an income ...

 

you defend farmers who are selfish, reckless, greedy and responsible for health issues and death of many people ...

 

you defend illegal burning because you think the farmers have the rights of an "easier" income ... 

 

it should be a human right to breath no toxic air and to drink no toxic water ... what do you think?

I could answer in  similar fashion.

Instead I will simply suggest you investigate the reality of farmers' Easy income.

Land rich and dirt poor most  are. But be thankful the price of  rice is controlled by .... ?

 

[motdaeng]

32 minutes ago, 0ffshore360 said:

I could answer in  similar fashion.

Instead I will simply suggest you investigate the reality of farmers' Easy income.

Land rich and dirt poor most  are. But be thankful the price of  rice is controlled by .... ?

 

 

everyone who is poor can do illegally activity and harming other people?

a hungry person should be allowed to steal food or to robbery other people?

to be poor gives you a free pass ...?

 

i do agree, in thailand they poor people should get much more support ... but to let them get away with burning and destroying others health is for sure not the right way ... 

 

probably the farmers have the same mindset as you, they don't care about others as long they can do a shortcut for "easier" money ...

 

btw. they are many farmers who do not burn the fields ... so it seems to be possible without burning to do farming!

Edited April 20 by motdaeng
spelling

[Kinnock]

7 hours ago, 0ffshore360 said:

If there was a low cost method provided to small rice growers to rid the ground of rice straw that inhibits ploughing for next crop they would most likely be willing to use it.

It's possible to just plough the field without burning, and this is better for the soil. 

 

This can be an issue with multiple crop farms where the next planting may be in a couple of weeks, so on these farms they may need to remove the rice straw for use as animal feed or mulch, but for seasonal, single crop farms there's no reason for burning.

[Brickleberry]

3 hours ago, 0ffshore360 said:

A farming practice in annual use for at least a millennia is suddenly the focus of attention to people who need to learn to eat rocks.

 

 

A farming practice that is outdated don't you mean? Western nations do not do this, why is it acceptable for Thai farmers?

 

Furthermore, it is against the law for farmers to burn their fields. So no, I don't need to learn how to eat a rock. I would much rather farmers follow the law, and didn't cause cancer and a plethora of other health problems.

[richard_smith237]

4 hours ago, motdaeng said:

 

do i understand you right?

the health of thousands of people are less worth than the farmers income?

 

do you think it's ok if a chemical factory let the toxic waste into the next river, because that is the much cheaper way to do things and it gives every factory worker an income ...

 

you defend farmers who are selfish, reckless, greedy and responsible for health issues and death of many people ...

 

you defend illegal burning because you think the farmers have the rights of an "easier" income ... 

 

it should be a human right to breath no toxic air and to drink no toxic water ... what do you think?

 

This is an oversimplified and dumbed down outlook matched with a superiority complex which highlights no true understanding of the issue at hand...   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

2 hours ago, Brickleberry said:

 

A farming practice that is outdated don't you mean? Western nations do not do this, why is it acceptable for Thai farmers?

 

Furthermore, it is against the law for farmers to burn their fields. So no, I don't need to learn how to eat a rock. I would much rather farmers follow the law, and didn't cause cancer and a plethora of other health problems.

 

Its not acceptable....   Yet much of South East Asia (developing areas) do this...  From Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia...  and they are all competing with each other to export cheaper rice crops... 

 

This 'cheaper' solution is not carried in in Western nations because taxes are collected, agreements are made, subsidies are provided... and laws are strictly enforced across the area (i.e. the EU etc)... 

 

 

I don't see anyone agreeing with burning of the fields - I do see some taking enjoyment that this has cost someone their life, I see others who recognise the tragedy of some dying while cutting the same corners many every other farmer in Asia do. 

 

 

Environmental Heath / clean air is a massive, no one argues that....   but it is also the Governments that are 'letting this exist'... almost enabling the behavior. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bobthegimp]

10 hours ago, 0ffshore360 said:

could be turned under/into the soil to eventually  decompose adding the oh so deficient humus that is increasingly lacking in Thai soil

 

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. The material needs to be removed and properly composted or it lignifies and causes the soil to become hydrophobic. 

 

One has to wonder if the old fella was into the whiskey before this most unfortunate incident.  He would have learned a thing or two during a lifetime of farming, one of which would have been how to judge wind speed and direction.  Perhaps it wasn't an accident. Some old people get tired of life and long for relief from chronic pain and suffering. 

[motdaeng]

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

This is an oversimplified and dumbed down outlook matched with a superiority complex which highlights no true understanding of the issue at hand...  

 

the burning does destroy the nature, the health of people and therefore it is illegal ... facts as simple as it is.

 

so you call that "oversimplified and no true understanding of the issue", just to find some reason to justify the burning and blaming others ...

 

no one force them to burn the fields, the forest, the rubbish! i don't have any sympathy if the all get sick and miserable ... but I feel sorry for they own and other children, they will suffer the most and will have to pay the price in the future because of the reckless and selfish burning ...

[Gecko123]

22 hours ago, Brickleberry said:

I'm struggling to find any sympathy for this man, or his family.

 

He was outside, burning his fields - causing a huge problem for everyone in society. How many more need to die or get sick before they finally crack down hard on all of these fire starting idiots?

 

Would be interesting to compare this farmer's carbon footprint to your carbon footprint. That goes for all the other Little Cesars on this thread as well.

[Gecko123]

15 hours ago, soalbundy said:

I admit I can be flippant on occasion. Of course if I saw something of the sort happening I would attempt to help. Impotent anger at farmers who cut and burn is the cause, laws aren't adhered to, there is nothing people can do. My wife doesn't have her extensive fields burnt, much of the straw is collected for the neighbours cows and buffaloes the rest is plowed back into the ground at next years planting. My village is surrounded by rice fields and yet I see no burning. I used to live in Chiang Mai and although the burning didn't affect me I knew people who did suffer and the smog was horrendous seen from Doi Suthep. One doesn't see farmers in Europe burning after a wheat harvest, there is obviously no real need to do it, perhaps the ash is a fertilizer or it's done out of tradition.

Appreciate the explanation of your perspective.

[Brickleberry]

1 hour ago, Gecko123 said:

 

Would be interesting to compare this farmer's carbon footprint to your carbon footprint. That goes for all the other Little Cesars on this thread as well.

 

I couldn't care less about the Farmer's carbon footprint. I do care that he was poisoning everyone with his thoughtless actions. Whilst it is sad that he died, I find it hard to have sympathy with the way he died - it is a sort of poetic justice really.  

[Gecko123]

26 minutes ago, Brickleberry said:

 

I couldn't care less about the Farmer's carbon footprint. I do care that he was poisoning everyone with his thoughtless actions. Whilst it is sad that he died, I find it hard to have sympathy with the way he died - it is a sort of poetic justice really.  

Air quality. That's your issue. Got it.

 

Let's talk about your impact on air quality, shall we?

 

How many miles did you drive last year? How many air miles did you travel? How much electricity did you use last year? What is the thermostat on your air conditioner set at? How much trash did you generate? How much did you order from overseas? How much plastic trash and air freight carbon emissions did it generate? How did you dispose of that trash? Did you burn it? Do you recycle? Etc., etc., etc.

 

My point is that if you compared all the CO2 this farmer's activities and lifestyle generated over the course of a year, it would probably be less than yours. He probably didn't have air conditioning, drive an SUV, take international trips, order much stuff on line, use the internet or buy Bitcoin (all of which use a lot of energy), or generate a fraction of the garbage you do.

 

Still don't get my point? I'm saying look in the mirror.

Edited April 21 by Gecko123

[richard_smith237]

7 hours ago, motdaeng said:

 

the burning does destroy the nature, the health of people and therefore it is illegal ... facts as simple as it is.

 

so you call that "oversimplified and no true understanding of the issue", just to find some reason to justify the burning and blaming others ...

 

no one force them to burn the fields, the forest, the rubbish! i don't have any sympathy if the all get sick and miserable ... but I feel sorry for they own and other children, they will suffer the most and will have to pay the price in the future because of the reckless and selfish burning ...

A rather binary outlook which, as I mentioned simplifies & dumbs down a complex issue into a singular myopic view point.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

53 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

Air quality. That's your issue. Got it.

 

Let's talk about your impact on air quality, shall we?

 

How many miles did you drive last year? How many air miles did you travel? How much electricity did you use last year? What is the thermostat on your air conditioner set at? How much trash did you generate? How much did you order from overseas? How much plastic trash and air freight carbon emissions did it generate? How did you dispose of that trash? Did you burn it? Do you recycle? Etc., etc., etc.

 

My point is that if you compared all the CO2 this farmer's activities and lifestyle generated over the course of a year, it would probably be less than yours. He probably didn't have air conditioning, drive an SUV, take international trips, order much stuff on line, use the internet or buy Bitcoin (all of which use a lot of energy), or generate a fraction of the garbage you do.

 

Still don't get my point? I'm saying look in the mirror.

100% agree - there a plenty of posters on this thread virtue signalling an element of schadenfreude, that sits very negatively & highlights an absence of deeper consideration towards these issue.

 

In the haste of many to jump on the environmental bandwagon they ignore or forget their own contribution which presents a stench of hypocrisy to accompany the schadenfreude - ultimately their comments betray their absence of critical thought.

 

Burning fields is wrong - but there’s a lot more to it than one man, a few farmers, or even a majority of a nations farmers - this is a continental issue & one on which fiscal policy & international trade has a huge impact. 
 

 

[Barnet1900]

22 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

Fine. Let's make respiratory health, especially for the ALL-important expat community, the #1 top priority. All in favor of this, 100%. Food prices will go up for sure, but no doubt you as an expat can absorb the added costs. All I'm saying is don't demonize the lowly farmer for trying to eke out a living the best way he can. The real culprit is agro-businesses competing with one another to satisfy consumer demand (including you) who wants low prices, and don't care about hidden intangible costs like air pollution unless they are directly affected by the problem. Clean air, fair prices for farmers, and making consumers pay for the hidden environmental costs of food production. I'm all for it!!! 

The points you make are effective within themselves but I fail to understand why you keep treating this as a poor farmer burning his fields against the expat.

 

He didn't deserve death and his daughter will suffer that day until she dies. 

 

However, this isn't about a poor man and the expats. His actions are akin to living next door to a neighbour from hell. How do you think other farmers and the locals felt about being surrounded in his smog each time he decided to have a burn up?

 

This guy could be a saint for all I know but if the entire planet takes the same attitude that small potions of pollution don't compare to others then we're all in the proverbial muck.

 

He didn't deserve this death however it shouldn't be excused, blamed on the government or given any form of excuse. I'm of an age where all my rubbish used to go into one bin and you could smoke in public. I can fly tip all my rubbish if I feel like it, save a lot of time and I won't have to pay for different bins. I can smoke in public and just ignore people's complaints.

However, like many people I put up with it because it's beneficial to my own and other people's lives.

[richard_smith237]

27 minutes ago, Barnet1900 said:

The points you make are effective within themselves but I fail to understand why you keep treating this as a poor farmer burning his fields against the expat.

 

He didn't deserve death and his daughter will suffer that day until she dies. 

 

However, this isn't about a poor man and the expats. His actions are akin to living next door to a neighbour from hell. How do you think other farmers and the locals felt about being surrounded in his smog each time he decided to have a burn up?

 

This guy could be a saint for all I know but if the entire planet takes the same attitude that small potions of pollution don't compare to others then we're all in the proverbial muck.

 

He didn't deserve this death however it shouldn't be excused, blamed on the government or given any form of excuse. I'm of an age where all my rubbish used to go into one bin and you could smoke in public. I can fly tip all my rubbish if I feel like it, save a lot of time and I won't have to pay for different bins. I can smoke in public and just ignore people's complaints.

However, like many people I put up with it because it's beneficial to my own and other people's lives.

You are educated & understand this…

 

The farmer isn’t - takes ‘burning short cuts’ because he’s allowed to & it saves costs he may not otherwise be able to meet. 

The governments all over Asia are accountable for the pollution when they ‘allow’ their citizens to repeatedly behave this way. 

It’s the very same of polluting industries not being penalised. 
 

It’s the same for allowing those horrific fume belching busses & old polluting lorries (with common brake failure).. 

 

Its the same when they never do anything about the clocked pickup trucks belching fumes.

 

This issue of pollution in Asia is multifaceted - one farmers death will not change this no matter how satisfied some posters are to hear of a poor man who burnt his field dying a result.

 

 

[Gecko123]

1 hour ago, Barnet1900 said:

The points you make are effective within themselves but I fail to understand why you keep treating this as a poor farmer burning his fields against the expat.

 

It was triggered by early posts on the thread suggesting that the deceased farmer deserved little sympathy. Presumably some of these comments were made by expats living in areas where smog from agricultural burning is at its worst. While I can empathize with their frustration with poor air quality, I found the suggestion that the farmer deserved what happened to him to be offensive.

 

Rice farmers have some of the lowest incomes in the agricultural sector. The man was elderly, as are many of the members on this forum. You would think more empathy would be shown towards a fellow senior citizen, and the disrespect for his humanity, in my opinion, bordered on racism. I live in a small farming community - not much rice is grown here - but many of the farmers are elderly, and something like a farmer getting caught  and dying in a field fire would have had a traumatizing effect on the whole community.

 

Everyone is assuming that what he was doing was illegal in his area, but it's not clear that this was the case. The news article references another instance of illegal agricultural burning getting out of hand and resulting in damage to structures elsewhere in Thailand , but burning ordinances are not universal in Thailand, and the article did not say that this particular farmer was breaking the law by burning the field.

 

The burning of rice stubble produces a tiny fraction of the smoke generated that a field of burning sugar cane produces. Even if a thresher came in and just harvested the rice grains leaving the stalks in place, the amount of smoke wouldn't be that extensive. At most, the stalks would be knee high, unlikely to cause a conflagration which the farmer couldn't escape from, which is probably why the police and his family are speculating that he had a medical emergency. I would also like to add that from personal experience I can attest that it is not that difficult to misjudge wind speed and direction when burning.

 

As I said in an earlier post, an indigent rice farmer in all probability has a fraction of the carbon footprint of the typical expat retiree zooming around in a gas guzzling SUV, sitting in air conditioned comfort in his house, leading a consumer oriented lifestyle, enjoying international and domestic travel and ordering stuff on-line. For someone leading such a lifestyle, when that lifestyle is made possible or at least subsidized in large part by the exploitation of local labor such as the deceased farmer's to ignore this truth and to also overlook their own contribution to air quality and environmental degradation was more than I could stomach. 

[Barnet1900]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

You are educated & understand this…

 

The farmer isn’t - takes ‘burning short cuts’ because he’s allowed to & it saves costs he may not otherwise be able to meet. 

The governments all over Asia are accountable for the pollution when they ‘allow’ their citizens to repeatedly behave this way. 

It’s the very same of polluting industries not being penalised. 
 

It’s the same for allowing those horrific fume belching busses & old polluting lorries (with common brake failure).. 

 

Its the same when they never do anything about the clocked pickup trucks belching fumes.

 

This issue of pollution in Asia is multifaceted - one farmers death will not change this no matter how satisfied some posters are to hear of a poor man who burnt his field dying a result.

 

 

Can you explain your first statement?  Forget the rest of it because upon opening a comment like this the first thing that jumps out is your condescending and patronising tone.

 

I expressed an opinion and respectfully and I always imagined you to be one of the posters who doesn't revert to behaving in this way.

 

Opinion changed 100pc.

[Barnet1900]

23 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

 

It was triggered by early posts on the thread suggesting that the deceased farmer deserved little sympathy. Presumably some of these comments were made by expats living in areas where smog from agricultural burning is at its worst. While I can empathize with their frustration with poor air quality, I found the suggestion that the farmer deserved what happened to him to be offensive.

 

Rice farmers have some of the lowest incomes in the agricultural sector. The man was elderly, as are many of the members on this forum. You would think more empathy would be shown towards a fellow senior citizen, and the disrespect for his humanity, in my opinion, bordered on racism. I live in a small farming community - not much rice is grown here - but many of the farmers are elderly, and something like a farmer getting caught  and dying in a field fire would have had a traumatizing effect on the whole community.

 

Everyone is assuming that what he was doing was illegal in his area, but it's not clear that this was the case. The news article references another instance of illegal agricultural burning getting out of hand and resulting in damage to structures elsewhere in Thailand , but burning ordinances are not universal in Thailand, and the article did not say that this particular farmer was breaking the law by burning the field.

 

The burning of rice stubble produces a tiny fraction of the smoke generated that a field of burning sugar cane produces. Even if a thresher came in and just harvested the rice grains leaving the stalks in place, the amount of smoke wouldn't be that extensive. At most, the stalks would be knee high, unlikely to cause a conflagration which the farmer couldn't escape from, which is probably why the police and his family are speculating that he had a medical emergency. I would also like to add that from personal experience I can attest that it is not that difficult to misjudge wind speed and direction when burning.

 

As I said in an earlier post, an indigent rice farmer in all probability has a fraction of the carbon footprint of the typical expat retiree zooming around in a gas guzzling SUV, sitting in air conditioned comfort in his house, leading a consumer oriented lifestyle, enjoying international and domestic travel and ordering stuff on-line. For someone leading such a lifestyle, when that lifestyle is made possible or at least subsidized in large part by the exploitation of local labor such as the deceased farmer's to ignore this truth and to also overlook their own contribution to air quality and environmental degradation was more than I could stomach. 

Got it. I thought it was a poor farmer Vs rich expat comparison.

 

I don't agree with him or anybody polluting a neighbourhood but yes, there is reason to revel in the passing away of anybody in this manner.

[Barnet1900]

18 minutes ago, Barnet1900 said:

Got it. I thought it was a poor farmer Vs rich expat comparison.

 

I don't agree with him or anybody polluting a neighbourhood but yes, there is reason to revel in the passing away of anybody in this manner.

No reason.

 

Correction. No reason to revel.

 

Cheers

[richard_smith237]

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, Barnet1900 said:

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

You are educated & understand this…

 

The farmer isn’t - takes ‘burning short cuts’ because he’s allowed to & it saves costs he may not otherwise be able to meet. 

The governments all over Asia are accountable for the pollution when they ‘allow’ their citizens to repeatedly behave this way. 

It’s the very same of polluting industries not being penalised. 
 

It’s the same for allowing those horrific fume belching busses & old polluting lorries (with common brake failure).. 

 

Its the same when they never do anything about the clocked pickup trucks belching fumes.

 

This issue of pollution in Asia is multifaceted - one farmers death will not change this no matter how satisfied some posters are to hear of a poor man who burnt his field dying a result.

 

 

Expand  

Can you explain your first statement?  Forget the rest of it because upon opening a comment like this the first thing that jumps out is your condescending and patronising tone.

 

I expressed an opinion and respectfully and I always imagined you to be one of the posters who doesn't revert to behaving in this way.

 

Opinion changed 100pc.

 

Thats part of the problem with forums - its difficult to get the 'intended tone across'....   there's no intent whatsoever to appear condesending or patronizing - apologies if my comments appeared that way.

 

I meant that as you are a Westerner and educated you will see a bigger picture regarding the impact of burning and pollution whereas the farmer, who is unlikely to have more than the most basic of village education has an extremely different outlook - his only concern is getting food on the table, he won't see the bigger picture and is perhaps completely unaware of the harm such pollution causes...    Its entirely possible he's not even aware that burning is illegal....   the ban on burning is certainly not enforced by the Police (or Authorities in General), so why wouldn't the farmer just continue doing what he's always done for decades ?

 

 

 

 

 

[Brickleberry]

3 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

Air quality. That's your issue. Got it.

 

Let's talk about your impact on air quality, shall we?

 

How many miles did you drive last year? How many air miles did you travel? How much electricity did you use last year? What is the thermostat on your air conditioner set at? How much trash did you generate? How much did you order from overseas? How much plastic trash and air freight carbon emissions did it generate? How did you dispose of that trash? Did you burn it? Do you recycle? Etc., etc., etc.

 

My point is that if you compared all the CO2 this farmer's activities and lifestyle generated over the course of a year, it would probably be less than yours. He probably didn't have air conditioning, drive an SUV, take international trips, order much stuff on line, use the internet or buy Bitcoin (all of which use a lot of energy), or generate a fraction of the garbage you do.

 

Still don't get my point? I'm saying look in the mirror.

 

You didn't make any points at all. You made quite a few silly guesses about my lifestyle, none of which are true, and none of which relate to my concerns.

 

You seem to be worrying a lot about this farmer's 'Co2 / carbon emissions'. Again, I couldn't care less about his carbon emissions, I care about the toxic fumes and health concerns - as does the majority of the population, each and every year.

 

Why are you so keen to protect this guy who was poisoning his neighbors? Are you a pyromaniac? Do you enjoy breathing in cancerous fumes? Are you a poor farmer who burns his fields in the dead of night?

[motdaeng]

8 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

Air quality. That's your issue. Got it.

 

Let's talk about your impact on air quality, shall we?

 

How many miles did you drive last year? How many air miles did you travel? How much electricity did you use last year? What is the thermostat on your air conditioner set at? How much trash did you generate? How much did you order from overseas? How much plastic trash and air freight carbon emissions did it generate? How did you dispose of that trash? Did you burn it? Do you recycle? Etc., etc., etc.

 

My point is that if you compared all the CO2 this farmer's activities and lifestyle generated over the course of a year, it would probably be less than yours. He probably didn't have air conditioning, drive an SUV, take international trips, order much stuff on line, use the internet or buy Bitcoin (all of which use a lot of energy), or generate a fraction of the garbage you do.

 

Still don't get my point? I'm saying look in the mirror.

 

why don't you adress this questions to the people who are most affected by the burning? as the people who have no choice than to breath the toxic air, especially infants, children, older people or people with existing heath issues ...

 

more and more thai people have enough and get angry about the illegal burning, they are suffering now more than 10 years ... they demand  immediately action and do not need empty promises or a useless committees ...

 

surprisingly some foreigner think differently: helping the criminal farmers to have not to go "the extra mile" to get an income is more important than a immediately and strictly enforcement of the illegal burning law!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 21 by motdaeng
spelling

[richard_smith237]

20 minutes ago, motdaeng said:

 

why don't you adress this questions to the people who are most affected by the burning? as the people who have no choice than to breath the toxic air, especially infants, children, older people or people with existing heath issues ...

 

Address the questions to the people like the 'children'... seems I already am....  

 

 

20 minutes ago, motdaeng said:

more and more thai people have enough and get angry about the illegal burning, they are suffering now more than 10 years ... they demand  immediately action and do not need empty promises or a useless committees ...

 

The need for a government who'll act and push a police force to act you mean ???... 

 

 

20 minutes ago, motdaeng said:

surprisingly some foreigner think differently: helping the criminal farmers to have not to go "the extra mile" to get an income is more important than a immediately and strictly enforcement of the illegal burning law!

 

Unsurprisingly some people (and foriegners) have no understanding of the situation at all... as written earlier, their views are dumbed down and simplified into binary bite sized pieces because their intellect cannot handle bigger chunks !

Edited April 21 by richard_smith237

[richard_smith237]

5 hours ago, Brickleberry said:

I care about the toxic fumes and health concerns - as does the majority of the population, each and every year.

 

I completely agreed that this is a concern the majority of people have.....       this concern has being around for decades.

 

Why has nothing been done about it ???....   Why have authorities not stepped up to control the burning ?

 

 

5 hours ago, Brickleberry said:

Why are you so keen to protect this guy who was poisoning his neighbors? Are you a pyromaniac? Do you enjoy breathing in cancerous fumes? Are you a poor farmer who burns his fields in the dead of night?

 

Baiting and gaslighting - a fundamentally flawed argument missing the point - no one wants this... 

 

But one individual guy is not the blame or the solution....  Do you think all the burning will now stop because this guy killed himself burning his fields ??... Or course not.... The issue will exist year after year until the ASEAN nations in an international agreement sort this out....   

 

Its not down to individual farmers...  its down to the authorities to enforce these issues.

 

Without these authorities wed have people driving the wrong way down one way streets, not wearing helmets, drink driving, filling the flat-beds of pickups with people, importing pork and chicken preserved in formaldehyde.....  erm...  er... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[motdaeng]

15 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Address the questions to the people like the 'children'... seems I already am ...

ask children was more of a literally question, because they cannot defend themselves against the toxic air ...

 

no one blames this single farmer is the cause of the air pollution. in thailand there most be thousands of people who are doing illegal burnings. in comparison there are (and will be) millions who are directly negative affected by the burning ...

 

btw. for some people on this forum english is not they first language ... to judge people seems so easy ...

[Brickleberry]

17 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I completely agreed that this is a concern the majority of people have.....       this concern has being around for decades.

 

Why has nothing been done about it ???....   Why have authorities not stepped up to control the burning ?

 

Baiting and gaslighting - a fundamentally flawed argument missing the point - no one wants this... 

 

But one individual guy is not the blame or the solution....  Do you think all the burning will now stop because this guy killed himself burning his fields ??... Or course not.... The issue will exist year after year until the ASEAN nations in an international agreement sort this out....   

 

Its not down to individual farmers...  its down to the authorities to enforce these issues.

 

Without these authorities wed have people driving the wrong way down one way streets, not wearing helmets, drink driving, filling the flat-beds of pickups with people, importing pork and chicken preserved in formaldehyde.....  erm...  er... 

 

 

 

You are incorrect. One individual is to blame for burning that field. One individual is the solution to that problem - don't burn the goddamn field.

 

The authorities have already put several laws in place - and international agreements between neighboring countries - to prevent this.

 

It is 100% down to individuals like you and me to comply with the law. If we do not, we will face repercussions. If I go crazy later this afternoon and start committing crimes in my city, it is not the fault of the authorities for not preventing me from committing crimes - that would be ridiculous. It is my fault for being an idiot!

 

The same is true for farmers. They have a responsibility to follow the law, as all other citizens do.

[rickudon]

We have a one rai rice field. After the rice harvest (done by an old combine harvester) we get barely enough rice to pay the man. It doesn't cut the straw. Wifey then gets a man to the plough the rice field (she doesn't really understand farming) which results in a one metre high pile of rice straw, roots and soil on one side of the field. Because it is dry season it doesn't rot down, and now the field is uneven. I could just abandon that bit of field and wait a year or 2 for it to rot away, but still have a heap of soil left which is uneven.

So what do i do?

Rake the straw out of the pile, and ..... burn it.

 

 

I do dry it out completely and burn in small piles, to minimise the pollution and any local smoke issues. I would like to compost it, but it already has taken up a lot of my time (months!) and would need a lot of water in the dry season, which would have to be hand carried. Straw by itself doesn't compost well, need to mix it up ideally. Cannot bury it, dry season rice paddy is like concrete.

 

I have now banned rice growing, to much hassle, no profit (actually a financial loss). Now what do we do with a rice paddy that floods once a year and grows lots of rank grass? Low cost/labour answers only please.

[Bobthegimp]

On 4/21/2024 at 11:46 AM, Brickleberry said:

 

I couldn't care less about the Farmer's carbon footprint. I do care that he was poisoning everyone with his thoughtless actions. Whilst it is sad that he died, I find it hard to have sympathy with the way he died - it is a sort of poetic justice really.  

 

One day someone might write the same eulogy for you. An unsympathetic character, blind to his own faults and unforgiving of the faults of others.  

 

"He died knowing everything"

[0ffshore360]

On 4/21/2024 at 5:19 AM, Bobthegimp said:

 

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. The material needs to be removed and properly composted or it lignifies and causes the soil to become hydrophobic. 

 

One has to wonder if the old fella was into the whiskey before this most unfortunate incident.  He would have learned a thing or two during a lifetime of farming, one of which would have been how to judge wind speed and direction.  Perhaps it wasn't an accident. Some old people get tired of life and long for relief from chronic pain and suffering. 

I am very interested in the source of your statement claiming  rice straw lignifies if macerated and turned under soil.

Rice straw is extraordinarily deficient in nutrient value a stock feed but as humus to the soil it was derived from  of great value.

In the process of harvesting  either by hand traditionally or by mechanical methods the rice straw is discarded as of limited value. Yes indeed a percentage which is convenient to manually cart and toss into straw "ricks" or in more modern methodology using "hay" balers but that percentage is minimal by comparison to the  bulk of surface waste that due to the already lignified state that was a prerequisite for  harvesting and storage of the "associated" grain .

Rice straw is used as a renewable roofing material when layered correctly in parts of the world where other materials are  beyound economic capacity.

Year upon year the productive  capacity of the soil in most areas of Thailand incrementally decreases and the prime  cause is soil depletion. Not of  minerals.

Huge resources are dedicated to develop  new hybrid strains to offset the issue but almost zero effort is put into countering the cause.

Pumping in cheap fertilizers derived from toxic steel founderies etc is not a sustainable  answer but for short minded profiteers who only look to quarterly ledgers.

Burning crop waste is no longer an acceptable method for the urban critics but nobody is willing to offer a "ground level" cure that compensates a subsistence income farmer.

An instant solution would be to provide the small holder rice farmers with an annual subsidy to not grow rice at the same net profit level as he/she has done for the last 10 years. Nor  grow anything at all as a condition. Pretty much the same as EU subsidies to places like Sicily where  farmland is in a permanent fallow state, the local working population has moved to Palermo and become slaves to the  mafia, while land owners sit pretty on a guaranteed income and  the price of grain is maintained.

In Thailand that policy just might reduce the local 2.5 bogey by 25%, deprive the Thai grain export mafia leverage, deprive tenuous employment overall for rural dwellers but  HOOOREY the air is a fraction  less dirty !

Selfish and greedy  flockers never want let alone look for a comprehensive solution.

Oh yeah !  I hate eating rice anyway ?