Swiss farmers planted flowers between their crops and watched pest damage drop by over half. The UK is now running the same trial across 15 farms. The reason this works is embarrassingly simple.
A Swiss study on winter wheat found that fields with wildflower strips had 40 to 53% fewer leaf beetle pests than fields without. Crop damage dropped 61%.
The mechanism is simple. Wildflowers feed hoverflies, lacewings, parasitic wasps, ladybugs, and ground beetles. Those insects eat the aphids, beetle larvae, and caterpillars that farmers would otherwise spray for. A few meters of wildflowers hosts an unpaid pest control crew that would jump at the chance to whoop some aphid ass.
In apple orchards where no insecticides had been used for five years, plots with wildflower alleyways had 9.2% damaged fruit. Control plots without flowers had 32.5%.
The UK is now running a five-year trial across 15 farms placing 6-meter flower strips through the middle of fields, not just at the edges, because the beneficial insects can't reach the center of a large field otherwise.
This works the same way in a backyard vegetable garden as it does on a commercial farm. Plant native flowering species near your tomatoes, beans, and squash. The pests still show up, but the predators show up too.
Study doi: 20151369
@calkikomori@Ewa_ocheee@AnnaAtreidess That she from Cape Verde but probably lives and works in UK in no way discredits her assertion that they and she don’t want to be classified as European citizens
@calkikomori@Ewa_ocheee@AnnaAtreidess Strawman is creating a false narrative to explain away the argument in order to intentionally misrepresent the statement through the new and irrelevant focus
The global collapse of pollinators is estimated to kill 427,000 people a year. It sounds absurd until you follow the data.
A 2022 study led by Harvard modeled what happens when wild pollinators decline. Bees, moths, flies, hoverflies, beetles, and other animal pollinators help produce the fruits, vegetables, and nuts that reduce the risk of heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and certain cancers.
When pollination falls short, those crops yield less. People eat fewer of them. That gap in healthy food consumption accumulates into disease risk.
The estimate: 427,000 excess deaths a year, mostly from chronic diseases tied to lower fruit, vegetable, and nut intake. That is larger than the global annual death toll from prostate cancer.
This isn't really about managed honeybees. Their numbers have actually grown globally, even though beekeepers still face serious losses in some regions. This is about wild pollinators: the thousands of bee species, flies, moths, beetles, butterflies, and other insects that most of us have never heard of, but all of us rely on.
Their habitat is what keeps disappearing: meadows converted, hedgerows removed, roadsides mowed flat, lawns replacing native plants, and pesticides spread across landscapes they used to forage in safely.
Every wildflower strip, every unmowed edge, every native plant replacing a patch of lawn is working against that loss. Not as a cute gesture. As actual habitat restoration for the animals our food system depends on.
The chain from the flowers in your yard to cardiovascular mortality is longer than most people picture. But it is real.
Seven years ago a representative from Google reached out to me in an official capacity to discuss the company's energy use. I told them it would become necessary for major firms in core economies to reduce energy use in order to enable Paris-compliant decarbonisation.
They assured me that their new AI tools were already helping them identify ways to improve the company's energy efficiency, so they weren't worried. They insisted this would soon yield radical efficiency improvements, and lead to energy use reduction without any change to their production activities. "Just wait, you'll see!" they told me, full of confidence.
I told them that's not how it works. In growth-oriented capitalist firms, savings from efficiency improvements are generally leveraged to expand production. I predicted that even if their AI found ways to improve efficiency, Google's energy use would go up, not down. Seven years later and this is where we're at:
@TayScorsese Have you ever listened to him speak on making a movie or watched a making of any of his movies? He freely admits to this. Constantly. Like what
BOMBSHELL reporting finds Princeton climate researchers took tens of millions of dollars from BP to publish research, shaped and edited by BP, promoting carbon capture & storage and fossil fuels.
Landmark "Wedges" climate paper promoting CCS now confirmed to be BP propaganda.
Why did our ruling class not invest in decarbonising faster to avoid this acceleration in deadly heatwaves that scientists warned would come? Because of the capitalist law of value.
Capital invests in what is most profitable to capital, rather than what is most necessary for humanity, so our ruling class keeps ploughing investment into fossil fuels and SUVs, while we get far too little in renewables and public transit, even while the world burns around us.
We have more than enough capacity (labour, factories, technology) to address the climate crisis, but as long as capital controls investment and production we are prevented from doing it.
We are trapped by the capitalist law of value, living in a miserable shadow of the world we could have.
The people who told you that we have the time and the “carbon budget” to pursue pro-growth technological fixes to climate collapse were wrong
It’s radical degrowth or doom
Yes, it's mind boggling how much of the academic job cuts are due to incompetent senior management wasting money on vanity infrastructure projects, with zero consequences
Congolese fans were excited to see Vea standing in support of the team, but the US turning him back isn't surprising b/c his presence is a direct indictment of what the gov't and CIA did to Lumumba, and the present day exploitation and subjugation of Congo, her people, and Africa
You should try utter the words “Support” and then “Palestine” and then even try the other word “Action” in Britain and see how far that gets you … not all Europeans (although the British really don’t want to be seen alongside the Spanish French Portuguese Italians etc)
Ir’s simply impossible for Europeans to understand let alone tolerate the restrictive definition of free speech that exists in the US. On this China and US are on one side, Europe on the other