Jump to content
Thai Visa Forum

Industry Ministry plans end to sugarcane burning in three years


webfact

Recommended Posts

Industry Ministry plans end to sugarcane burning in three years

 

66.jpg

 

The Ministry of Industry will propose to the Cabinet a plan to end within three years sugarcane farmers’ widespread practice of cane burning before harvesting which is largely blamed for smog problem in many areas.

 

The plan will be incorporated into a ministerial regulation to be enforceable during the 2019-20 sugarcane crop year and seeks to force sugar mills to accept only 30% of burned sugarcane for milling, with a further reduction to 20% for the 2020-21 crop year and to no more than five percent for the third crop year.

 

Thai sugarcane farmers prefer burning sugarcane to make it easier to cut and to save labour costs.  However, the burned sugarcane is of lower quality and has reduced sweetness. Burning of sugarcane has also been blamed for creating smog in some provinces containing large sugarcane plantations, such as Khon Kaen.

 

Full story: https://www.thaipbsworld.com/industry-ministry-plans-end-to-sugarcane-burning-in-three-years/

 

 

thaipbs.jpg

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2019-04-09
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, webfact said:

Industry Ministry plans end to sugarcane burning in three years

At least they didn't say 30 days, like they normally do.

I will expect exactly NOTHING to happen in three years and this story will be long forgotten by then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they want to stop the burning aerial "bombing" with fire retardant would do the trick. The crop would not be fit for harvest. I am sure the farmers would change their practices if the powers that be used this as a fire fighting tactic.

On a different note an education project showing that the farmers would make more money by reducing their need for fertiliser and other chemicals by using the stuff they burn as mulch as is done in the larger sugar exporting countries. This can be achieved by using mechanical harvesting devices which further reduce labour costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fex Bluse said:

At least they didn't say 30 days, like they normally do.

I will expect exactly NOTHING to happen in three years and this story will be long forgotten by then.

Nor did they say 7 days like one particular person did. A stiff upper lip and a spade doesn't make the smoke go away.

imageproxy (3).jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

This will be “words only” & no action. Three years from now nothing will be done. Note: Has the government reduced traffic fatalities with their words? Has the government stopped polluting the sea and littering with their words? Has the government improved the outdated education system with their words?  - 

Link to post
Share on other sites

       The answer to this is simple. Station a few of the underemployed soldiers at the front gate of every sugar mill in Thailand. Any truck turning up with burnt cane is refused entry. The word would soon get around and burning would stop.

        Who am I kidding? Nothing will be done as usual and we will continue to have haze and black ash floating around. With more and more farmers growing sugar cane we now get burning for 5 months of the year. It started in November last year and they are still burning around here, every evening the sky lights up with another field being torched.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, webfact said:

The plan will be incorporated into a ministerial regulation to be enforceable during the 2019-20 sugarcane crop year

I can see the deliberate error above: 'enforceable'

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is they tried this last year in select areas. What happened is the farmers happily harvested their green cane, then went back to the fields and burned them as usual. So while this program could increase the quality of sugar cane somewhat as they say, it seems unlikely that it will reduce pollution.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, justin case said:

 ahaha, 3 years, because next year would be impossible for what reason again ?

 

let them grow mari-jane... at least we all be high

If all the smoke came from burned ganja, the junk food giants ran out of stock, and CP shares would hit the ceiling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How dumb is this?  Whats the logic in saying 30%, 20% - who gets to do the 30%?  IT just means everyone will go crazy burning to make sure they are the first to dump their cane.

Stupidity doesnt come close to describing this debacle.

Meanwhile - i dont think tourists will wait three years to cancel their vacations to smog capital of the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Three years from when ?

or

barring accidents

or

"There I was minding my own business when "Woosh" everything went up in flames !"

or

I heard a rumour about 'acts' of spontaneous combustion, perhaps it was a cigarette end ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The govt. would do better to look at the costs imposed by the mills on the farmers for using the combined harvesters owned by the mills. Burning is far less costly than using a machine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fex Bluse said:

At least they didn't say 30 days, like they normally do.

I will expect exactly NOTHING to happen in three years and this story will be long forgotten by then.

And the question is : WHO START THE FIRE !!!!???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously a failure to realize the extent of rural farming as opposed to the obvious consequences of such- with Bangkok specifically. So what is the solution?Ban burning which is obviously part of rural farming or worry about the effects in BKK? Third world country standards apply when it comes to burning.  Decide whether this is not only acceptable to those in certain areas, but now the reality is here. You (those who burn) decide whether you do not accept progress (and obvious pollution risks while tending to your historically rendered plots of land.)

 

One must decide- a terrible decision when those who have their own way of living have to deal with the pollution "issue". They never thought that it would present a problem And northern Thailand is not a comparative  scenario to Phuket or any other tourist attraction.

 

So, in essence I wonder why supposed Thai natives who for whatever reason I understand. Key? is when you understand me for those same reasons:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about post maize harvest burning? Or is mentioning that forbidden because it would hurt the pocket of one of Thailand's monopolies?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...