Ladies and gentlemen, do you know?The burned straw is mainly wheat straw, and the other part is corn straw, but this part is relatively small. After the wheat is harvested, the straw is basically useless nowadays. Before the ban on straw burning, the straw of wheat grown by farmers was burned. Now, after the policy of banning the burning of straw, basically straw is returned to the field. However, in fact, the policy of returning straw to the field has been implemented for many years, and now it has not promoted planting, but has affected the problem of planting.
I am also a farmer, and straw burning is very simple for the most primitive purpose, because there is no place to put it, and burning is the simplest, most convenient and cost-saving way. Otherwise, after harvesting the wheat, the storage of these straws requires a large space. And wheat and corn are planted every year, and you say that these stalks are placed in **. These are all problems, and incineration is the easiest way to dispose of it and the lowest cost.
Then the ash after burning the straw is grass ash, which can replenish some potassium and other nutrients in the soil. And these supplemental elements are very low, and for fertilization, it can only be regarded as the icing on the cake. Another reason why farmers burn straw is that the burning process can use the high temperature of the fire to eliminate some parasitic pests, eggs and germs on the straw. In this way, planting in the coming year will reduce the occurrence of pests and diseases, so that the use of pesticides will be reduced, that is, the cost of farming will be reduced.
The reason for this is also very simple, that is, it increases the cost of cultivation for farmers. As for the disposal of straw, the professor of Agricultural University has also called for not increasing the planting burden of the people. At present, the regulations prohibiting straw burning in many regions have gradually become regional burning or conditional burning. Now the ban on straw burning has increased the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, which means that the cost of planting has increased for farmers.
As for whether it is polluted or not, I am not a professional and I do not say. But what I want to talk about is a more practical problem, and it is also a scene that I have seen firsthand. The incident was also caused by the burning of straw, and the damage was very large. That's the fire, and after the straw is lit, the people are gone. The lit straw then burns on its own, as the wheat field is relatively close to a family outside the village. And this fire happened to burn this house, and it burned down all of them, but fortunately, the people happened to be not at home, and there were no people's **. Even if the policy of banning the burning of straw is abolished, someone must be responsible for the burning process, not just ignite it. There must be a sense of security, otherwise the loss will be too great.
Summary:Whether the straw is burned or not, I personally think it is better to burn less. So how to burn without increasing the cost of cultivation for farmers is a question that needs to be considered. In particular, the functional part of the policy, which is responsible for customizing the policy, is also a test. Dear netizens and friends, what do you think should be done with this straw?If you have any good suggestions, you can also talk about them in the comment area.