Features
Nano-Urea: A solution to presentfertiliser crisis?
By R.S. Dharmakeerthi
Professor in Soil Fertility and Nutrient management
University of Peradeniya
Safeguarding the food security is a prerequisite for ensuring national security. We can produce enough food or generate enough foreign exchange to purchase food to achieve food security. If we fail to secure these two, we will have to abide by the conditions set forth by other countries. Under the current global geopolitical battle to secure safe spaces, the super powers will always look for opportunities that they can capitalise in countries that are strategically important such as Sri Lanka. The current fertiliser crisis in the agriculture sector of Sri Lanka is making us even more vulnerable.
Organic Agriculture Mania
On 27 April, the Cabinet took a bold decision to ban the use of agrochemicals, almost overnight, to provide the nation with safe and healthy food. Recently, Senior Professor Udith Jayasinghe Mudalige, the Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, has gone on record admitting that the sudden 100% organic agriculture was based on the wrong advice. If someone can mislead a government on a matter related to national security, then there must be something terribly wrong. The authorities now say a phase-out transition to 100% organic agriculture within a period of 3-5 years could have been the best policy. One could see the determination of the government to go for 100% organic agriculture. There are enough scientific publications that insist that crop yield will be reduced by 20-25% on average in organic agriculture leading to food insecurity of a country. Therefore, not the transition period, but the concept of 100% organic agriculture itself is a threat to national security.
Chemical fertilizer is not poisonous
The government still believes that chemical fertilisers are poisonous and have led to a number of non-communicable diseases including the chronic kidney disease of unknown etiology (CKDu). Those who have a knowledge on soil science reiterate the fact that at rates of fertiliser applied in Sri Lanka, there is only a very low risk on health. For example, a final report of a government-funded research project on CKDu, led by Senior Professor Rohana Chandrajith of the University of Peradeniya can be considered a case in point. According to that report, causes for CKDu have been narrowed down to three reasons; namely fluoride content and magnesium content in drinking water, and low water intake by farmers. None of these causes are related to agrochemicals used in those areas. Even for other health issues highlighted by 100% organic supporters, a cause-effect relationship has not been established by scientific investigations.
Deficit of organic fertiliser
If the governments strive for 100% organic agriculture, they first wanted to produce the required quantities of organic fertilisers within the country and within 3-4 months before the next cropping season (i.e. this Maha season) starts. They failed to achieve this target and farmers are demanding fertilisers. Then without listening to the outcry of scientists not to import organic fertilisers, as it is a threat to our bio-diversity, plant and animal health, the government decided to import an “organic nitrogen fertiliser” from a Chinese Company. At least two sets of randomly drawn samples from these organic fertiliser stocks were found to be contaminated by pathogens and micro-organisms. Later, the government announced that they will not allow this seaweed and manure-based nitrogen fertiliser to enter the country. The Chinese government then issued a press release saying that our test reports were not accurate. Despite all this the ship carrying the fertiliser lot is still sailing, and we will have to wait and see how the Sri Lankan government will handle the pressure from the Chinese government to accept that fertiliser lot.
Produce from agricultural lands is the lifeline and only income source of the farming community. They are in dire need of fertilisers. Some farmer societies have even decided not to accept water from the irrigation tanks until there is an assurance from the government on fertilisers. If fertilisers are not provided on time to farmers, this could lead to another crisis; management of water in irrigation tanks.
Nano-Urea: An illusion
The government has decided to purchase an alternative fertiliser called “Nano-N” from India. Part of this fertiliser was airlifted as the cultivation has already started in some parts of the country and received on 20t October. Again, Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture was on record saying it was a highly efficient “organic” liquid nitrogen fertilser. One hectare of paddy land requires only 2.5 liters of this Nano-N. This time someone has given the wrong advice to the Ministry of Agriculture and the government.
The patent right for “Nano-N” fertiliser is owned by Indian Farmer Fertiliser Corporations Ltd. (IFFCO) and is produced in a factory owned by IFFCO in Gujarat. They invented this technology in 2019 and released for commercial purposes in June 2021. This suggests that even in India there is a limited experience on the use of this fertiliser. To the best of my knowledge there is no experimental evidence on the use of this product under Sri Lankan conditions. There are some important aspects of this Nano-N that farmers and general public must be aware.
If this is a “organic” fertiliser, as the Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture states, this must be imported into the country according to the conditions set forth in the Plant Protection Act following proper protocols to avoid another fiasco like the Chinese organic fertiliser issue. But what authorities is hiding from the public is that this “Nano-N” is actually a synthetic fertiliser that cannot be used in organic agriculture. According to the web site of IFFCO, this product is actually called “Nano-Urea” and hence cannot be organic.
This “Nano-Urea” contains only 4% nitrogen as against 46% nitrogen in urea granules. If only 2.5 litres of “Nano-Urea” is applied per hectare, rice plants will receive only 100 grams of nitrogen. This is assuming 100% efficiency which we will never achieve in nature. The most important point here is that to produce five tons of paddy harvest from one hectare, plant needs 105 kg of nitrogen of which 50 kilos of nitrogen are in grains. Therefore, anybody can calculate how many liters of “Nano-Urea” is required to produce the expected yield. That is 1,250 liters of “Nano-Urea” per hectare to provide at least the nitrogen that is removed from paddylands with harvest (i.e. 50kg N). Because of this, the limited available Indian research indicates that “Nano-Urea” cannot be applied as the only source of nitrogen but must be used together with at least 50% of nitrogen from other organic and chemical sources. By giving farmers only 2.5 liters of “Nano-Urea”, farmers will definitely reduce productivity. Our research evidence suggests that paddy yield loss due to lack of nitrogen fertilisers could be around 16-60% depending on the site characteristics. Therefore, “Nano-Urea” will endanger our national security as we will have to depend on other countries for our staple food.
According to the IFFCO website, 500ml bottle of “Nano-Urea” costs about Rs.640 (Indian Rs.240). Even if airfreight and other costs are ignored, the cost of one kilo of nitrogen in “Nano-Urea” is Rs.31,000, where as one kilo of nitrogen in granular urea is only Rs.130. No wonder why the government has decided to provide only 2.5 liters of “Nano-Urea” per hectare. What this writer cannot understand is that a much cheaper synthetic fertiliser like urea has been banned in their quest for 100% organic agriculture and then import another type of synthetic urea fertiliser at a price of 240 times higher. The government has ordered 3.1million liters of “Nano-Urea” from IFFCO at a cost of Rs.4,000,000,000 (Rs. four billion according to the figures given above). If farmers need to obtain their expected yields, the government has to provide farmers with additional sources of nitrogen. But the country has not produced enough organic or bio fertilisers to provide at least one-third of nitrogen required by different crop sectors.
The government is creating an illusion that the “Nano-Urea” is a wonder product that can replace 50kg of urea bag with just half a liter of this liquid nano-fertiliser. Of course, they are relying on the information provided by the IFFCO. According to IFFCO, because urea is in “Nano” size particles, plants can absorb nitrogen from this product easily and utilize efficiently. What they probably not aware or hide from the public is that urea is 100% water soluble and they dissolve almost instantaneously disintegrating urea granule into urea molecules. The size of a urea molecule is much smaller (approximately 0.3 to 0.5 Angstrom in different dimensions) than that of a “nano-urea” particle (200 to 500 Angtrom). If the size determines the absorption efficiency, then dissolved urea must get absorbed faster. Therefore, the question is why “Nano-Urea” needs to be produced in the first place. According to the limited literature on “Nano-Urea” this writer reviewed, the IFFCO conducted field experiments do not have a liquid urea only treatment to compare with “Nano-Urea” treatment. This raises some concerns, at least in this writer’s opinion, on the significance of this wonder product.
Nano products are new to the environment and not enough research has been conducted on the long-term effects of nano particles on human health and environment. Therefore, in many organic agriculture certification systems nano fertilisers are not allowed. Therefore, before such new products are introduced, adequate research must be conducted in a given environment to ensure environmental sustainability that is expected from organic agricultural systems.
Finally, if the government is not taking evidence-based advices from their “advisors”, we can only wait and see what will become of our food security and hence the national security vis-à-vis the interests of world powers.
The writer can be reached at dharmakeerthirs@gmail.com or +94-77 264 0505
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
