I give up.....

[Janne]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...ic-food-WORSE-environment-study-suggests.html


If this is true, then we are truly doomed....
It does not matter what we do, it is still bad.
Being the eminent news site of wrong information and substandard reporting, Daily Mail, I will see if I can go back to the source and get more accurate info.

 

[Woody girl]

I wonder who commissioned that report? We have had so many food scares it's a joke nowadays. I know organic yields are lower at first untill soil fertility is established . Once this is done yields are usually fairly similar. There is less pollution as tractors are not spraying with chemicals every few weeks. The simple answer is to eat less. Then we solve obesity diabetes and a host of other issues. Including needing so much food. I wonder how big most people's food bills will be over Xmas. I see people loading their trolleys as if the shop will never open again. Hundreds of pounds per trolly load. Crazy! Most of it will end up in the bin too. We'll I intend to be frugal this year and have a good Christmas dinner. Mostly home grown or foraged and organic. Home produced drinks and about ten pounds worth of extras.chocolates etc. I'm planning a good spread for 4people this year and I doubt I'll have spent more than £40in total. I grow enough organic food to supply me most of the year in two raised beds each 6 feet by 3 feet. How can that report be right? Scaremongering if you ask me!

 

[Janne]

I will investigate tonight as I need a Swedish adopted computer, my US one is hopeless there.
IP addresses, the correct letters and so on.

I certainly hope it is scaremongering!

 

[crosslandkelly]

This is not new news. Just think about it.
http://www.mynewsdesk.com/uk/chalmers/pressreleases/organic-food-worse-for-the-climate-2813280

 

[Janne]

Sometimes an inkling/ idea needs to be confirmed.

The majority of people ‘know’ the way to save Earth is going Organic.

 

[slowworm]

I think to some extent it's common sense. Just because something has a label it doesn't mean it's better or worse. Is flying something that's organic or vegan in from a deforested area of Brazil better for the planet than say eating some lamb from a field that gets one or two light dressings of fertilizer a year?

Personally I don't use pesticides or herbicides but while establishing a new garden I will use a little fertilizer to help with yields. If it saves one or two trips to the shops that's less carbon emissions.

As for the article, it may cover the extra land they think is required but as there's no mention of pesticides, herbicides etc I wouldn't say non-organic is better for the environment. I also wonder if people who buy organic food waste less?

 

[petrochemicals]

They are both crap for the environment per frolicky little critters, bio diversity etc. As has been said soooooooooooooo many times on here the population of earth needs to be cut to 2 billion max. North america is about ok population density wise, exept they do things like farm all the land and export for money, kill dem injuns an' bufalo, dam dat gran canyin, and put out dem fires.

 

[Janne]

Any suggesions how to cut the population?

We have only one child, so we have done our contribution....

 

[Tengu]

The Lacademonians had an idea, but its a bit technical.

The North Koreans plant trees instead of food crops, which also seems to work well.

While we are on the subject,is it true that the Organic associations in the US are against hydroponics?

(What are yo doing reading the DM, anyhow, Janne??)

 

[Broch]

(What are yo doing reading the DM, anyhow, Janne??)

We keep asking him that and he still reads it!

 

[petrochemicals]

Any suggesions how to cut the population?

We have only one child, so we have done our contribution....

2 children per couple is a fast enough way to cut population. Coupled with disease accidents lack of children etc the population comes down. China are heading for a major problem they will have alot of retired people (2 generations worth) and only about a quarter of the ammount to do the work.

Or seniside, ill give your daughter the info.

 

[Janne]

Son. One son, the youngest person with our ancient family surname.

But according to Darwin, he should have many children. One by each woman.


Same problem all around Europe, UK too I believe?
To keep a population level, each woman needs to have 2.1 children on average.

As this is not happening the population need to keep working for longer ( raising the OAP year) or increase immigration of young, work hungry people, preferably a 50/50 mix of mrn and women

 

[petrochemicals]

For some reason i thought you had a daughter, weird !

Thats another good point in china. If they have a quater of the people to do the work in a post moder society, and the male female ratio is 5/6, and not all of the couples go on to have two kids, they will be severley short of workers for a good few years yet.

 

[Wayland]

Any suggesions how to cut the population?

We have only one child, so we have done our contribution....

A good dose of flu or plague might help. We're about due for something lethal and the transfer rate could be high enough to do the job these days.

As for children, with a pollution that lives longer, the amount of children needed for population stability drops so I would think one child per couple should be a more realistic target for a while at least.

Personally, we have none so I look to my brother to continue our family name which he has done with two kids. So with us out of the equation that should balance out nicely.

 

[Woody girl]

If we keep destroying the planet the way we are doing it won't matter as everything will die anyway .

 

[Wayland]

If we keep destroying the planet the way we are doing it won't matter as everything will die anyway .

People keep saying stuff like that but the truth is that life will go on. It will just go on without us.

The planet has had extinction events before for other reasons. This one is caused by a species imbalance, humans have become too dominant and are messing up their own environment. Sadly that is also impacting on other species faster than on our own at the moment.

Complex systems usually return to their own balance eventually and that will probably be when we have depleted the resources we rely on and lose that dominant position.

It's a mistake to think that the Earth's future is our own.

 

[tracker1972]

Well, I read the article, and it's entirely based on the premise that all organic crops automatically deforest the required extra space. Therefore releasing all the carbon held in the forest. First of all, I doubt all the farms going organic deforest an area to maintain yields. Secondly, you don't have to burn everything you do cut down, do you?
I can only assume the research was based on the entire planet going organic and as a result having to deforest to maintain the food supply, rather than increasing prices (which is what actually happens now) and maybe did becoming more valuable and thrown away less?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Woody girl]

People keep saying stuff like that but the truth is that life will go on. It will just go on without us.

The planet has had extinction events before for other reasons. This one is caused by a species imbalance, humans have become too dominant and are messing up their own environment. Sadly that is also impacting on other species faster than on our own at the moment.

Complex systems usually return to their own balance eventually and that will probably be when we have depleted the resources we rely on and lose that dominant position.

It's a mistake to think that the Earth's future is our own.

I was being ironic realy ..tho having been an environmental campaigner for about 40 years I have seen many things in my lifetime that were predicted if we didn't change our ways come true. It's kind of depressing to see it and to find myself still campaigning on the same issues 30 or 40 years later and still people are not taking any notice. Still have their heads in the sand or just don't care and won't make simple changes in lifestyle that would be beneficial to the environment. I worry what sort of life our kids and their kids will have. All actions should look unto the seventh generation ie be sustainable for the future in seven generations time. OK sermon over! (Tho I could go on for hours)

 

[Janne]

I have not been able to find the full research.

The Earth will be fine. We might not though.

Environmental campaigner? You?
Thank you for your work!
Our countries would not have been what they are today without you.
No lead in petrol poisoning nature. No DDT used. Our environment is so much better than 30 years ago.
Yes it is!

 

[Woody girl]

Thank you for those words. I do come across a lot of negativity and shrugged shoulders so it is lovely to see that somebody appreciates my small efforts! I've just joined extinction rebellion and my next March is in January. Time is running out for many species including us! But hey.... we can exist without orangutans, polar bears, and penguins ,whales and dolphins....Can't we? We can exist without cod and sardines and many other things, but ask the chip shop owner whose business relies on cod wheat and potatoes how their livelihood is affected by climate change. Drought affects the wheat and potatoes. Pollution and over fishing affects the fish. Even the humble corner chippy is affected by climate change.who'd have thought it!!!