January 9, 2015
Organic farming could be worse for the climate than
conventional farming methods, one of the government’s scientific advisers has
said, because of the greater land use required and the methods us.
Lord Krebs, who advises ministers on how to adapt to
climate change, told the Oxford Farming
Conference that organic farming did not necessarily mean more
environmentally friendly farming.
Instead, he suggested, agricultural methods known as
“no-till” – which usually involves the use of genetically modified crops or
biotechnology, with herbicides to kill the weeds that tilling normally prevents
– were better for the climate as they reduce the turnover of soils, a process
that releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere......Krebs also argued that
organic farming needs more land than technological methods to produce the same
yield, which could be an increasing problem as the world’s population is
projected to grow from more than 7 billion people today to 9 to 12 billion by
mid-century, requiring a correspondingly large rise in agricultural
productivity.....He told the BBC in that year that people who bought organic
food were “not getting value for money, in my opinion and in the opinion of the
Food Standards Agency, if they think they’re buying food with extra nutritional
quality or extra safety. We don’t have the evidence to support those claims.”.....To Read More....
Take - The
fact this appeared in the Guardian is the only justification for linking the
article, and they do give the "organics" the last word. Global Warming has exposed the Guardian as the left wing rag
everyone knew it to be and their attachment to real science, the proper
interpretation of science, understanding science is tenuous at best. Actually, the Guardian’s attachment to anything
that resembles reality is tenuous.
Post a Comment