2 ms·
>> To top it all, the yield from organic farming is low. > Bullshit!! I don't have numbers handy, but I've been on farm tours, (granted organic is a misleading
by johansch 11y ago
>> To top it all, the yield from organic farming is low.
> Bullshit!! I don't have numbers handy, but I've been on farm tours, (granted organic is a misleading label these days) and the net yield from farms that depend on renewable, organic resources is higher than industrialized factory farmed produce, and the quality is higher. Only in the narrow calculus of unit per price is the yield higher, but we already know the dirty secret there: factory farmed, mass produced food is subsidized by oil and unsustainable resources, where the true cost is buried in diminishing returns over generational time spans.
Note that you have to include the environmental footprint of the inefficient humans that manage "organic" farms and compare that to more automated variants.
- tehchromic 11y agoyeah but that's the problem exactly with the article, which is that there is no incompatibility with automated, greenhoused, hi-tech, and sustainable, local, organic farming. They are compatible. Given that, local and organic (not the label, but the true meaning, which is things grown in living and decaying matter, not awash in chemicals and subsidized by non-renewable, fossil fuel based supplements) The argument is that conventional mass production farming is superior to local, hands-on, organic farming. I don't think this is true, but I know a lot of pretty deeply invested corporations that would like it to be true.