JJJ
Posts: 3090
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:56 am

tommy1808 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
VTKillarney wrote:
You are missing my point. Sure, some individual organic farms can rely on alternatives to manure. But organic farms simply can’t feed anyone other than a fraction of the world’s elite without dependence on manure. The industry as we know it today depends on manure.

But this is not the main issue. The main issue is that organic farming can’t feed the world. People’s privileges are really showing here. Not everyone can afford to waste money on organic food that is scientifically proven to be no more nutritious than conventionally grown food.

The other issue with organic farming is land use. The amount of arable land that would be required to feed the world's population using organic farm techniques would be staggering..


The ~10% more land you´d need to go all organic are not really a staggering amount of extra land, aside of wheat most staple foods even just need single digit more land, and could easily be offset by even a slight decrease in food waste. We do throw 1/3 of all food calories we produce away after all.

And i am pretty sure that using 10% more land without much in the way or herbicides and pesticides will have less negative impact that exchanging one for the other.


You're taking best-case scenario here. That 10% yield variability is just for fruits and horticulturals, under modern management.... which btw includes a lot of (organic-approved) pesticide applications, and those pesticides cost more (often way more) than the conventional.

If you talk about, say, potatoes or other tubers the yield gap between organic and conventional is about 30% less. Beans? about 20% less. Cereals? Under 50% if you account for increased crop rotation needed.

Horticultural and fruit tree surface is a tiny % of worldwide agricultural land use. Horticulturals + fruit trees + citrus make under 10% of land use (8% or so). The rest are all crops where the gap between organic and conventional is much higher. Especially cereal where the gap is the highest makes up 2/3 of global land agricultural use.

Dial back the technology (think developing nations) and the gap grows, but the worst thing is how those organic crops are ill-equipped to deal with unexpected pests and a worse than average year for a certain fungus or insect might mean total crop loss.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9701
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 8:31 am

JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
The other issue with organic farming is land use. The amount of arable land that would be required to feed the world's population using organic farm techniques would be staggering..


The ~10% more land you´d need to go all organic are not really a staggering amount of extra land, aside of wheat most staple foods even just need single digit more land, and could easily be offset by even a slight decrease in food waste. We do throw 1/3 of all food calories we produce away after all.

And i am pretty sure that using 10% more land without much in the way or herbicides and pesticides will have less negative impact that exchanging one for the other.


You're taking best-case scenario here. That 10% yield variability is just for fruits and horticulturals, under modern management.... .


or Corn, or Soy Bean, or Rice....

but the worst thing is how those organic crops are ill-equipped to deal with unexpected pests and a worse than average year for a certain fungus or insect might mean total crop loss.


That just means you need to have a mechanism to allow saving crops in those cases.
You also can´t dismiss the external costs of intensive farming.

That organic can´t feed the world is the same, carefully cultivated, myth as that genetically modified crops are bad for you when you eat them, just from the other side of the aisle. And once more, i have no problem with GMO in organic farming, so many of the problems can be migrated.

https://news.berkeley.edu/2014/12/09/or ... yield-gap/

If more organic farming would be standard, obviously demand would shift to those crops that are yielding closer to their conventionally farmed counterparts. That is market forces for you. Right now the market is unbalanced very much in favor of conventional farming. Conventional farming is well on track to make water 40% more expensive here, if we forced farmers to pay for that conventional farming would largely be done. Water from field needs decades to make it into our drinking water reservoirs, so that is guaranteed to become significantly more expensive over time. There are already some wells where the costs of processing water gets close to operating desalination plants.
And since the cheap manure disposal by just dumping it on fields would be significantly curtailed, or at least be more expensive, meat would become somewhat more expensive, depressing demand. My gut feeling tells me that is going to free up a lot more farmland than going organic costs.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
JJJ
Posts: 3090
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 10:25 am

tommy1808 wrote:
JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

The ~10% more land you´d need to go all organic are not really a staggering amount of extra land, aside of wheat most staple foods even just need single digit more land, and could easily be offset by even a slight decrease in food waste. We do throw 1/3 of all food calories we produce away after all.

And i am pretty sure that using 10% more land without much in the way or herbicides and pesticides will have less negative impact that exchanging one for the other.


You're taking best-case scenario here. That 10% yield variability is just for fruits and horticulturals, under modern management.... .


or Corn, or Soy Bean, or Rice....


Check your sources. That's just not true. Wheat yields in Belgium, like-for-like, peer-reviewed. 4,5T/ha vs 8,5T/ha

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 4315300486

Or this compilation from another article
Image


but the worst thing is how those organic crops are ill-equipped to deal with unexpected pests and a worse than average year for a certain fungus or insect might mean total crop loss.


That just means you need to have a mechanism to allow saving crops in those cases.
You also can´t dismiss the external costs of intensive farming.


That's what regulation is for. Governments are already doing a great deal of promoting organic agriculture through grants, pesticide restriction, residue limitation, etc.

That organic can´t feed the world is the same, carefully cultivated, myth as that genetically modified crops are bad for you when you eat them, just from the other side of the aisle. And once more, i have no problem with GMO in organic farming, so many of the problems can be migrated.


I'm flying to Niger next week, as part of a FAO-sponsored development program. Ask the farmers there if they're OK with getting cc 30% less rice yield using the same land and the same water (which is precious scarce there), while paying maybe 50% extra in treatments (more expensive inputs plus the need for more frequent applications thanks to organic pesticides being less effective than traditional chemicals).

Organic is great for many reasons, but as per today and likely the foreseeable future it will remain a sideshow for the main event.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9701
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 1:21 pm

JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
JJJ wrote:

You're taking best-case scenario here. That 10% yield variability is just for fruits and horticulturals, under modern management.... .


or Corn, or Soy Bean, or Rice....


Check your sources. That's just not true. Wheat yields in Belgium, like-for-like, peer-reviewed. 4,5T/ha vs 8,5T/ha


Wheat is neither Corn, not Soy Bean, nor Rice. I said that the difference for Wheat is larger.....
And "like-for-like" ... please... whats like for like in that study, aside of nothing done to the fields being the same, quality of the land not even accessed...... ?

Or this compilation from another article


Mighty inconsistent. I already linked to the UC Berkeley bit about how studies underestimate the yields of organic farming.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
JJJ
Posts: 3090
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:23 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
JJJ wrote:

Mighty inconsistent. I already linked to the UC Berkeley bit about how studies underestimate the yields of organic farming.


From your link:

"They found that organic yields are about 19.2 percent lower than conventional ones, a smaller difference than in previous estimates."

Without accounting for crop type (as we've seen before crops covering the most land are the ones with the highest gap) you're looking at almost 20%

Furthermore, that study only speaks about yields during a single, productive year, and does not take into account that organic crop rotation has less productive years than conventional. Nor does it take into account that organic farming almost always involves more mechanic work (thus manpower and fuel) than comparable conventional practices.

Everything adds up. As mentioned before, this is my area of work, I do a lot of my work with organic inputs, it's a good part of what puts bread on my children's table and there are many variables you can't glean from googling some words and see what shows up.

Organic yields are increasing, but so are conventional yields. Any talk of organic practises closing the gap ignores that science hasn't stopped working in conventional solutions, too.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9701
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:28 pm

JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
JJJ wrote:

Mighty inconsistent. I already linked to the UC Berkeley bit about how studies underestimate the yields of organic farming.


From your link:

"They found that organic yields are about 19.2 percent lower than conventional ones, a smaller difference than in previous estimates."

Without accounting for crop type (as we've seen before crops covering the most land are the ones with the highest gap) you're looking at almost 20%.


...and the very next paragraph reads:

The researchers pointed out that the available studies comparing farming methods were often biased in favor of conventional agriculture, so this estimate of the yield gap is likely overestimated. They also found that taking into account methods that optimize the productivity of organic agriculture could minimize the yield gap. They specifically highlighted two agricultural practices, multi-cropping (growing several crops together on the same field) and crop rotation, that would substantially reduce the organic-to-conventional yield gap to 9 percent and 8 percent, respectively


best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
JJJ
Posts: 3090
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:54 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:


From your link:

"They found that organic yields are about 19.2 percent lower than conventional ones, a smaller difference than in previous estimates."

Without accounting for crop type (as we've seen before crops covering the most land are the ones with the highest gap) you're looking at almost 20%.


...and the very next paragraph reads:

The researchers pointed out that the available studies comparing farming methods were often biased in favor of conventional agriculture, so this estimate of the yield gap is likely overestimated. They also found that taking into account methods that optimize the productivity of organic agriculture could minimize the yield gap. They specifically highlighted two agricultural practices, multi-cropping (growing several crops together on the same field) and crop rotation, that would substantially reduce the organic-to-conventional yield gap to 9 percent and 8 percent, respectively


best regards
Thomas


Which tells more about the intention behind that study than that of the study itself. Most (90%) cereal crops are rotated. As mentioned before, organic cereal needs to be rotated more frequently than conventional.

Multi-cropping looks very good on paper (and is used in fringe cases, to keep moisture or nitrogen fixing for example) but the additional work needed to work two or more crops on the same field make only useable for self-consumption small plots. That's the deal breaker except for hand-picked subsistence farming (where it is used successfully, but a tractor would increase the yield much more).

Show that to a farmer and you'll be laughed out of the field.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 1786
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:20 pm

JJJ wrote:

Show that to a farmer and you'll be laughed out of the field.


I actually showed that line to my coworkers here in Kansas and we all had a good laugh. (Many of the engineers I know here own 180 acre + plots of land that they receive land rents on for agricultural reasons -either pasture that cattle roam on, that is hayed or they receive crop income in the form of a 1/3rd 2/3rd split - landowner gets 1/3rd, planter/harvester gets 2/3rd)
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2434
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:31 pm

JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
The other issue with organic farming is land use. The amount of arable land that would be required to feed the world's population using organic farm techniques would be staggering..


The ~10% more land you´d need to go all organic are not really a staggering amount of extra land, aside of wheat most staple foods even just need single digit more land, and could easily be offset by even a slight decrease in food waste. We do throw 1/3 of all food calories we produce away after all.

And i am pretty sure that using 10% more land without much in the way or herbicides and pesticides will have less negative impact that exchanging one for the other.


You're taking best-case scenario here. That 10% yield variability is just for fruits and horticulturals, under modern management.... which btw includes a lot of (organic-approved) pesticide applications, and those pesticides cost more (often way more) than the conventional.

Indeed. Most of the numbers I've seen project approximately 40% more farmland required to accommodate 100% organic farming.

You're paying for your water to be sanitized with or without organic farming. Doubtful you're paying much more, if any incremental cost to ensure your water is clean.
 
User avatar
VTKillarney
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:37 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
Indeed. Most of the numbers I've seen project approximately 40% more farmland required to accommodate 100% organic farming.

Land that simply doesn’t exist.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2434
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Tue Jan 08, 2019 6:08 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

The ~10% more land you´d need to go all organic are not really a staggering amount of extra land, aside of wheat most staple foods even just need single digit more land, and could easily be offset by even a slight decrease in food waste. We do throw 1/3 of all food calories we produce away after all.

And i am pretty sure that using 10% more land without much in the way or herbicides and pesticides will have less negative impact that exchanging one for the other.


You're taking best-case scenario here. That 10% yield variability is just for fruits and horticulturals, under modern management.... which btw includes a lot of (organic-approved) pesticide applications, and those pesticides cost more (often way more) than the conventional.

Indeed. Most of the numbers I've seen project approximately 40% more farmland required to accommodate 100% organic farming.

You're paying for your water to be sanitized with or without organic farming. Doubtful you're paying much more, if any incremental cost to ensure your water is clean.

And just to add, even if we are talking about the low end 10% number...that is certainly still a staggering amount of land, much of it likely needing to be deforested, that would only exacerbate climate change.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9701
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:10 am

flyguy89 wrote:
You're paying for your water to be sanitized with or without organic farming. Doubtful you're paying much more, if any incremental cost to ensure your water is clean.


The increase is what the water utilities in Germany state come from removing residual from conventional farming. Our tap water is already better than most bottled waters and has been so for decades.
Water Utilities in Germany are by law forbidden to make profits and have to justify each cost increase, as they are for all intents and purposes owned by their water users. If they say rates go up 40% because of farming, you can take that to the bank.

flyguy89 wrote:
And just to add, even if we are talking about the low end 10% number...that is certainly still a staggering amount of land, much of it likely needing to be deforested, that would only exacerbate climate change.


You are looking at the situation one dimensional. Less conventional farming makes lifestock more expensive, reduces demand and hence frees up land. That is in fact one of the things markets can regulate quite well.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
JJJ
Posts: 3090
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:04 am

tommy1808 wrote:
You are looking at the situation one dimensional. Less conventional farming makes lifestock more expensive, reduces demand and hence frees up land. That is in fact one of the things markets can regulate quite well.


It also makes all food (other than wild caught fish) more expensive, not just meat. I would personally benefit from food being more expensive (more money for agricultural inputs) but do we really want to go back to the days where people were spending half their income just to put food on the table?
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2434
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:50 am

tommy1808 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
You're paying for your water to be sanitized with or without organic farming. Doubtful you're paying much more, if any incremental cost to ensure your water is clean.


The increase is what the water utilities in Germany state come from removing residual from conventional farming. Our tap water is already better than most bottled waters and has been so for decades.
Water Utilities in Germany are by law forbidden to make profits and have to justify each cost increase, as they are for all intents and purposes owned by their water users. If they say rates go up 40% because of farming, you can take that to the bank.

They'd still have to remove residue from organic farming, too.

JJJ wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
You are looking at the situation one dimensional. Less conventional farming makes lifestock more expensive, reduces demand and hence frees up land. That is in fact one of the things markets can regulate quite well.


It also makes all food (other than wild caught fish) more expensive, not just meat. I would personally benefit from food being more expensive (more money for agricultural inputs) but do we really want to go back to the days where people were spending half their income just to put food on the table?

Exactly. We'd be looking at the return of mass starvation and extreme poverty rather than the gradual elimination thereof we're seeing today.

Again, perfectly fine with organic farming as consumer choice, I think it's great. But it's not practicable for feeding the world.
 
User avatar
VTKillarney
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:58 am

flyguy89 wrote:
Exactly. We'd be looking at the return of mass starvation and extreme poverty rather than the gradual elimination thereof we're seeing today.



You know that you are privileged when you advocate for something that will make you feel good but cause death and disease to a significant portion of those who live on this planet.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9701
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:27 am

flyguy89 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
You're paying for your water to be sanitized with or without organic farming. Doubtful you're paying much more, if any incremental cost to ensure your water is clean.


The increase is what the water utilities in Germany state come from removing residual from conventional farming. Our tap water is already better than most bottled waters and has been so for decades.
Water Utilities in Germany are by law forbidden to make profits and have to justify each cost increase, as they are for all intents and purposes owned by their water users. If they say rates go up 40% because of farming, you can take that to the bank.

They'd still have to remove residue from organic farming, too. .


They always had to remove that, so no.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2434
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 3:51 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

The increase is what the water utilities in Germany state come from removing residual from conventional farming. Our tap water is already better than most bottled waters and has been so for decades.
Water Utilities in Germany are by law forbidden to make profits and have to justify each cost increase, as they are for all intents and purposes owned by their water users. If they say rates go up 40% because of farming, you can take that to the bank.

They'd still have to remove residue from organic farming, too. .


They always had to remove that, so no.

best regards
Thomas

As they have for conventional farming pesticides.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8158
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:00 pm

How about genetically modifying foods specifically for increasing nutritional value?

Scientists are creating super-healthy, gene-edited spicy tomatoes

https://qz.com/1518570/scientists-are-c ... -tomatoes/
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
VTKillarney
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: GMO crops - good or not?

Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:20 pm

And let’s not forget golden rice.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: atcsundevil, qf789 and 39 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos