Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Yes, organic farming will kill us all

shift.newco.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 260 posts

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#51

Post by KaiserPro »

avar wrote: post #20
kuschku wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And there is a huge unspoken problem yet. In many areas of northern Germany, even with the extremely strict limits on fertilizer and pesticides that Germany has, the drinking water, rivers and oceans are getting so massively polluted that we’re seeing massive algae blooms and drinking water slowly becoming undrinkable. It’s a massive problem, and there’s no way to solve these without massively reducing fertilizer and…

Start by picking GMOs instead of the woo-woo that is organic farming. See e.g. a German-funded meta-analysis[1] that found that: "[...] the adoption of herbicide-tolerant (HT) soybean, maize, and cotton, and insect-resistant (IR) maize and cotton has resulted in a 22% increase in average yields, a 37% overall decrease in pesticide use, and a 68% increase in farmer profits.". 1. http://www.theskepticsguide.org/gm-impa…

yes, but for those yields, you need to increase the use of herbicides.

Which has unintended consequences.

GMOs are currently faster horses.

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#52

Post by 7sigma »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #38
avar wrote: post #17

Organic isn't the answer, it's trying to address some legitimate concerns, but it's a movement full of scientific woo-woo that's been legislated. For instance, organic farming thinks GMO's are bad, but is just fine with irradiating large fields full of plants to accomplish random mutations through radiation breeding. This article is one example of this, the author decries traditional corn fields, and as a counterexam…

The reason why GMO is bad is probably not because of the "Modified" part. It's because they're optimised to withstand heavy pesticide use. Pesticides are bad. Also, that freedom thing: GMO are generally sterile, so you have to buy seeds every year from Monsanto. Great business model for Monsanto, not so much for the farmer.

"It's because they're optimised to withstand heavy pesticide use"

Actually, GMOs need less pesticides than non GMO crop. Some of them produce their own pesticide (BT corn and BT cotton).

"Pesticides are bad."

Thats kind of the point, they are bad to pests that try to eat the crop

"GMO are generally sterile"

You are confusing GMO with hybrids and no they are not sterile, the just lose vigour after a few generations, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1_hybrid

", so you have to buy seeds every year from Monsanto. Great business model for Monsanto, not so much for the farmer."

Most farmers in the developed world buy new seed every year because of the hybrid thing, and do so because its convenient. At the end of the day its a choice the farmer makes: they could re use their own seeds and hybridise them, but for most its not worth the hassle.

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#53

Post by TeMPOraL »

kristopolous wrote: post #8
snovv_crash wrote: post #3

One thing I don't see him cover is how to deal with the "ecosystem" which will form around, and eventually consume, a fully organic permaculture farm. One of the big advantages of monoculture is that you usually only need to protect against a single class of pests in a specific area.

A single point of failure is an advantage?

Yes?

As a king, what would you prefer - to defend against one big kingdom that wants all of your land, or to defend against three big kingdoms that each want a third of your land?

When number of points of failure trade off against your attack surface, you can't just say "more PoFs is better".

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#54

Post by [deleted] »

avar wrote: post #17

Organic isn't the answer, it's trying to address some legitimate concerns, but it's a movement full of scientific woo-woo that's been legislated. For instance, organic farming thinks GMO's are bad, but is just fine with irradiating large fields full of plants to accomplish random mutations through radiation breeding. This article is one example of this, the author decries traditional corn fields, and as a counterexam…

[deleted]

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#55

Post by DanBC »

7sigma wrote: post #52
loup-vaillant wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason why GMO is bad is probably not because of the "Modified" part. It's because they're optimised to withstand heavy pesticide use. Pesticides are bad. Also, that freedom thing: GMO are generally sterile, so you have to buy seeds every year from Monsanto. Great business model for Monsanto, not so much for the farmer.

"It's because they're optimised to withstand heavy pesticide use" Actually, GMOs need less pesticides than non GMO crop. Some of them produce their own pesticide (BT corn and BT cotton). "Pesticides are bad." Thats kind of the point, they are bad to pests that try to eat the crop "GMO are generally sterile" You are confusing GMO with hybrids and no they are not sterile, the just lose vigour after a few generations, s…

> > "GMO are generally sterile"

> You are confusing GMO with hybrids and no they are not sterile

Monsanto did have the (terribly named) "terminator gene". They said this was to protect the environment from spilled seed.

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#56

Post by codingdave »

leecarraher wrote: post #49

so what would this rube goldbergian harvester machine look like that could be capable of efficiently farming such a dynamic landscape as a multistory(already sounding like we got some marketing terms in the works here) farm... my guess is about 5'10", over worked and from some economically depressed country. yay organic

As opposed to the 5'10" rube goldbergian harvester machine that selects your products at the grocery store, moves them around in a cart for 20 minutes, then stands in line to purchase them?

Somewhere along the line, you as a person will always walk around and pick up your own food. (Unless you pay someone to do that for you, too.) Doing it direct from a local food forest, or a farmers market, will always involve less transportation and labor cost than a grocery store.

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#57

Post by dagw »

justin_vanw wrote: post #12

I think this is just an example of 'elitism' on the part of the author. It is ludicrous to think that there is a chance that the 'local/organic' movement will ever capture more than 1%-2% of food production. Most people don't care, and some fraction of people that do care are intelligent enough to decide that additional cost for no increase in quality is not worth it. So this is 'elitism' because people think that a…

It is ludicrous to think that there is a chance that the 'local/organic' movement will ever...

Why are you conflating local and organic? Neither implies the other and they're two entirely different questions.

(local && organic) may never capture a huge share of the market, but that is an entirely unrelated question to organic farming

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#58

Post by ogrisel »

grzm wrote: post #40
geon wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't use the word "chemical" like it is something unnatural or harmful. Water is a chemical. The active ingredients of natural fertilizer are chemicals.

I understand the point you're trying to make. Likely you understand the distinction your parent intends as well, and this is a commonly understood way to discuss the topic. Do you have a preferred alternative to suggest that conveys the same intent, preferably one that is also widely understood?

"fossil-fuel intensive synthetic fertilizers" or "inorganic synthetic fertilizers"

NH3 in particular is commonly synthesized by combining N2 from the atmosphere with H2 extracted from CH4 (natural gas).

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#59

Post by srssays »

ju-st wrote: post #26
justin_vanw wrote: post #12

I think this is just an example of 'elitism' on the part of the author. It is ludicrous to think that there is a chance that the 'local/organic' movement will ever capture more than 1%-2% of food production. Most people don't care, and some fraction of people that do care are intelligent enough to decide that additional cost for no increase in quality is not worth it. So this is 'elitism' because people think that a…

It already captured 5,3% of food revenue in Germany and growing (4,7% in 2015). Source http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/dm-gegen-alnatu...

5.3% of Germany is 4 million people. And a wealthy 4 million people at that. Organic food is not going to feed China, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, etc.

Re: Yes, organic farming will kill us all

#60

Post by roel_v »

throwaway1892 wrote: post #43
ThePhysicist wrote: post #5

The thing with conventional farming is that a lot of the costs (in terms of environmental damage which needs to be repaired) are currently externalized, i.e. payed for by the society, which indeed makes industrial farming more cost-effective than organic farming, at least for the farmer (though in many countries you can charge a good premium for organic food, which will often outweigh your additional cost). The same…

> Farming lobby in Europe For my perspective in France, here the farming lobby is inexistant/inefficient, since farmers had to big pretty big actions all over France just to raise the price of milk. So I think it's not the farming lobby, but the fertilizers and pesticides lobby.

It's a lot more complicated than that. There isn't one single 'farming lobby'. France, to take your example, has a highly inefficient agricultural system, heavily dependent on CAP subsidies. There has been massive pressure the last two decades to reduce that, but it hasn't happened yet and probably won't for years to come. This is a form of 'lobbying' (those farmers get benefits from those subsidies), even if those farmers didn't have the clout to set higher milk price floors (a weird concept in the first place, since this is a very basic supply/demand thing - the reason they don't make enough is because their per-liter cost is too high compared to the competition; sure you can say that that's because extra-EU farmers don't have to internalize environmental costs to the same degree the EU ones have to, but then it's a matter of setting import restrictions, not having an artificial price floor enforced. But I digress.)

Of course fertilizers and pesticide produces are an aspect of the abstract concept of 'the Ag lobby', but it's much more nuanced than that.

Post reply on HN