Looney Labs EcoFluxx Mailing list Archive

Re: [Eco] Organic milk and meat worse for the environment?

  • From"Jonathan G." <jonathang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateFri, 23 Feb 2007 11:33:34 -0600
I'm pretty sure what I read applied to plants, but I'm not 100% certain.

My biggest problem with the organic "movement" is the opposition to 
genetically modified foods.  I figure cheaper, longer-lasting, 
pest-resistant foods would be something that everyone would agree with, but 
I guess not.  I have no problem with organic products as a premium option to 
consumers, but it seems like a lot of folks want organic produce to replace 
conventionally grown products.  Something like that will only hurt the poor, 
since they'll be unable to afford as many vegetables.  It's even worse when 
you consider that the nutrition benefits of organic produce are negligable 
at best.

Though if you can afford it, I'm all for getting locally made produce.

J/

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ginohn" <ginohn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Eco Foundation Discussion List" <eco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Eco] Organic milk and meat worse for the environment?


I'd have to look into it, but off the top of my head - I'm guessing
that would be true of going organic with all animal products. Cut
back on animal products, grow a lot more organic food. You can grow a
lot more food if you are growing plants for people to eat instead of
grain for animals.

Personally, I'd rather have a less poisoned planet!

Gina

On Feb 23, 2007, at 9:53 AM, Jonathan G. wrote:

> It's also true that if all food were produced organically, that due
> to the
> increased amount of land that it requires and the lowered
> efficiency of the
> crops, there would not be enough food to feed the current
> population of the
> earth.
>
> J/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rebecca Stallings" <becca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Eco Foundation Discussion List" <eco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 6:40 AM
> Subject: [Eco] Organic milk and meat worse for the environment?
>
>
> Whoa!  Here's an interesting finding:
>
> The Way to a Manchester's Stomach
> New study says some organic food no better for the environment
>
> In case you weren't confused enough about your grocery shopping, a
> government-sponsored study in the U.K. has added a possible twist. It
> suggests that some organic foods may not be better for the environment
> than their conventional counterparts. While the 200-page study by the
> Manchester Business School found that many organic products do have
> lower impacts than their pesticide-laden brethren, it points out that
> the act of producing others can actually have a bigger impact. Organic
> milk, for instance, requires 80 percent more land and creates 20
> percent
> more carbon dioxide than conventional milk; organic chickens, because
> they're raised longer than those crammed into crummy conventional
> coops,
> require 25 percent more energy. Britain's top organic group, the Soil
> Association, acknowledged that in some cases organic farming can be
> less
> energy-efficient, but said that factors not considered in the study
> more
> than make up for that. Like, say, eating food that's not laced with
> neurotoxins.
>
> The above summary is from Daily Grist.  Read more about it at
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/20/
> norganic20.xml
> ---'Becca
> _______________________________________________
> Eco mailing list
> Eco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/eco
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eco mailing list
> Eco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/eco

_______________________________________________
Eco mailing list
Eco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/eco