In the fast changing climate, depletion of water, agrodivesrsity and soil health it is going to be inevitable to convert whole wold farming into Ecofriendly /organic .Certainly it will be GRADUAL shift without loosing the production and rather increasing efficiency of all natural resources. Here organic meaning does not necessarily be Certified but excluding synthetic chemicals and including all ecotechnologies. My attached article ' MISSION POSSIBLE' may help in reply.
Why not possible, Dr. Kulvir Singh and Dr. Arvind Singh?
It may be possible with better technology within, say, 20 years.
But one precondition is there.
The population number MUST be kept unchanged.
Those who donot agree for population control, may be kept without any assistance of modern scientific discoveries like medical care, constructed building, petroleum derived fuel, modern vehicles, prepared dresses etc. basing on the logic that s/he do not agree with the concept of science.
Thanks.
Not at all.
However in exceptional cases only where chemicals donot pay eg rainfed areas, tribes, this opportunity can be cashed in by going for organic umbrella.
Particulraly for developing economies like iNDIA WITH 132 CRORES OF POPULATION,FEEDING ORGANIC CAN NEVER BE AN OPTION WHILE FEEDING SOMETHING IS AN URGENCY OF THE HOUR.
the division in "chemical" and "organic" is arbitrary more suitable is the division ion "conventinal" and "authentic" farming:
Conference Paper Authentic food production – a new concept for sustainable de...
if possible, but the monetary interests are great and make believe that it is not possible
No it is not possible. Organic agriculture alone can't fufil the growing needs of world population.
Why not possible, Dr. Kulvir Singh and Dr. Arvind Singh?
It may be possible with better technology within, say, 20 years.
But one precondition is there.
The population number MUST be kept unchanged.
Those who donot agree for population control, may be kept without any assistance of modern scientific discoveries like medical care, constructed building, petroleum derived fuel, modern vehicles, prepared dresses etc. basing on the logic that s/he do not agree with the concept of science.
Thanks.
I do not think so, the need for chemical use remains even if it is a small percentage.
The clear answer is definately NO. Rather than thinking the world, it is better to start from some where and proceed phase by phase to increase the area coverage.
If chemical farming can not be replaced for whatever reasons genuine or otherwise, let us learn to live with health issues of unknown etymology in the world for having continued to pollute land, water, air, fire and sky resources that are basic elements of life on Earth. What is life of people if they can not be healthy, happy, hilarious, strong, stable, peaceful and prosperous during their life span?
Not at all even if research prove it possible. A lot of of factors are there to restrict/limit the success and spread of organic farming. Poverty, ignorance, interest of chemical producing countries among others are there to make it impossible.
Not possible because of high population growth rate, shrinking of arable lands, limited resources, climate change, urbanization and change of dietary patterns.
Please also have a look at this useful link.
Article Short communication Organic agriculture cannot feed the world
Some where and some time, this shift from chemical to organic farming has to take place in the interest of health and wellness of all forms of life on Earth aquatic as well as terrestrial. Why the plant and animal living resources should become a casualty due to human failure or indifference in maintaining the sanctity of natural resources such as land, water, air, fire and sky and in turn plant and animal kingdom? Imagine, plants and animals come to unity and understanding to declare a war against human race? What will happen to it? Already, it is happening though at initial stages as evident from viral infections now for instance Kerala NIFA virus identified very recently due to which 11 people already died. Human greed for material possessions beyond genuine needs has steeply exceeding alarming proportions in the world. Ironically, the starvation deaths among humans are also occurring due to unscrupulous hoardings and sea dumping across the world in business interest. Let us not stall progressive thinking and action to switch over to organic/natural farming, echoing the stock answer that human population and organic food production does not match demand and supply. At least, let us start with dry land agriculture with organic production of food and fodder crops. India should not sleep over this issue any longer since developed countries such as US, Canada, UK, Australia have already progressed in the realm of organic food production in a big way despite climatic constraints unlike for India.
China, India and United States are to be compared in terms of climate for its suitability to grow diverse crops for human as well as animal population in these nations and also other nations of the world, assuming that food production and productivity as uniform. The true picture would emerge whether or not India has the potential to feed its population driving out hunger notwithstanding its growth inclusive of animal population.
Who knows? Let's try!!
A check on ecosystem resilience (soil fertility, soil degradation, etc.) may help in understanding why at least SAME LEVEL PRIORITY of both (more) organic agriculture (including combinations of traditional and modern practices, e.g. using precision farming technology with organic (on-farm) fertilizers) and food security (improve NGO-driven concepts of a better food-distribution) should be considered. More than short-term profit-oriented strategies, we need long-term strategies.
Dear Dr. Sharma,
Your article is of great inspiration and I agree with your views about the feasibility of "weaning" gradually, agriculture from its addiction to oil, chemicals and human exploitation. Cuba (in my opinion) is leading the way in this process and, despite the challenges that this country has been facing (especially since the mid' 1990s), Cuba has been able to feed its people with quality food that has also improved health and preserved its environment. The typical rethoric that the world population is increasing and agriculture is stretched to its limits to feed more people in the near future is a simplistic answer that is NOT helping to resolve the challenges of present and future agriculture, whether this is going to be organic, or not. During the last 10,000 years of food production only the last 180 years have been employing chemical inputs. I understand that the present world is different than the one in which our ancestors lived and farmed, thousands of years ago but the bottom line is that the present model of agriculture is coming quickly to its demise because more oil based energy goes into it than the energy that we get from it. Gradually, the conversion could be done if we would allow people to "feed themselves" first. I am talking here about countries making laws and implementing provisions for access to land/space, especially in urban and periurban areas. Decentralizing this global food system is another issue to be considered (in my opinion) to operate the shift to organic agriculture. Also, eliminating food waste is important as here in the US for example, we trash 0.5Kg. of food per person every day and this is unacceptable. You wrote that "millenials" are receptive to become educated and engaged in growing organic food and I see that here where I live, too. Unfortunately, most agricultural universities are still providing an education that is subservient to the agroindustry and thus ineffective to assist society in shifting the paradigm of food production towards ecology, stewardship and environmental sustainability. On the other hand, alternative research centers, organizations like IFOAM, CAZRI and others and their small "army" of researchers and educators are hard at work to materialize this vision. I am proud to be one of these.
Dear Dr Borsari,
First of all I thanks that you have read thoroughly the attached article before reply, and again Thanks for very comprehensive yet logical reply.
yes it is possible but it will take minimum one decade, for now we can start with integrated approach of nutrients for sustainability.
The idea that modern farming practices can be overturned and conventional (organic) agriculture adopted 100% is Utopian, and only good for a academic discussion like the present one.
Dear Dr Murray, The meaning of word UTOPIAN I find in Cambridge dictionary a perfect society in which everyone works well with each other and is happy and that is true with organic/ecofriendly farming because farming is a business of nature and as near the farming reached to the NATURE that is the perfect system and every living associated with it will happy because of no pollution, no health problem and so on------.
Possible or not is altogether a different question. But certainly, organic farming will make the plant and animal kingdom smile, flourish, healthy, happy and prosperous for sure. The system will ultimately transform in to a forest ecosystem. The concept is live and let live peacefully and happily. Plants can speak. Go them to speak to you. Glued to the chair, you can never know them. Plants, respond to music, kindness and love. Their company will create a heavenly ambience being most selfless organisms on Earth.
Forests which are organically flourishing by default,across the world maintain themselves unless there is human interference and their destruction. It is only due to climate change, global warming and environmental pollution that the life of plants and animals has become a casualty.
well, Dr PATTANAYAK
It is hard to enforce such conditions in India but possible in China where population has been controlled with certain stringent govt policies.
This means we have to feed ever growing population by any means andfor that quality will always lag priority over that of quantity to feed.
Organic Agriculture would require larger pieces of land producing less per unit area. Precision farming would then go away. Are we not moving backwards? There is need for a lot of research to make this possible
Organic agriculture literally envisages the supply of quality food for plants and animals. This process requires transitional period of at least 5 years with in which period soil capacity to support quality life of soil biota gets restored and thereupon needs to be maintained. Food has to be evaluated in terms of hunger removal capacity per unit of food consumed per person. This requires scientific evaluation of organic and conventional foods.
NO! But, we can reduce the areas cultivated with chemical fertilizers and increase those cultivated with the organic fertilizers..
The crop yields of organic agriculture are comparable to those produced with conventional farming (Rodale Institute, 2003). Therefore, this idea of having to use much more land for agriculture if all farmers would go organic is not correct. The problem is with the conversion from conventional to organic, in the sense that the addiction to chemicals requires a time period of detoxification of the land to readjust to more natural and ecological processes, while restoring the loss of soil microbial diversity. The world agricultural output is massive and capable of supporting the foreseeable size of the human population by the end of this century. The problem with food security this days consists in politics that impede a more equal distribution of food, in addition to the insane food waste occurring in the affluent northern regions of the world.
Hi Kenneth and Shukra,
Obviously, a stabilization of the human population is a priority goal for the near future ahead and also conservation natural ecosystems, which are dearly needed to maintain the productivity of farming systems. In any case here below are a few references that support the potential for food production through organic agriculture.
Check out the journals:
Anup Das et al., Impact of seven years of organic farming on soil and produce quality and crop yields in eastern Himalayas, India. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment Volume 236, 2 January 2017, Pages 142-153.
Zeynab Jouzi et al., Organic Farming and Small-Scale Farmers: Main Opportunities and Challenges. Ecological Economics Volume 132, February 2017, Pages 144-154.
Altieri, Miguel A. 2000. Modern Agriculture: Ecological impacts and the possibilities for truly sustainable farming. Agroecology in Action.
Bender, M. (2002, February 1). Energy in Agriculture and Society: Insights from the Sunshine Farm. Retrieved April 14, 2002, from http://www.landinstitute.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2001/03/28/3accb0712
Odum, H. T. (1984). Energy Analysis of the Environmental Role in Agriculture. In G. Stanhill (Ed.), Energy and agriculture (pp. 24 - 51). Berlin ; New York: Springer-Verlag.
Pervanchon, F., Bockstaller, C., & Girardin, P. (2002). Assessment of energy use in arable farming systems by means of an agro-ecological indicator: the energy indicator. Agricultural Systems, 72(2), 149-172.
Pimentel, D., 1992. Energy Inputs in Production Agriculture. In R. C. Fluck (ed.) Energy in Farm Production. Vol. 6, pp. 13-29. Elsevier: Amsterdam.
Organic agriculture adapted at different levels, according to local cultures of doing agriculture has potential to convert food production into renewable and restorative systems. The reliance on non renewable energy from large scale, conventional agriculture although apparently effective to produce high crop yields, remains unsustainable because it is an extractive form of agriculture. A transition (I understand) as challenging and slow will be the necessary path to follow to insure food production without jeopardizing irreversibly, the natural resource base that sustains any form of agriculture.
İ can only express my personal opinion.
The problem of organic cultivation is the not only problem of crops, biopesticides, organic fertilizers, etc. In the first place it is the problem of social and age structure of countries. During the milleniums humankind cultivated the plant using the army of peasants. Although the another type of society was existed; the nomadic type of society and economy; but we discuss the basic type of society, which was the founder the phenomenon of state.
So, now at the First and Second Worlds most of people live at the great cities, megalopolices. For example only about 4% of population work at the agricultire at the US. Every year farmers at the territory of Texas and other borderline states forced to hire thousands illegal mexican immigrants. I must add: US use the highly productive, industrial methods in agriculture. Most of these methods are inorganic.
Some countries have the quite enough peasants; for example, India, China. But social structure of these countries is changing. Most people in our planet is now citizens of urbanized megalopolices. We need the great army of peasants for organic cultivation. Simple question: where we can mobilize these millions and millions workers for organic cultivation?
The another problem is the problem of resources. Only some companies can produce really organic fertilizers and biopesticides. In addition, the cost price of these products is high in comparison with inorganic fertilizers.
I believe that we can incorporate some organic methods in inorganic cultivation. For example — biopesticides, entomophags and so on. But total changing of inorganic methods impossible.
Sincerely,
Mehdi Ali.
Is total conversion of chemical farming of the world into organic possible ?
No, total conversion is not possible. The 7.6 billion (as of May 2018) population can not be fed on organic farming alone. The population may reach 9.6 billion by 2050. We have to depend on chemical farming for producing enough food for the increasing population.
The question is like conversion of non-renewable to renewable sources for energy. The renewable sources can not fulfill the requirement of total energy. Its contribution is very less in the present energy requirement.
Regards
I don't believe so - as a farmer and Environmental history PhD candidate I am emphatic that unless the nutrients going out are replaced by the nutrients coming in, agriculture whether organic or conventional becomes mining. Communities would have to relearn to feed themselves and return all waste and water to the food growing lands. The world population is far too big and continuing to erupt, to be fed with small scale agro-ecological systems. The primary components of cheap food growing are also reaching peaks as they have been flagrantly wasted in growing and consuming industrialised ag. Food e.g. peak Phosphate by 2030's; cheap Nitrogen will disappear with oil; highly important trace elements such as Cobalt and Copper being diverted into new technologies such as Batteries for Solar, wind and electric cars. Unfortunately I see a major collapse in the future as happens when any species over runs it's limits and as has occurred over and over again throughout human history. Humans as a species, unless in ' hunter gatherer ecofarming ' societies are completely unable to control their populations or wants rather than needs and giving "stuff" up for the future of all has low priority amongst cultural and political machinations and pompous displays of weaponry and short term economic goals.
Dear Nicole - I appreciate your answer. Can your conclude your explanation in one sentence? Regards
Total conversion of chemical farming to organic may not be Possible. But in terms of Integrated nutient management and by application of organic farming there is 50-70% scope is there that chemical converted into Organic farming
All of a sudden change in the farming type from chemical to organic farming will greatly effect the total yield of the crops. Yield will drastically reduce which shall further lead to food security issues in the world. But, as far as the soil health is concerned INM (Integrated Nutrient Management) together with onsite residue management would play a significant role in reducing the utilisation of synthetic fertilizers to organic fertilizers to a great extent. Further, With continuous efforts towards INM will with short span of time will effectively convert the synthetic farming to Organic Farming.
I agree with Arun K Sharma and Panna Chandra Nath views. Certainly possible, but it may be gradual. If human beings want organic farming, It can be done and extended. But due to population increase the conventional and organic methods should be together for a period.
It is possible, but not for all the soils, for all the crops, for all the conditions, for example, in Iraq, my country is possible, but within the limits of protected agriculture due to climatic conditions, the temperature is more than 50 degrees Celsius?Some very salty soils reach salinity more than 70 desems / meters how living neighborhoods are and so on
Dr. Panna - "INM (Integrated Nutrient Management) together with onsite residue management would play a significant role in reducing the utilisation of synthetic fertilizers ......"
Yes, there should be continuous efforts for reducing the use of chemical fertilizers. But I think total conversion to organic farming is not possible. Regards
If we will supply the whole world population with organiccly produces food, the answer will be "no". The world population is still growing, so the demands for good food is rising. We must use synthetic fertilizers in a proper way in our food production.
Yes, for sufficient production of food we have to depend on synthetic fertilizers. But, the adverse effects of synthetic fertilizers have to be minimized. Regards
After 300+ read I would like to add some more information on the basis answers added. First of all in my question I used word ‘GRADUALLY without loosing productivity’ and secondly requested to read my attached article but in many of one line answers of NOT POSSIBLE both were totally ignored that made no sense or biased answer.
Out of all the replied two major terms come out that is INCREASING POPULATION and LOW PRODUCTIVITY OF ORGANIC FARMING that can’t feed this growing population. Let me try to reply that Population is not bound to follow a mathematical equation( as happened in industrial production) because it depends on hundreds of variables including social, ecological,economical,political and even personal choice. Therefore, we can’t predict so precisely and it may decrease also as happening in industrially developed country and now due to fast changing awareness by information technology it will happen in developing countries also, further the shrinking natural resources will force to keep family as small as possible. This hype of increasing population may be promoted due to business interest of industrial agriculture.
Now come to the organic farming ( I grouped all ecofriendly farming systems in it) In my previous question https://www.researchgate.net/post/Three_major_arguments_are_given_by_the_opponents_of_organic_farming_agriculture_Details_below_Do_you_agree_disagree_with_these_arguments
and in this question reply by Bruno it was given with evidence of scientific papers that there is no yield reduction in organic system rather additionally we get many benefits in terms of environment improvement and resource conservation.
Further in the present industrial (chemical) agriculture in developing countries about 30% food goes waste due to inadequate storage/transportation while similar amount goes waste in developed countries in processed food http://www.fao.org/food-loss-and-food-waste/en/
Also due to manly use of chemicals the food quality deteriorated in last half century specially micronutrients and vitamins and that food causing ailments due to nutrition deficiency. A good scientific comparison of food quality has been given in this document. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eqQ578gHiPoIaHaVYjQa_3sFe_LzGhm1/view .
Additionally in industrial agriculture good amount of food is grown to feed meat producing animals whose conversion rate low and this meat industry contribute 18% in global warming. This food could feed additionally huge population. The production of meat, milk and eggs leads to an enormous loss of calories grown in fields, since cereals and oil seeds have to be cultivated to feed to animals. According to calculations of the United Nations Environment Programme, the calories that are lost by feeding cereals to animals, instead of using them directly as human food, could theoretically feed an extra 3.5 billion people. Feed conversion rates from plant-based calories into animal-based calories vary; in the ideal case it takes two kilograms of grain to produce one kilo of chicken, four kilos for one kilogram of pork and seven kilos for one kilogram of beef. By their nature, cattle and sheep eat grass. More than two thirds of the global agricultural area is used for permanent meadows and pastures. If livestock eat grass and other plants that are not suitable for direct human consumption, they do not compete for cereals but increase food supply and add significantly to agricultural production.
Finally it is problem of FOOD DISTRIBUTION and not the FOOD PRODUCTION that cause food shortage at one place and obesity in other place.
I would request please respond with the changing global scenario.
Dear Dr. Sharma,
Your eloquent latest post could not be more correct in explaining the paradoxes and contradictions of modern agriculture, which are often purported through a very paternalistic rethoric (e.g.: the human population is growing and agriculturists have to feed the world). The chemical breakthroughs of August von Liebig and later on by Haber and Bosch subverted for ever (in my opinion) the "culture" of doing agriculture. The illusory successes of the green revolution amplified the ideas that the chemical and presently the genetic engineering approaches to food production are the 'way to go'. However, despite the massive investments of the agroindustry we are beginning to reckon with the inevitable limitations of GE agriculture (e.g.: environmental degradation, monoculture, public health issues in rural areas and increasing accidents of food contamination due to food mass production). Organic agriculture however, has been able to survive through the decades despite an uncontrollable expansion of GE agriculture. This fact has been reassuring to me through the years and even more reassuring is to feel connected now to a growing community of wise and like minded professionals (farmers, researchers, students of agriculture) like yourself that are continuing to bring evidence to the fact that organic agriculture is valuable (as it has always been), to fulfill human needs through the centuries to come. I simply wish (as a researcher) that governments were more fair in distributing funds and other resources more equitably for the study of organic farming as agricultural universities continue (in my opinion) to be dominated by an education and research agendas that are pontificating the lucrative principles of the agroindustry, as if nothing else matters. I predict that as non-renewable energy sources like oil will become more scarce and expensive and as an appreciation and expansion of organic agriculture will inevitably take place. The scientific evidence for Organic agriculture is abundant already to substantiate the need of this paradigm shift. Keep up with the good work!
Hi Kenneth,
During my 30 years career as an agroecologist I have been working with farmers in west and Central Africa, in southern Europe, central and south America, prior to relocating to Minnesota. From these experiences I have learned that although the routine operation of farming can be similar (e.g.: preparing the soil, sowing the seed, control weeds, apply fertilizers, harvesting) the knowledge, genetic resources, germplasm and local knowledge for growing food differ. I have learned very much on what types of techniques and technologies may be successful in different climatic zones and soils, and also what distinctive foods can become available at specific seasons of the year in various regions. Solar energy is the ultimate energy source for agriculture and farming systems modeled and inspired by the ecological functioning of their ecosystems can be biologically productive and regenerative as oil based agriculture has never been able to be. I do not want to convince you nor any other who does not think that agriculture will never, ever convert into organic. I have been taught the same dogmas, through my years of education as millions of other ag students, later on graduating from agricultural schools. Through my professional experience, I conclude that organic farming not only has great potential to fulfill the human needs of a growing population, but also it is offering the opportunity to gradually restore the landscape from the use and abuse of agrichemical products, before the world runs out of oil.
Some of the replies act as diluter and deviater of the issue raised in the question.I would request to be please adhere with the main issue and not to hyperlinking them with many irrelevant issues.
Dr. Arun,
Your 9 pointers in 'Mission Possible' does show some hope that gradual transition is possible. However, TOTAL CONVERSION will depend on Need, policy support, demand and economics of organic farming. Again a series of may and may not's can be discussed in next 300+ responses.
Also...i agree with Dr. Bruno's all responses.
Dear Readers,
Kindly see my attached paper in that I tried to synthesised all aspects of organic farming and answer of WHY,WHAT and HOW of this system. Although it was written in India context but I hope it is more or less relevant to all the tropical countries and to some extent in the areas having intensive industrial agriculture.
Dr. Anju,
Regarding total conversion, one very important point you have indicated 'economics of organic farming'. Agricultural economists may throw light on this issue. Regards
Yes Dr. Asit. At the base of every initiative is the economics which ultimately decides its success or failure.
Organic farming is no different. The extra cost of becoming 'organic' is high and not everyone can currently afford organic products. Policy intervention to give huge subsidy to make it affordable to suit common man will be one way if 'total or high conversion' to organic farming is the target.
The state of agriculture is confronted by multiple world crises, in terms of the world economy, access to food, energy needs and climate change. In this context, one of the main roles of agriculture, at a very basic level, is to meet the challenge of providing adequate output to assure global food security. Due to water dearth, the intense use of agrochemicals and excessive irrigation lead to pollutants trickling into lakes, streams and other fresh water sources, and the overexploitation of water resources. Having said that, total conversion of chemical farming to organic farming will be a bit difficult especially in the developed world as well as recent increase in the world population.
Anju - Good explanation - extra cost of organic farming, policy and economic support. In Indian context, the subsidy towards organic farming is almost impossible. Regards
I would of thought that once Indian farming was completely organic for thousands of years - why has it changed so completely? Uncontrolled population growth due to Colonial interference, economic imperatives to earn export income? There must be vast amounts of human waste that could be incorporated into food production. Is there a population policy in place - to me it seems the greater the population pressure on food resources the greater the chance of upheaval if anything happens to food availability. China appears to be attempting to mitigate this by following European behaviour of accessing overseas countries resources to grow cheap food for their own populations - often at the expense of local traditional food systems.Is India on the same track. It calls to mind Tim Flannery's book 'The Future Eaters'. The longer term future is discounted for the present economic imperatives.
@Nicole...the question is "Is total conversion of chemical farming of the world into organic possible" Please frame your answer with "WORLD" in mind.
@Nicole - Thanks to you for referring the book "The Future Eaters: An Ecological History of the Australasian Lands and People" by Tim Flannery.
Excellent work by Flannery; he follows the environment of the islands through the age of dinosaurs to the age of mammals and the arrival of humans, to the European colonizers and industrial society. Penetrating, gripping, and provocative, this book combines natural history, anthropology, and ecology on an epic scale. Regards
The reason I couldn't frame an answer for 'the world ' is that in my opinion it is so completely unrealistic as to be not worth talking about at that scale. It is far more achievable to look at local scales and be informed by agricultural histories in places such as India that in the past achieved a type of Agriculture that seemed relatively sustainable compared to high input modern industrial agriculture.
But again I think that the inputs and outputs of Organic agriculture need to be determined and related to the food requirements of a given population. For true sustainability a place (country) should be able to feed itself and not have to rely on food produced somewhere else - which is taking the nutrients out of one ecological system and transferring them somewhere else, basically a form of mining. It is worth reading 'Farmers of Forty Centuries' by F.H. King, 1911. He examines permanent organic agriculture in China, Korea and Japan for the USA Dept of Agriculture - this question of how to achieve Agricultural sustainability is not new!
"The reason I couldn't frame an answer for 'the world ' is that in my opinion it is so completely unrealistic as to be not worth talking about at that scale. It is far more achievable to look at local scales......... But again I think that the inputs and outputs of Organic agriculture need to be determined and related to the food requirements of a given population. "
Is the analogy also applicable to inputs and outputs of emissions and contributions to GWP/climate change from a certain country's population and still not agreeing to Paris Agreement. Should we or Shouldn't we talk about local scale as you say (far more achievable to look at local scales)...
I agree that in its present form (e.g. look at Macro Foods where organic industrialisation is taking place)'organic' agriculture is unsustainable but there are numerous examples of traditional agro ecology agriculture (which I prefer to use instead of Organic ) has persisted for very long time scales e.g
' The Great Meadow ' by Brian Donahue which describes a pretty sustainable Ag. System in New England and how industrialisation and USA market economy destroyed it; and as previously mentioned traditional Asian and Indian agricultural systems ; South America also ; traditional European systems and Aboriginal 'eco- farming (my PhD terminology ) in Australia - they all had one thing in common recycling nutrients and retaining high levels of biodiversity from the soil up.
I would like to answer this query with my fingers crossed. You know it sounds like Karl Marx preaching socialism to the world with one eye closed. the idea or the objectives may be excellent but then just as you and I do not have all the 5 fingers of any hand of the same length so is the human nature.
In order to switch over to organic farming, it will be very essential and crucial to define all aspects of crop management like: 1. Integrated Pest management (IPM); 2. Integrated Disease Management (IDM); 3. Integrated Nutrient/ Fertilizer Management (INM / IFM),; 4. Integrated water management (IWM); Integrated Soil Management (ISM); so on and so forth. Not only this, it has to be defined region wise, climate wise, etc. Finally the cultivators has to be educated about these and be shown the benefits of organic farming. At the moment, it is too far fetched as the number of mouths to feed is increasing at an alarming rate.
"..........it is too far fetched as the number of mouths to feed is increasing at an alarming rate (Dr.Jai Ghosh). It is correct. Organic farming cannot produce food for 7.2 billion world population; it is projected to increase by 1 billion over the next 12 years. Regards
Organic foods are a total scam.
According to the FDA:
https://www.fda.gov/food/guidanceregulation/guidancedocumentsregulatoryinformation/ucm059098.htm
(Contains Nonbinding Recommendations)
"Food manufacturers may voluntarily label their foods with information about whether the foods were not produced using bioengineering, as long as such information is truthful and not misleading. In general, an accurate statement about whether a food was not produced using bioengineering is one that provides information in a context that clearly refers to bioengineering technology. Examples of such statements include:
- “Not bioengineered.”
- “Not genetically engineered.”
- “Not genetically modified through the use of modern biotechnology.”
- “We do not use ingredients that were produced using modern biotechnology.”
- “This oil is made from soybeans that were not genetically engineered.”
- “Our corn growers do not plant bioengineered seeds.
This means that anybody in the US can call their products "organic" with impunity as long as they include vague statements like the ones above.
Actually, Kenneth, Icelandic scientists have found a way to pump CO2 into basalt to make stable carbonate compounds. A pilot plant can convert 10,000 tons of CO2 into rock per year.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/09/co2-turned-into-stone-in-iceland-in-climate-change-breakthrough
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/first-negative-emissions-plant-opens-iceland-180965270/
Article CO2 storage potential of basaltic rocks in Iceland and the o...
Article CO2 Storage Potential of Basaltic Rocks Offshore Iceland
It can be scaled up massively because all of Iceland is basalt and we have plenty of water. Environmentalists are not happy though. They don't want easy fixes like this. They want us to turn paleolithic.
Kenny, it is a pilot plant. You do know what a "pilot plant" is, right?
Anyway, I think the Smithsonian has a magazine that had an article about this. Are you familiar with this magazine?
Iceland runs on geothermal and hydroelectric energy, no solar or wind mills.
Also could you use smaller pictures or have a link to them?
The big .png pictures you post are slowing down this thread.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Climate Science
- Climate Change