scpg02
|
How Organic Food Contributes to Climate ChangeWhat are the odds the left will stop pushing organic farming do to AGW?
How Organic Food Contributes to Climate Change
By Robert Wager : BIO| 08 Aug 2007
| Quote: | As the world's policymakers and business elites look to curb greenhouse gas emissions, one economic sector due for a closer look is agriculture. What many people presently view as a 'green' agriculture choice is, upon closer examination, deeply environmentally suspect.
Most people do not realize that agriculture is a major contributor to atmospheric CO2. Further, different types of agriculture have very different CO2 emission profiles. The widespread adoption of modern agricultural biotechnology products have allowed farmers to maintain yields while reducing CO2 emissions. |
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=071807J
|
Andre
|
That's a remarkable article.
An element that seems to miss is that soils should produce larger amounts of CO2 for the benefit of the plants enhancing photosynthesis with extra CO2 fertilization.
|
scpg02
|
| Andre wrote: | That's a remarkable article.
An element that seems to miss is that soils should produce larger amounts of CO2 for the benefit of the plants enhancing photosynthesis with extra CO2 fertilization. |
That makes sense. I like your reponse better than the ones I got on other forums.
|
NileQueen
|
And rice paddies are a source of methane!!
I think there was also a recent study where plants were found to be emitting methane...quite unexpectedly, but I'll have to double check that. Do you recall that, Andre?
|
scpg02
|
| NileQueen wrote: | And rice paddies are a source of methane!!
I think there was also a recent study where plants were found to be emitting methane...quite unexpectedly, but I'll have to double check that. Do you recall that, Andre? |
I know there have been articles about trees emitting polutants that contribute to smog. Even cut grass seems bad for the environment.
|
Andre
|
There has been some commution about plants producing methane but the latests news seems to nullify that.
Incidentily the greenhouse effect of methane is usually overexagarated. It is true that the emission spectrum of methane is larger than that of CO2 but it's in the wrong frequency area and the actual contribution of methane is small, doubled or not:
Results of MODTRAN runs comparing CO2 and CH4. The X axis is logarithmic concentration, going to unrealistic high values quickly. The Y-axis shows the increase in temperature required to restore thermal radiation balance. A process that in reality may take hundereds of years.
|
HighPlanesDrifter
|
There was an article in either Nature or Science a couple months ago touting the low carbon benefits of GM crops due to reduced tillage. If I remember correctly they made the comparison between conventional agriculture and low or no-till agriculture. (not organic v conventional)
What Robert Wager seems to miss is the fact that compared to conventional and GM techniques “Organic” farming soils are much higher in “sequestered” organic carbon in the form of humus. Some humeric acids take hundreds of years (or more) to break down. Organic farming soils may respire more CO2 than conventional soil, but they also sequester more of it. The part of the equation he leaves out is that the manure (or other organic material) would be decomposing somewhere else (possibly in anoxic conditions producing more methane if it were not reintroduced into the soil by organic techniques. Not all organic farmers rely on animal manure.
The main issue is no-till v tillage farming techniques as tilling does indeed release more soil carbon more quickly. Some organic techniques are also no or low till such as those advocated by the Biointensive folks.
It is true however that genetically modified “Roundup-ready” crops do have an inherent advantage for reducing tillage and subsequent soil carbon release.
|
scpg02
|
| HighPlanesDrifter wrote: |
It is true however that genetically modified “Roundup-ready” crops do have an inherent advantage for reducing tillage and subsequent soil carbon release. |
A little off topic here but I have a problem with Roundup-ready crops. I don't have a problem with GMOs but round-up ready crops cause genetic cross over into the weed populations. This will make weeds resistant to roundup just in time for the patent to run out and Monsanto to release their new patented, more expensive weed killer. And you'll have to buy it cause roundup will no longer be effective.
|
HighPlanesDrifter
|
| scpg02 wrote: | | HighPlanesDrifter wrote: |
It is true however that genetically modified “Roundup-ready” crops do have an inherent advantage for reducing tillage and subsequent soil carbon release. |
A little off topic here but I have a problem with Roundup-ready crops. I don't have a problem with GMOs but round-up ready crops cause genetic cross over into the weed populations. This will make weeds resistant to roundup just in time for the patent to run out and Monsanto to release their new patented, more expensive weed killer. And you'll have to buy it cause roundup will no longer be effective. |
Glad to hear it. I agree with your assessment on this one. I have a problem with Round-up Ready crops too. None the less, if your priority is to reduce tillage they have the advantage of being able to be sprayed with herbicide rather than plowed for weed control.
By the way, I believe that most GMO crops are Round-up Ready (it is their big selling point).
|
scpg02
|
Probably right. I like seeing ones like Golden Rice and the sweet potato that Dr. Wambugu was creating. There are some tomatoes that are being engineered to withstand saline soil and have longer shelf life.
|
|
|