Organic vs. Conventional Agriculture

Greg_in_CO

Scholar
Greg_in_CO
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
105
Cue the anecdotal accounts (i.e. "I recently switched to all organic produce and it immediately cured my asthma, arthritis, scurvy, etc.") in 3. . . 2. . . 1 . . .
 
Merge with the thread in Science;)?

Nah, never mind, I'm personally fine with a thread here, too.
 
"I recently switched from beer to 100 proof hard liqueur and it immediately made me more drunk."
 
"I switched from evil corporate synthetic penicillin to all natural penicillin and it immediately made me vomit."
 
Sorry, saw now that there'd been a new (very well-made) podcast on organic foods. I wondered why there was a new thread here all of a sudden:).
 
Wow, the comments on this podcast on Brian's site are... colorful.

I wish they would all come here and actually debate the topic.
 
Is this sub-forum an "official" Skeptoid forum, or more of a "fan" deal? Because I'm wondering if Brian couldn't just slap down a link leading here at the end of each podcast, in addition to letting viewers comment.
 
It's the 'official' Skeptoid forum. He said it at the end of one or two of his episodes I remember. It's how I found this site in the first place.

Thanks again Mr. Dunning.
 
Well, not quite. But close

Hi

This is my first post here. Sorry but it has to be slightly negative

While I usually agree with the tone of every podcast, I always have a slight problem with the details. This time I really want to set the record straight.

I agree with most of the points made in the Organic Farming episode, I have to disagree with something.

Brian said, “To make synthetic fertilizer, we start with nitrogen, which we extract from the atmosphere. This process is infinitely sustainable and produces no waste.”

Well, yes. And no. There is more than enough nitrogen (78%) in the atmosphere to keep up production, well, basically, forever. No problem.

Ah, but the waste question?

The “Haber-Bosch” process, used to extract usable nitrogen out of the atmosphere, is hardly wasteless. I would recommend the excellent book “The Alchemy of Air” from Thomas Hager for anyone interested. He quotes statistics that the production of “fixed nitrogen” (ammonia) makes up 1% of the world’s energy consumption (Hardcover, 2008, p 271).

Whether this is worse that cow paddies, with the appropriate amount of methane, is beyond my comprehension and research. But no waste. Sorry. CO2 is a problem.

.There is a not to be denied amount of CO2 produced from ‘non-natural’ fertiliser. A better attacking point would have been the comparison. Carbon Dioxide vs. Methane produced by those very loved natural fertilizer producers (cows/farts).

Never the less, the comment “no waste” is REALLY wrong.

Just wanted to set the record straight.

PS. I would have sent this as a personal message, but as I see it, Brian would prefer it here.

On the other hand he says “Many young people and students have never before been presented with the tools for critical thinking. “ So there it is.
 
blc303 said:
.There is a not to be denied amount of CO2 produced from ‘non-natural’ fertiliser. A better attacking point would have been the comparison. Carbon Dioxide vs. Methane produced by those very loved natural fertilizer producers (cows/farts).
Click to expand...

Well it is worth noting that Brian did mention the fact that we simply don't have enough 'natural' sources to provide us with the need fertilizer.

Even if we did have enough horse/cow/etc crap to be used, the harvesting method would still likely produce a lot of CO2, not to mention methane. It is similar to the problem with local produce.

And no, to those of you thinking it, simply having the cows **** in the field that you're going to use next year for corn doesn't work well enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom