One of the reasons I go to the local Farmer's Market on a regular basis. Can't hurt once the crunch hits. Now where's the fun in that! - Megatron
And all the more so if you try less energy-intensive farming.
I don't see how organic farming would be better for the soil. The right farming practices - non organic - can lead to a very healthy and well structured soil. That means working at the right time with the right tools, alterning crops, etc. You just don't want monoculture or other stupid practices.
We will return to organic farming when liquid oil is expensive enough. But its price would have to be multiplied, or manual labor depreciated many times over, before organic farming becomes cheaper than chemical/energy-intensive farming.
I have never seen a proper comparison of the environmental effect of organic vs traditional farming. One example : the farmer wants to eliminate some weeds in his crop; now, he has a choice between chemicals, using very little energy (small tractor, high speed), or a some kind of mechanical tiller (large tractor, slow speed, lots of energy). Which of the two is the better for the environment ? No one can tell.
The truth is, today's farmers don't have the tools at their disposal to optimize their farming methods, or select their crops if they want to minimize their impact on the environment.
Pesticides and herbicides are by-and-large petroleum based; they are overused by large factors, and they are not cheap (and they are now much more expensive). They are dangerous to farm labor, and they are generally more long-'lived' than advertised (you could say that their 'life' is measured in half-lives). To some extent they sterilize the soil, which increases the need for fertilizer and tolerant plant varieties. Point being that there are other 'costs' besides the ones on the balance sheet.
Related item - farm equipment on the mega-farms is heavy 'footprint' and tends to compact the subsoil. Water then tends to accumulate in rainstorms, rather than seep into the ground. Reread the accounts of some of the Midwest flooding from the last few years. There are no references to '100-year' storms or any such cause - just "freak events".
Beyond that - U.S. farm produce is not cheap. Price "supports", highway maintenance for long-range transport, farm-fuel deductions, state and federal agriculture-related 'research', overseas marketing, 'free trade' agreements are all either tax-supported or tax dodges. paul spencer
Wikipedia: Causes of Dead Zones
Aquatic and marine dead zones can be caused by an increase in chemical nutrients in the water, known as eutrophication. Chemical fertilizer is considered the prime cause of dead zones around the world.
Eutrophication is an increase in chemical nutrients -- typically compounds containing nitrogen or phosphorus -- in an ecosystem. It may occur on land or in water. The term is however often used to mean the resultant increase in the ecosystem's primary productivity (excessive plant growth and decay), and further effects including lack of oxygen and severe reductions in water quality, fish, and other animal populations.
Dead zone (ecology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gulf of Mexico Currently the most notorious dead zone is a 22,126 square kilometre (8,543 mi²) region in the Gulf of Mexico, where the Mississippi River dumps high-nutrient runoff from its vast drainage basin, which includes the heart of U.S. agribusiness, the Midwest, affecting important shrimp fishing grounds. This is equivalent to a dead zone the size of New Jersey
Currently the most notorious dead zone is a 22,126 square kilometre (8,543 mi²) region in the Gulf of Mexico, where the Mississippi River dumps high-nutrient runoff from its vast drainage basin, which includes the heart of U.S. agribusiness, the Midwest, affecting important shrimp fishing grounds. This is equivalent to a dead zone the size of New Jersey
signed,
yer environment,
mama ~Government budget deficits are not nearly as dangerous as the deficits we have created in vital and complex natural systems.~ Naomi Klein.
