04-29-2014, 07:14 AM
quote:
Originally posted by pahoated
It almost eliminates the need for pesticides and herbicides, therefore a large part of the need for GMO, as well as reducing fertilizer needs.
Fascinating stuff. Thanks for sharing the information on the Granpa system. It probably deserves its own thread.
But I have to call out your statement above as sharing a common bit of misunderstanding about GMOs. While you may be most familiar with those GMOs that are designed around being resistant to herbicide and reducing pesticide use, because those are in the news in Hawai'i, biotechnology is actually being deployed globally for a very broad range of reasons, including increasing nutritional content, fighting disease, increasing crop yields, reducing the need for fertilizer, etc.
And while the Granpa system might become a viable solution for growing fresh produce in First World industrialized countries with a shortage of workers to do agricultural work, it's a capital intensive approach that I feel would not be a good fit for poor nations that really don't have the capital but do have the workers, if only they had worthwhile crops to grow, and the infrastructure to support them, like low tech pumps for irrigation, or whatever else is missing. Keep in mind that fully 1/3 of the population of the planet simply does not get enough to eat. In many cases GMO crops are being developed to improve their specific local situations.
Marl Lynas is a prominent environmentalist, and was one of the original founders of the anti-GMO movement. Last year he rocked the debate by reversing his previous position and offering an apology. "I was wrong," he said about opposing GMOs. After careful reviewing the science, he concludes that GMOs are the best hope of preserving the environment on the agricultural front, because they can be engineered to reduce the use of fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides. It's certainly a different refrain from the usual.
Here's one of his key points...
quote:
"I think the controversy over GMOs represents one of the greatest science communications failures of the past half-century. Millions, possibly billions, of people have come to believe what is essentially a conspiracy theory, generating fear and misunderstanding about a whole class of technologies on an unprecedentedly global scale.
This matters enormously because these technologies – in particular the various uses of molecular biology to enhance plant breeding potential – are clearly some of our most important tools for addressing food security and future environmental change."
http://www.marklynas.org/2013/04/time-to...cy-theory/