permaculture

["Lawrence F. London, Jr." <venaurafarm@bellsouth.net>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [SANET-MG] Sustainable agricultural methods vs. 
unsustainable/chemical/gmo-based agriculture (if you can even call it 
agriculture)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:57:40 -1000
From: Hector Valenzuela <hectoruh11@GMAIL.COM>
To: SANET-MG@LISTS.IFAS.UFL.EDU

As it stands today conventional GM corn growers can not make it on their
own, without the annual tax-payer subsidies. Overall the GM crops 
industry is subsidized at a level of ca $15 billion. This is certainly 
not 'economic sustainability.'

The direct subsidies to the GM crops industry do not include indirect
'subsidies'--  the medical and environmental costs from poor diets
(subsidized fast-food), pesticide and possibly GM residues on food, and
environmental clean-up of aquifers, soils, and other aquatic habitats. 
These are costs that we are currently charging to our environmental & 
human health 'credit cards,' and that will have to be paid by future 
generations.

Based on this, the assessment of purely biomass yields (bushels/acre)
becomes irrelevant. Perhaps we should incorporate other parameters to 
assess yields ---such as actual value/energy use/health, social, & 
environmental impact-- and in that case organic yields may be 
substantially greater than those obtained by conventional GM crops.

On another note, perhaps as a society we should move away from a
'monoculture' diet, move back to a tradition of growing multiple crops 
on the farm/community, and to a healthier diversified diet.

Hector
Univ. Hawaii at Manoa