From: altar@beaufort.sfu.ca (Ted Wayn Altar)
Subject: Re: Organically grown foods (was Re: What's the Best Juicer)
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 22:29:59 GMT

Leor Jacobi writes:

[...]
>Without trying to sound like a conspiracy theorist, I think it is quite
>evident that petroleum companies have a vested interest in selling their
>by-products as pesticides.

Yes, I agree.  One need not posit a deliberate, orchestrated conspiracy
for a confluence of vested interests to informally become an stable
"system" resistant to change.  That quote of yours about agribusiness
corporations was very illumination.  Thanks for the reference.

It is interesting to note that the world consumption of chemical fertilizers
more than doubled over the past 2 decades from about 69 million tonnes 
in 1970 to about 146 toones in 1990.  Of course, the rate is even
higher in the developing countries (about 360%) than in the 
developed countries (aobut 61%).  Nitrogenous fertilizers are the most
heavily used, followed by phosphates and potash.

Only about 50% of the fertilizer used benefits the plants, the remainder
is lost from the soil system by leaching, run-off and volatilization.
Another problem to consider is that the application of chemical
fertilizers increases nitrous oxide emissions.  Air also can
easily become contaminated with pesticides during spraying operations.  
In fact, traces of pesticides have been found in fog in California
(see Glotfelty et al., 1987, "Pesticides in fog" NATURE, 325:602).
and in rain.  Some relatively non-volatile pesticides, like DDT,
will evaporate into the atmosphere quite rapidly, especially
in hot climates and this can be carried over long distances,
contributing what what has is called GLOBAL CHEMICAL POLLUTION.
The table below helps to reveal how much of the major emissions
into the atmosphere are due to present agricultural practices.


  Estimates of major emission into the atmosphere due to agriculture:

		  million tonnes/year	   % of anthropogentic
					     emmissions
carbon dioxide		1200			17
methane			 230			66
nitrous oxide		   2			71
ammonia			  28			80
sulphur oxides		   2			 2
nitric oxides		   5			 7
particulate matter	  20			35

(emissions include contributions from burning of biomass directly
related to agriculture, paddy rice, livestock rearing and use
of fertilizers.  From Mostafa Tolba SAVING OUR PLANET, 1992)


[...]
>Tomatoes are more
>flavorful, less mealy, and more tender (unlike store-bought tomatoes, bred
>for mechanical harvesting, which can survive a 3-story drop). 

My experience with organic produce corresponds with yours.  :-)

Now, it this really true that a conventional tomato can survive a
3-story drop?  Would this be a landing on grass while the tomato
was still shipment ready and green?  


[...]
>Most of all,
>there is a VARIETY.  In a large grocery store, one can get the feeling that
>there is a lot of choice, but it is an illusion.  Again and again, one finds
>the same foods packaged in different quantities and mixtures.  The
>supermarket is actually confined to very few crops, perhaps (this is an
>estimate of mine) 95% of the products are made up solely of about 100
>different crops.  Oddly enough, there is more variety in the types of
>chemicals added to the foods than in the foods themselves!  There are
>thousands of plants known to be edible.  It stuns me how our culture
>continuously demands new music, movies, and books from the entertainment
>industry, yet we are content to keep eating the same s&*# year after year.
>I haven't even mentioned the dangers of processed food...

This is a really interesting point!  Indeed, the lack of variety 
really is quite astonishing, even in a large metropolitan 
conurbanation there is surprising little variety.  There does
seem to be something odd about our culture's distain for quality
foods.  No one thinks twice about paying a more, and often a lot more,
for a quality car, household appliance, stereo, TV, or even a screwdriver, 
but if there is only a penny difference per lb more for organic vs non-
organic produce, most people will choose to save those few pennies and 
will gladly pay a few dollars for some vitamin pills.   This doesn't
seem very sensible to me.
 
Again, maybe people's priorities are askew  :-(
Oh well.  

						Holiday Cheers,
							ted
 
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg