Sentences with phrase «conventional agriculture a»

However the smaller parcel of land needed to grow X amount of food using conventional agriculture, as well as the surrounding landscape, will be much more heavily impacted than the larger parcel of land needed if we opt for organic agriculture instead.

If on the other hand the moderately impacted land used in organic agriculture made it a suitable habitat for several important native species of wildlife that are threatened by conventional agriculture, then perhaps it would be ok to use a little more land for agriculture.

The program «prohibits specific pesticides that have been identified by scientists as high risk but are commonly used in conventional agriculture today.»

Along with «exponentially higher» yields, the CropBox promises that their complete growing system also uses 90 % less water and 80 % less fertilizer than conventional agriculture does.

Again, big conventional agriculture wins out over more sustainable growers and environmental interests.

Professor James Curran and you, Alex are perfectly correct about conventional agriculture in destroying the ability of the soil and hence the ability for plants (and crops) growing in it to take up carbon dioxide — increasing temperatures has the same effects.

Whereas conventional agriculture follows the law of supply and demand, organic agriculture follows what its founder, Sir Albert Howard, called «the law of return.»

But continuing research on this topic weighs heavily on the future of what we've come to assume is a sustainable alternative to conventional agriculture.

Of course, in order for bioremedial technologies such as this to move forward, the dichotomy between organic and conventional agriculture will have to be collapsed, a sober view of organic agriculture will have to be adopted, and we'll have to read the banana leaves with greater skepticism.

«We're not going to be abandoning conventional agriculture,» said Jonathan A. Foley, a University of Minnesota scientist.

More important, although once dismissed as clownish, negligent farming, the organic movement is now seen as an innovative standard setter that is pulling all of conventional agriculture toward higher environmental standards and more sustainable practices.

Nutrient Density Comparison Between Organic and Conventionally Grown Oats By Marisa Wagner and Emmanuel Omondi (Ph.D.) The Farming Systems Trial (FST) at Rodale Institute is America's longest running side - by - side comparison of organic and conventional agriculture.

It's not surprising, then, that, according to a new study, it appears the organic food movement may be having a positive influence on conventional agriculture, including reducing the necessity of pesticides, artificial fertilizers, and excessive tilling.

However, because of the convenience and labor - saving methods of conventional agriculture, organic farming has taken a back seat since the technological breakthroughs that led to significant yields beginning in the 1940s, called the green revolution (not to be confused with today's «green» practices designed to minimize environmental impacts).

Reversing soil carbon loss is a new green revolution where conventional agriculture is hitting a productivity barrier with exhausted soils and increasingly expensive inputs.

Savage took these unprecedented USDA / NASS data and compared them with similar USDA statistics from conventional agriculture during the same crop year.

Organic agriculture has lower N2O emissions from nitrogen application, due to lower overall ni - trogen input per ha than in conventional agriculture (Mäder et al., 2002, Olesen et al. 2006).

(The USDA tallies conventional agriculture stats every year in order to track U.S. agricultural output over time.)

The Farming Systems Trial (FST) at Rodale Institute is America's longest running side - by - side comparison of organic and conventional agriculture.

«But as I commented at scienceprogress, the way I see the ledger, the religious Right gets a handful of anti-science points for views on evolution (and related rationalizations about the age of the earth, etc.), and for some dismissal of climate change theory, but the Left gets many more anti-science points for exaggerating the health and ecological risks of POPs; DDT; GMOs; plastics and plasticizers; pesticide residues; conventional agriculture; low - dose EM radiation; high - tension powerlines; climate change; population growth; resource depletion; chemical sweeteners; species extinction rates; biodiversity decline; and I'm sure the list could go on.

The paper, «Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture,» is by a doctoral student, Verena Seufert, and the geography professor Navin Ramankutty, both of McGill University, and Jonathan Foley, the director of the Institute on the Environment of the University of Minnesota.

In his excellent book Growing a Revolution, David R. Montgomery suggests that for far too long we've been arguing over organic versus conventional agriculture.

Supplements are called for especially if all ingredients are not organically certified, because the soils of conventional agriculture are nutrient deficient, and almost toxic with synthetic agrichemical fertilizers and pesticides which also contaminate crops.

By buying organic food, you will also be supporting sustainable methods of land use that result in far less environmental pollution than conventional agriculture, which uses toxic chemicals.

If the human safety of farming with bugs and flowers versus deadly chemicals seems clear, why do you think growers maintain conventional agriculture?

Current prices for conventionally grown foods do not reflect the costs of federal subsidies to conventional agriculture, the cost of contaminated drinking water, loss of wildlife habitat and soil erosion, or the cost of the disposal and clean up of hazardous wastes generated by the manufacturing of pesticides.

Such a process guarantees consumers that managed practices incorporating biodiversity, plant health management and natural fertilizers in organic farming replace the use of toxic, synthetic pesticides used in conventional agriculture.

The herbicides are also building up in rainwater, because the air has become more polluted with pesticides from conventional agriculture and intensive chemical GMO agriculture.

«It's important to remember that conventional agriculture relies heavily on insecticide,» says Lunder.

Organic and conventional agriculture are different business models.

Smalling and her colleagues think their study supports the idea that pesticides used in conventional agriculture may play some role in the falling numbers of many species of frogs and toads.

CAM plants are adapted to grow on arid and semi-arid land, where low or unpredictable rainfall makes conventional agriculture difficult.

Conventional agriculture may have its downsides in terms of land usage and CO2 generation, but at least it has the possibility of being carbon neutral and of not squandering resources our descendants need.

It is the first such study to analyze 40 years of science comparing organic and conventional agriculture across the four goals of sustainability identified by the National Academy of Sciences: productivity, economics, environment, and community well being.

You think conventional agriculture would fare better?

We've all heard proponents of conventional agriculture claim that organic farming is a recipe for global starvation because it produces lower yields.

Supporters of organic farming acknowledge that production methods are currently more expensive, but point to the subsidies paid to conventional agriculture and funding provided for research in contrast to organic farming as making the comparison unfair.

The organic movement is based on the supposition that conventional agriculture is unsustainable, insofar as it damages the environment, harms animal welfare, and compromises food safety through the use of chemicals.

Conventional agriculture rejects these accusations, and in turn has frequently alleged that organic farming is itself damaging.

Our Universal circumstances are now pressuring us as a collective society to choose between health and sustainability or toxins and conventional agriculture.

Why do we need to choose between taking the organic high road to healthy vitality versus the slippery slide down, poisoning our foods and fibers through conventional agriculture?

While in conventional agriculture in the tropics even flat soil gets eroded due to the use of herbicides and the lack of soil cover, in organic agriculture permanent soil cover is an intrinsic part the system.

Conventional agriculture in the area uses the water from the rivers and causes further salinization by over-irrigation with already salinated water.

Haas and Köpke (1994) calculated the CO2 emissions of German organic farms to be 0.5 tonnes of CO2 per hectare whereas in conventional agriculture the amount was 1,3 tons, a difference of 60 percent (Table 5).

In comparison with conventional agriculture, organic production methods are considered to have less detrimental environmental effects.

Organic agriculture performs better than conventional agriculture on a per hectare scale, both with respect to direct energy consumption (fuel and oil) and indirect consumption (synthetic fertilizers and pesticides).

In fact, many farmers in developing countries perceive organic agriculture as a product meeting the demand of industrialized country consumers, and incorporated into the systems of trade and distribution that prevail in conventional agriculture.

The present study considered only yield differences; Ms Seufert's next project is to analyse existing research on the environmental impacts of organic and conventional agriculture.

One estimate of the negative environmental externalities from conventional agriculture in the United States is derived from Pimentel et al. (1993) who estimated total indirect private and external (off - farm) costs of the use of synthetic pesticides at US$ 12.1 billion annually: this included the private input costs of US$ 4 billion and US$ 5 billion in environmental and health costs.

One approach to determining this is to examine the benefits obtained from moving away from conventional agriculture.