The environmental case for genetically

The environmental case for genetically modified foods

Jonathan Rauch makes the environmental case for genetically modified foods, in the October Atlantic magazine. The article is online, here: "Will Frankenfood Save the Planet?". Genetically modified foods may help us use fewer pesticides, less fertilizer, use soils that have become salty through irrigation, and reduce pollution from agricultural runoff.

"...Gene transfer poses risks, unquestionably. So, for that matter, does traditional crossbreeding. But many people worry that transgenic organisms might prove more unpredictable. One possibility is that transgenic crops would spread from fields into forests or other wild lands and there become environmental nuisances, or worse. A further risk is that transgenic plants might cross-pollinate with neighboring wild plants, producing "superweeds" or other invasive or destructive varieties in the wild...

"What is much less widely appreciated is biotech's potential to do the environment good. Take as an example continuous no-till farming [Farming without ploughing. No-till farming is meant to reduce pollution from agricultural runoff of pesticides and fertilizers, erosion of the soil, and to preserve the richness and organic vitality of the soil - Ben], which really works best with the help of transgenic crops. Human beings have been ploughing for so long that we tend to forget why we started doing it in the first place. The short answer: weed control. Turning over the soil between plantings smothers weeds and their seeds. If you don't plough, your land becomes a weed garden—unless you use herbicides to kill the weeds. Herbicides, however, are expensive, and can be complicated to apply. And they tend to kill the good with the bad.

"In the mid-1990s the agricultural-products company Monsanto introduced a transgenic soybean variety called Roundup Ready. As the name implies, these soybeans tolerate Roundup, an herbicide (also made by Monsanto) that kills many kinds of weeds and then quickly breaks down into harmless ingredients. Equipped with Roundup Ready crops, farmers found that they could retire their ploughs and control weeds with just a few applications of a single, relatively benign herbicide—instead of many applications of a complex and expensive menu of chemicals. More than a third of all U.S. soybeans are now grown without ploughing, mostly owing to the introduction of Roundup Ready varieties. Ploughless cotton farming has likewise received a big boost from the advent of bioengineered varieties. No-till farming without biotech is possible, but it's more difficult and expensive, which is why no-till and biotech are advancing in tandem..."

The article isn't long, but is awfully interesting.

In connection with this, today's New York Times has a report by Larry Rohter on a policy change in Brazil, to allow farmers to plant genetically modified soybeans, here: "Hard Realities: Brazil Drops Resistance to Genetically Altered Crops". This has apparently been a very controversial decision in Brazil, "a bastion of global opposition to genetically modified organisms." The story implies the decision was driven by Brazil's desire to increase agricultural exports. The story also notes that,

"...many small farmers affiliated with the landless movement have also been clandestinely planting their own fields with genetically modified soy seeds smuggled across the border from Argentina. They justify that contradiction by arguing that they have lower production costs with these seeds and have complained that they will be driven into bankruptcy if the Brazilian government continues to ban them."