result #112001 - GM CROPS MAY REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASES

user ballots

Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes

Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz

TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase

Discussion
Bug Report

GM CROPS MAY REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASES

[+] serious ballot by herzog
created Mon Feb 05, 07

If 4 million cars were taken off the road in a single year, stopping 9 billion kilograms of carbon dioxide being discharged, most environmentalists would whoop with joy. But what if the same saving came from planting genetically modified crops?

This is the claim of an annual audit of GM crops by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), which is funded largely by the GM industry.

The audit, published on 18 January, bases its estimate on GM planting in 2005 in the US, Canada and Argentina. Graham Brookes of PG Economics in Dorchester, UK, who supplied the data, says 85 per cent of the savings come from the fact that farmers growing weedkiller-resistant GM crops don't have to plough their fields to get rid of weeds, so organic matter in the soil is not exposed to the atmosphere. This, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, prevents the release of 300 kilograms of CO2 per year per hectare. The rest of the figure is from fuel savings (Agbioforum, vol 9, p 139).

Gundula Azeez of the Soil Association, which represents UK organic farmers, says the ISAAA is only interested in promoting GM crops.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Assuming their numbers are accurate, would you support the increased use of GM crops to reduce carbon emissions?

No	70%
Yes	29%

Ballot #112001: has 24 total votes.
invite people to vote on this ballot!

Comment:

content @ BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank:

similiar ballots:
112012. Genocide may reduce greenhouse gases
88489. If George W. Bush doesn't believe in global warming then why is he suddenly concerned about greenhouse gases?
112010. Should animals do their part to reduce greenhouse gasses?
112597. Important Presentation and Bodily Gases : what would you do?
39319. Do you worry about global warming ( greenhouse effect ) ?
114422. How would Al Gore spin the greenhouse gas increasing during his two terms
93088. Greenhouse Gas : How long until the planet becomes inhabitable, given the current trend?
72992. What should be done to reduce or eliminate child abuse?
73076. What should be done to reduce the number of overweight people in the US?
102656. Should tape worms be ingested to reduce obesity?

email this ballot link to friends

COMMENTS:
Voted : Yes
But I support the use of GM crops regardless.

by herzog on Mon Feb 05, 07 7:51pm [+]

I wonder which will ultimately win out amongst the far left environmentalist movement; fear of global warming or fear of 'frankenfoods'?

In either event fear-mongering will win out over science.

by herzog on Mon Feb 05, 07 7:52pm [+]

Voted : Yes
The benefits would definitely outweigh the moral hesitation I feel at our modifying anything's genetics.

by himself809 on Mon Feb 05, 07 8:25pm [+]

A lot of trees would do the same thing without using cow genes in broccoli.

by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Mon Feb 05, 07 8:43pm [+]

Voted : No
No way.
Governments around the world, acting together could end the environmental crisis in two seconds without foisting Frankenfoods on us.

by Mr_Sheepy on Tue Feb 06, 07 3:19am [+]

Voted : Yes
We should leave the smallest footprint possible.

by thc2883 on Tue Feb 06, 07 5:22am [+]

Voted : Yes
Sounds like a great idea to me.

by mysticalknight on Tue Feb 06, 07 11:16am [+]

"A lot of trees would do the same thing without using cow genes in broccoli."

But those trees wouldn't feed anyone. It's fine for the US to plant more trees and fewer crops, we have plenty, but I doubt the over one billion malnourished/starving third worlders out there would put trees ahead of their next meal.

by herzog on Tue Feb 06, 07 4:51pm [+]

"It's fine for the US to plant more trees and fewer crops, we have plenty, but I doubt the over one billion malnourished/starving third worlders out there would put trees ahead of their next meal."

There's more than enough food in the world to feed those malnourished people. The thing is, a glut of food of all kinds is concentrated in the richer countries. No matter whether the solution is the building of strong economies in those third world nations, or equally distributing the food, the fact is that Earth has more than enough potential to produce enough food for all its inhabitants.

by himself809 on Tue Feb 06, 07 6:11pm [+]

Exactly. The fact is that the very rich wouldn't be very rich without an enormous number of very poor people all over the world. And very poor aren't the ones peddling trademarked crop seeds. It seems now that the slime behind GM foods need to make them appear all fluffy and caring and environmentally friendly. Ahhhhhh. Lovely. What a joke!

by Mr_Sheepy on Wed Feb 07, 07 1:22am [+]

About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact