Organic farming environmental disaster! - Page 4

Scucca · 05-09-08, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kelzie

Yes. Well, as soon as there's a tax on non-organic beef, pork and lamb to make up for their higher impact to global warming, we can talk. Better yet, why don't you just figure out the increased impact on global warming from organic chickens, convert it to dollar amount, and I'll mail it to some global warming activist group. I imagine it might be somewhere around $.00001 a bird.

You sure you haven't got the blinkers on? We've gone from "I doubt the evidence" to "I doubt its significance". A lot of doubting going on. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more doubting amongst the environmentalist movement. However, I'd love to see it more evenly spewed.

Quote:

Land use is already passed on to the end purchaser. What other cost does there need to be?

The opportunity cost, once environmental effect is taken into account, is not passed on to the end purchaser. Be it intensive farming and the impact of nitrates, to organic farming and resources taken away from forms of environmental investments.

Quote:

Again. I don't care what you eat.

I care what you eat. You could be more damaging than a 4 by 4!

SouthernDemocrat · 05-09-08, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scucca

He's demanding product which generates greater global warming damage. That is a social cost! Whilst he'll pay more because of the higher costs for the farmer, he should be forced to pay even more for the damage he inflicts on the rest of us

Ok, lets accept the premise that organic chicken results in significantly more greenhouse gasses than the big chicken house operations do.

That is only one factor as to which form of chicken farming results in a greater cost to society. For example, how much groundwater pollution typically results from chickenhouses? What about air pollution? You ever smelled one? The smell alone of a big commercial chickenhouse is by far the worst thing you have every smelled in your life.

I would wager that even with the higher greenhouse gas emissions, on balance, the environmental impacts of organic chicken farming is much lower than traditional chickenhouses. If thats the case, then it would be poor public policy to try to discourage organic chicken farming.

Scucca · 05-09-08, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat

That is only one factor as to which form of chicken farming results in a greater cost to society. For example, how much groundwater pollution typically results from chickenhouses?

Isn't that just another call for regulatory control? "God bless the global warming cos of the groundwater" is two too many negatives

Kelzie · 05-09-08, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scucca

You sure you haven't got the blinkers on? We've gone from "I doubt the evidence" to "I doubt its significance". A lot of doubting going on. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more doubting amongst the environmentalist movement. However, I'd love to see it more evenly spewed.

Well, agriculture only represents a fraction of the green house gas issue, poultry only represents a fraction of agriculture (and apparently the smallest one, according to your article) and organic poultry is a fraction of total poultry. So, mmmm, yeah, I doubt the significance. But by all means. You are free to prove that organic poultry is a significant contributor to green house gasses.

Quote:

The opportunity cost, once environmental effect is taken into account, is not passed on to the end purchaser. Be it intensive farming and the impact of nitrates, to organic farming and resources taken away from forms of environmental investments.

If land is x dollars a square acre and an organic operation needs y more acres than conventional, the consumer pays for it. Every action has an opportunity cost. Just because organic farming requires more land doesn't mean people who purchase organic foods should pay taxes for it. They're already paying for the extra land use.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scucca

I care what you eat. You could be more damaging than a 4 by 4!

I'd advise you to take an interest an other things then. A hobby might do wonders.

Scucca · 05-09-08, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kelzie

Well, agriculture only represents a fraction of the green house gas issue, poultry only represents a fraction of agriculture (and apparently the smallest one, according to your article) and organic poultry is a fraction of total poultry. So, mmmm, yeah, I doubt the significance. But by all means. You are free to prove that organic poultry is a significant contributor to green house gasses.

I can't cheer your support for extra greenhouse gasses.

Quote:

If land is x dollars a square acre and an organic operation needs y more acres than conventional, the consumer pays for it.

you're not understanding the nature of opportunity costs. We're not just talking about alternative commercial use, we're talking about a resource that could be used to support environmentalism. Organic farmers aren't supporting environmentalism. They're land hogs

Quote:

I'd advise you to take an interest an other things then. A hobby might do wonders.

You'll be saying "there is no such thing as society" next

Kelzie · 05-10-08, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scucca

I can't cheer your support for extra greenhouse gasses.

So you admit organic poultry's not a significant contributor then? A small amount of greenhouse gas is a price I am willing to pay for the other benefits.

Quote:

you're not understanding the nature of opportunity costs. We're not just talking about alternative commercial use, we're talking about a resource that could be used to support environmentalism. Organic farmers aren't supporting environmentalism. They're land hogs

I am quite sure I understand the nature of opportunity costs. One of the opportunity costs of an organic farm is the land that could have been used for something else. Big deal. Everything has opportunity costs.

Quote:

You'll be saying "there is no such thing as society" next

What does that have to do with me not caring what you eat?

Scucca · 05-10-08, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kelzie

A small amount of greenhouse gas is a price I am willing to pay for the other benefits.

You're prepared to worsen greenhouse gas emissions for personal preferences.

Quote:

I am quite sure I understand the nature of opportunity costs. One of the opportunity costs of an organic farm is the land that could have been used for something else. Big deal. Everything has opportunity costs.

Opportunity costs that include utilising land as part of an environmental policy. The "I prefer" of organic demand is again inconsistent with social optimality.

Quote:

What does that have to do with me not caring what you eat?

We're not independent, particularly with regards our consumption patterns.

Billo_Really · 05-10-08, 08:13 AM

I'm all for organic ****!

bub · 05-10-08, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

I'm all for organic ****!

Ahahah so true, Billo!

Lachean · 05-10-08, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scucca

Opportunity costs that include utilising land as part of an environmental policy. The "I prefer" of organic demand is again inconsistent with social optimality.

Or a stem cell research facility! Or how about cancer?

Who the **** are you to tell a landowner that they're "land hogs" because they do not use it for YOUR CAUSE? Do you just go around telling every establishment that they consume energy and are bad for the environment?