Page 2 of 2

Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 2:49 pm
by richard p
perhaps at one extreme for gardeners "organic" is an ideal to aim for,
at the other extreme for some commercial producers its a set of rules to bend as far as possible to make the maximum profit :twisted:

Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 4:29 pm
by Colin Miles
Jenny - Johnboy

Having read the Defra report that Jenny refers to, and not just the conclusions, it is clear that situation is complex and varies from crop to crop. Plus the fact that the report is actually referring to the Carbon-Nitrogen footprint. And in most cases any improvement in energy use by organics is offset by lower yields and higher land usage.

Hopefully more research and the use of existing information will lead to improvements all round, both organically and inorganically. Personally I am a great believer in 'nipping problems in the bud' - 'A stitch in time saves nine' - and so on. If that involves being non-organic then so be it. And if you are a producer whose livelihood depends on it, or a third-world farmer whose life depends on it, then I can't see that there is any real choice. Us consumers in the developed world are so pampered an out of touch with cruel realities of nature.

Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 6:29 pm
by Allan
I would like to mention our way of eating our own tomatoes all year round, namely by freezing the surplus. This gives the best flavour and nutrition compared with the imports in our winter. It is only convention that says that tomatoes must be 'fresh', if only people were to accept frozen tomates the planet could be saved a large amount of carbon pollution etc.
Peas are eaten as frozen, why not tomatoes.
Allan

Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 10:19 pm
by richard p
Allan, I guess most people eat their tomatoes raw sliced in salads , rolls or sandwiches, frozen ones are only any good if cooked, and we all know how few people cook now :D