Show of HandsShow of Hands


Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Squidboy October 14th, 2013 2:46pm

Is 'local agriculture' good for the environment?

Yes No
12 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

jms in the middle of Nowhere
10/14/13 9:44 am

Wow. I learned something today!! Thanks!! I'll keep my garden, though. We don't use fertilizer or pesticides. I grow more food in 3- 64 sq. ft. boxes than most people do in a traditional 40 X 40 garden. And we use a drip system to save on water.

Reply
Squidboy Snarkapottamus
10/14/13 9:51 am

I think gardens are good, but it's unreasonable to try and create an entire food supply locally. Try all you want, bananas, pineapples and oranges will not easily grow in New York.

jms in the middle of Nowhere
10/14/13 10:15 am

I agree. It would be impossible to grow all the food we currently consume without a greenhouse here in Idaho!! It would be possible to grow enough to sustain life quite well, though. We can grow a lot of fruit and most veggies with careful planning.

MJSeals Esq.
10/14/13 8:06 am

Wow. Lets keep this from Al Gore

Reply
suppressedID destiny is right now
10/14/13 7:54 am

Monoculture isn't good for the environment. Unfortunately, that's what the modern economy of scale favors, and environmental quality isn't a factor in the models.

Reply
Squidboy Snarkapottamus
10/14/13 7:47 am

freakonomics.com/2011/11/14/the-inefficiency-of-local-food/ 'A locavore-like production system would require an additional 60 million acres of cropland, 2.7 million tons more fertilizer, and 50 million pounds more chemicals.'

Reply