Latest comments posted about GM crops are not the answer to world hunger on ChinaDialogue en-gb http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/2026-GM-crops-are-not-the-answer-to-world-hunger- http://staging.chinadialogue.net/images/cdlogo.gif http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/2026-GM-crops-are-not-the-answer-to-world-hunger- Urea is probably the only fertilizer that relies on oil, and it is just one of nitrogen fertilizers. Hence it is exaggerated to say fertilizers rely on oil. I do not understand what kind of agriculture those environmental politicians want. Mechanization and fertilizer represent the progress of agriculture. Even so, agriculture consumes little energy compared with industries. It is impossible to popularize the so-called organic agriculture which claim to be fertilizer-free, because high-yield fields are quite limited. As for the pesticide-resistant species you have mentioned, we can try to reduce the amount of weed killer used, but the idea of abandoning weed killer is unreasonable. Total abandonment will not benefit current ecological balance. In addition, if we forbid all weed killers, the only alternative is to pluck the weeds by hand. It is impossible except in labor-intensive agriculture. Wed, 21 May 2008 21:31:06 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2026#comment-7404 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2026#comment-7404 As industry is divided into labor-intensive industry and skill-intensive industry, agriculture has the same classification as industry. The counterpart of skill-intensive industry in agriculture probably refers to “oil-gas intensive agriculture” raised by Ms. Hockridge. The so-called “oil-gas intensive agriculture” mainly exists in developed countries. Now in developed countries, hunger is not a problem any more. And the technology of genetically modification is mainly researched in developed countries. Thus, the genetically modified crops are not for the purpose of solving hunger, but for “cleaner and better” food for people. So the result is just the same as my previous conclusion: genetically modified crops cannot solve the problem of output. Moreover, I have to add one point here, genetically modified crops do have the possibility of decreasing output, for the extra ability of insect resistance and stress tolerance need more energy to develop, although the portion of energy maybe little. Besides, I haven’t completely understood why genetically modified crops are relying on oil. I agree on this opinion although I don’t agree with the proof that the author provided. Genetically modified crops cannot solve the hunger problem in developing countries and that’s for sure, because technology is just a method of solving problem of nature, not the human problems—hunger and pollution. Human being’s own problems can only be solved by our methods—politic and economic. If human don't restrict his own behaviors and keep incongruence economic, great technology cannot meet our desire. Actually, food in the world is not insufficient. The poor don't have enough food because the rich buy too much. --Aturen Wed, 21 May 2008 11:49:05 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2026#comment-7401 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2026#comment-7401 GM agriculture follows the old oil-intensive path. It is oil reliant because it still relies on fertilizer. As for the widely planted pesticide resistant species, such as Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soybean, the amount of weed killers used is staggering, which is also a by-product of petro-chemical industry. Furthermore, the use of agricultural machinery for large scale single cropping cannot do without oil. TVhead Wed, 21 May 2008 14:04:52 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2026#comment-7402 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2026#comment-7402