Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Difference between organic and conventional farming
Literature review of comparative benefits of conventional and organic farming
Difference between organic and conventional farming
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Difference between organic and conventional farming
In 1969, the Cuyahoga River (in Cleveland, Ohio) caught on fire because it was “polluted from decades of industrial waste.” Furthermore, after the river set on fire for the final time, the government of Cleveland stepped in to stop the factories’ water runoff into the river. They no longer allowed the factories to have overflow into the river, Although the main problem was fixed for the present, another problem was creeping up: runoff from large industrial farms. Pollution is a serious matter, because if our world gets polluted, it will no longer be safe or healthy to live. The way people eat has a big part in pollution. If they eat locally, or at least try to, they can help cut down on out pollution. The method of Local Sustainable farming …show more content…
gets its name because the word “sustainable” means to keep the land’s ability to grow food without destroying the environment. When food is “grown locally”, it means that it is grown in a nearby town a few miles away. People should eat locally because it benefits the health of the consumer and the environment. These are some questions that people should ask themselves as they are buying food.
Was it grown locally? How was it grown? Were chemicals used? Eating locally promotes the health of the consumer. Michael Pollan and Richie Chevat, author of The Omnivore's Dilemma, stated, “No fossil fuels or added fertilizer or chemicals needed” (148). Since there is nothing being added to the animals’ diet or their pastures, their meat is more nutritious because they are eating the nutrients that they need through, not a corn-fed diet and a condensed living area like a CAFO farm does. Julia Vogel, author of the book, Local Farms and Sustainable Foods, said, "It takes a lot of human-made chemicals, plus fuel energy, to keep the produce looking perfect while it's shipped" (Vogel 6). Since the food isn't grow naturally, but instead chemicals that were created and used by us, which are abundantly poor for the environment, but also the consumer. When people think about the food they eat, us as consumers need to think about what is is made of and where how it was made. If a fruit has no bruises, chances are it was created with chemicals, and if is does have a bruise, chances are that it was grown in a natural environment. One organization that would disagree with this is McDonald’s as well as a CAFO farmer. Pollan says, “These animals have evolved to eat grass. But at a CAFO, they are forced to eat corn-at considerable cst to their health, to the health of the land, and ultimately to the health …show more content…
of us, their eaters” (49). Since the animals are forced to eat corn, the farmers are messing with the animals diet and they can’t get all the nutrition that they need to be healthy. Their meat will end up substandard and they have a higher chance of getting sick. As Americans, "We have few rules about what to eat, when to eat, and how to eat" (Pollan 92) There are no set national food culture that are followed, unlike other countries like France or Spain. There is also insufficient rules about the food system and how to eat, and that links to the high rates of diabetes and obesity. Between 2003-2006 the Nutrition Examination showed a survey that increased the obesity rate 17.3% (Pollan 77). In 2016, the obesity rates in children and teens is 29.5% in Wisconsin. As of 2018, the obesity rates in adults is 30.7% (the State of Obesity). “Nationally, 31.2 percent of youth in this age range are overweight or obese” (the State of Obesity). How can people help the environment?
Whether it is growing their own garden or going to a nearby farmerś market, eating and buying locally is superior for the consumer and the environment. When food is naturally grown, it is better for the environment."Almost everything the farm uses is grown on the farm. Almost all of the energy used to make the food comes from the sun. there are no pesticides, no artificial fertilizer, no pollution, and no extra waste. Everything is recycled" (Pollan 148/150). On Joel Salatin's farm, a local farm in Swoope, Virginia, they doesn't use as many chemicals, fertilizers, or pesticides as a standard industrial food systems. They mostly use natural fertilizers. For example, Joel has a rotation; every day, he moves his cows and chickens to a new pasture (Pollan 147-148). This way, the soil will be more fertile, and it will be in better, not worse, shape. "...My snack could have traveled 8,000 miles to get to my mouth... it takes a lot of energy for food to travel so far" (Vogel 6). For an Industrial food product to travel about 8,000 miles with pesticides and chemicals in it, it makes the pollution in the air worse. The more energy that we use, and the more pollution we create, the worse our future will be because trucks carrying meat and fruit from other cities and countries are worsening our environment by polluting it.Michael Pollan interviewed a few people that shop at Joel Salatin’s farm and one lady said “I drive 150 miles one way in order to
get ce3an meat for my family” (Pollan 184). An industrial farmer might throw it back into a local buyer’s face and say that you travel more miles to get fresh food when you can travel less than a mile to go to a local grocery store. CAFO farmers may feed more people, but the “...waste from CAFOs if a huge source of exceedingly toxic pollution…” (Pollan 49). If they keep pouring this waste, or also known as, manure and fertilizer, the environment will be heavily polluted. When people eat locally, it benefits the health of the consumer and the environment. When CAFO farmer consider the benefits of growing naturally or industrially, they think about the profit and the piles of money that they are about to make, not the piles of corn that they are feeding their cows and poultry making them sick. If someone buys locally, that can be sometimes be up to 200 miles, but that is still local. Buying locally can affect the environment and the health of the consumer, positively or negatively. Think about how a community around can help. If people buy local, even just for fruits and vegetables, maybe even meat once in awhile, it can help the environment’s health improve, and it help improve their health, too!
James E. Mcwilliams stated his aversion to the locavore movement in his essay “The Locavore Myth: Why Buying from Nearby Farmers Won’t Save the Planet”. The locavore movement is the concept of buying produce, meat, and other farm-grown food locally as opposed to having your vegetables or fruits shipped from across the world. This notion believes going local reduces harm to the environment by decreasing the miles food needs to travel before landing on your plate. From the title of his essay itself, the claim would seem obvious. The locavore movement does not essentially help save the environment through lessened food mileage. Don’t be easily swayed, in short. Mcwilliams presented several grounds and data for his justification on this issue.
First, the local sustainable food chain is healthy for people. In the book The Omnivore’s Dilemma as people stand around to buy chicken from Polyface, Pollan records some of the customers’ quotes. In the book it says, “ You’re not going to find fresher chickens anywhere. (Pollan, 184). ” This quote shows
Moreover, this system of mass farming leads to single crop farms, which are ecologically unsafe, and the unnatural treatment of animals (Kingsolver 14). These facts are presented to force the reader to consider their own actions when purchasing their own food because of the huge economic impact that their purchases can have. Kingsolver demonstrates this impact by stating that “every U.S. citizen ate just one meal a week (any meal) composed of locally and organically raised meats and produce, we
Former editor of Us News and World Report and recipient of Guggenheim Award,Stephen Budiansky in his article, “Math Lessons For Locavores”,published in August 19,2012 addresses the topic of locally grown food and argues it as a more sustainable choice in terms of freshness and seasons.I agree with Budiansky for growing food locally,however; with three other reasons: we can reduce food waste,(which will benefit the environment), and obesity(which will help an individual mentally and physically), and improve our economy. The purpose is to illustrate why locally grown foods would be a finer option for an American lifestyle. Budiansky adopts an informative,persuasive,and insightful tone for his audience,readers
Michael Pollan and David Freedman are two reputable authors who have written about different types of food and why they are healthy or why they are damaging to our health. Michael Pollan wrote “Escape from the Western Diet” and David Freedman wrote “How Junk Food Can End Obesity”. Imagine Pollan’s idea of a perfect world. Everything is organic. McDonald’s is serving spinach smoothies and Walmart is supplying consumers with raw milk. The vast majority of food in this world consists of plants grown locally, because almost everyone is a farmer in order to keep up with supply and demand. How much does all this cost? What happened to all the food that is loved just because it tastes good?
Within these past few years, more and more people have tried to use their community’s grown produce instead of large company-based products. These ‘locavores’ have grown in numbers as people have taken into account the health related, environmental, and economic consequences of choosing locally grown products. The key issues associated with the locavore movement are the economic effects and the change made in the environment of a community.
...led an average of 1,518 miles (about 2,400 kilometers). By contrast, locally sourced food traveled an average of just 44.6 miles (72 kilometers) to Iowa markets. (DeWeerdt)” This is not only bad for the environment with all the food being transported all around the world causing pollution, it also does not support the local growing gardeners. When people buy locally grown produce it helps the community out because of the taxes made from the produce they buy.
More and more farm-to-table restaurants, farmer’s markets, and food co-ops are cropping up to meet the demand among consumers for healthy, local foods, as more chefs and consumers recognize the poorer taste and nutritional integrity of ingredients shipped in from far away. Fruits and vegetables that have to be shipped long distances are often picked before they have a chance to fully ripen and absorb nutrients from their surroundings. Because local food doesn’t have to travel long distances, it is grown in order to taste better and be healthier rather than to be resilient to long travel. The farm-to-table movement also helps local economies by supporting small farmers, which is a dying
If you are interested in bird watching, the Connecticut River is the place to go. With eagles, ospreys and scores of other species, enthusiasts can see them up close and personal under the guidance of the RiverQuest crew and a set of high powered binoculars provided by the staff. The RiverQuest boat has two open decks along with a heated interior with large windows to keep you comfortable when the winds get too chilly outside. The thoroughly knowledgeable staff of Captain Mark Yuknat along with wife Mindy, crew Scott and Cathy provide a wealth of information related to the various species of bird, habitat and environment.
According to the Organic Consumers Association, in 1970 there were approximately 900,000 family farms in the United States; by 1997 there were only 139,000 family farms. This number is continually decreasing by the year. Why is this a problem? Factory farms promote abusive practices in order to maximize production at minimal cost at the expense of the environment, the community, and even our personal health. They house thousands of animals and inject them with hormones in order to maximize their growth and food output. The techniques being used are inhumane and are used thousands of times a day. According to the Organic Consumers Association, two out of every three animal products in stores come from factory farms. Factory farms dominate food production throughout the country. Animals most commonly consumed that require large-scale farming practices are cows, chickens and pigs. The methods of farming are not only bad for the animals themselves, but it’s affecting the meat we put into our bodies, and is therefore affecting one’s health. Factory farms ultimately have a negative effect on the health of both the animal and the consumer of the animal product.
Phasing out animal agriculture and replacing it with stronger, safer plant cultivation would greatly reduce pollution released into the environment as animal waste, burning fossil fuels, and contaminated water runoff. The animal waste produced in factory farms is dumped into immense open-air lago...
An enormous number of people visit a grocery store several times a week and buy chicken, but not many of them know that what they are buying were injected with various chemicals and prohibited from moving around in the farms, in order to make them bigger. This type of food production is called mass production, which uses a great amount of chemicals such as pesticide for crops and antibiotics for the livestock in order to guarantee rapid production, only focusing on maximizing the profit. Furthermore, the major companies are not revealing the process of manufacturing their goods clearly to the consumers. Consequently, mass production of food has caused problems in economic and environmental aspects of our society. Thus, as an alternative for mass production, local food movement is spreading throughout the world, mainly in the United States. Local food movement is the consumption of food that is produced within the region one lives. This effort in the food industry has its own benefits in terms of consumer satisfaction, economic cost, and protection of the environment.
For years organic farmers and conventional farmers have feuded over which is superior. Organic farmers argue that their product is more eco-friendly because they do not use the synthetic chemicals and fertilizers conventional farmer’s use. Conventional farmers argue that their product is healthier and yields more. People tend to have stereotypes regarding the two types of farmers. Organic farmers are usually thought of as liberal, hippy, tree-huggers while conventional farmers are usually thought of as right-wing, industrialists. Obviously, some do adhere to this stereotype, but a majority of these farmers are normal, hardworking people. Although these farmers, both believe in their methods, one is no better than the other. There are advantages and disadvantages to both, but there is no true superior method of crop farming.
The problem of water scarcity has increasingly spread throughout the world as of yet, The UN reports that within the next half- century up to 7 billion people in 60 countries which is more than the whole present population will face water scarcity (Sawin “Water Scarcity could Overwhelm the Next Generation”). As well the demand for freshwater has tripled over the past 50 years, and is continuing to rise as a result of population growth and economic development. 70% of this demand derives from agriculture which shows the influence of water on food supply globally as well not just drinking water (Sawin “Water Scarcity could overwhelm the Next Generation”). But increasing water use is not just a matter of the greater number of people needing it to drink and eat; it also comes from pollution and misuse of water supplies, by either dumping or runoff of bacteria or chemicals into water. This also “causes other pollutions as well such as soil and air pollution, accelerating wetland damage and human caused global warming” (Smith and Thomassey 25). According to UN report, recent estimates suggest that climate change will account for about 20 percent of the increase in global water scarcity in coming decades.
Pollution can have an impact on our health, not only affecting people with impaired respiratory systems such as asthmatics, but very healthy adults and children too. Plants can be a benefit for pollution in the air, trees, bushes and other greenery growing in the concrete-and-glass canyons of cities can reduce levels of two of the most worrisome air pollutants by eight times more than previously believed. The more trees we can plant the less pollution we get and more air than just having a huge land and having abandoned buildings taking up space. To solve water pollution is to conserve soil, the best way to combat soil erosion is to keep the banks of waterways well-covered with soil-retaining plants.