Healthier, maybe; but often more energy-efficient, too.

In Chalk One Up for Organic at Front Porch Republic, Kathleen Dalton discusses a study from the Land Institute that, although aimed at a different objective, was also able to show that organic farming is in many areas more energy-efficient than conventional, chemical-based farming, even when the increased need for human labor is taken into account.

Distributist economist John Médaille comments not to forget the fuel costs of moving food across the country, either.

This follows uncomfortably (for the friends of corporate megafarms) the publicity about Roundup-Resistant weed infestations.

When will we ever learn that there is no technology fix for finitude? There are limits in this created world. We may not know where they are exactly, but the chronically recurrent giddy glee (E.g., “Oh boy! The pill! Now we can have all the sex we want, whenever we want, with whomever we want, without consequences!” Or “Oh boy! Roundup! …”) is delusional.

One thought on “Healthier, maybe; but often more energy-efficient, too.

  1. Yup. There are always consequences. Newton’s Third Law is a pretty good indicator of that. It’s usually a matter of trying to figure out what they are and choosing appropriately. Lack of perfect, total knowledge can really trip you up, unfortunately.

Comments are closed.