|
|
|
|
|
|
by jjbiotech
3717 days ago
|
|
|
Inefficient? Yes. Unsustainable? No way. We've been farming the old-fashioned way for thousands of years with exponential increases in population. If that's not the definition of sustainability I don't know what is. Also, modern cultivation techniques can strip the produce and soil of essential vitamins and nutrients. So yes, in some cases, the "inefficient" and "unsustainable" farms yield more nutritious and eco-friendly foods. The notion that these facts are purely a fabrication of marketing companies is total bullshit. There's tons of research out there supporting this (nb4 WHO SPONSORED THE RESEARCH??), you just have to look for it. |
|
|
Just because a technique is sustainable at prior population levels doesn't mean it will be sustainable in the future. Slash-and-burn was used for thousands of years and is now one of the main causes of deforestation. Bottom trawling has been used for almost a thousand years and is now considered directly responsible for fishery collapse. Humans have been responsible for the extinction of thousands of animals through unsustainable hunting practices that occurred thousands or even tens of thousands of years ago.
> Also, modern cultivation techniques can strip the produce and soil of essential vitamins and nutrients. So yes, in some cases, the "inefficient" and "unsustainable" farms yield more nutritious and eco-friendly foods.
Actually modern farmers are very, very careful about keeping high quality soil because it results in higher yields and spending less on fertilizers and pesticides. 60 years ago, farming "the old-fashioned way" we had things like the dust bowl.