Tips: buy better

[Christophe]

Let's just stop drinking mineral water.

Uh what is that?

[Rajqawee]

Let's just stop drinking mineral water.

Uh what is that?

Bottled water, sold as better / more mineralized, therefore containing more minerals. What is expensive (to purchase), requires transport (unnecessary), of a rather dense material (water), packaged in plastic (more or less recyclable), rather than using the existing network, which produces, most of the time, water of excellent quality.

Food supplements minerals, in principle, without worry! you don't even have to count, just eat a variety of foods.

[Christophe]

Ah? And who drinks this?

Kings and Queens?

[Rajqawee]

Unfortunately no...

https://www.planetoscope.com/consommati ... rance.html

[khalidsmh]

Hello everyone, I would ask you to give me a few minutes to answer this questionnaire which deals with the attitude towards "slow fashion" applications, the results remain anonymous and for academic purposes, I am counting on your help and thank you in advance

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIp ... _wSR32CFRw

[gillesberdugo]

We often describe the ecological impact of organic products coming from afar, when in reality they pollute less than local but non-organic products. It sounds counterintuitive, but it's true. The most important variable in calculating the ecological impact of products is not transport. According to this source: https://youmatter.world/fr/consommer-local-ecologie-environnement/ , it is really the cultivation method that counts, and not the number of kilometers carried out. It is easier to imagine a distance than to know the ecological impact of a type of crop. It is for this reason that many people think that organic from foreign countries is more polluting. This is not necessarily wrong in all cases, but in most cases it is. The non-organic production method involves more polluting methods, and is more energy intensive. The best is obviously to be able to combine organic, local and seasonal products (see why on https://facilementecolo.com/2021/05/24/je-mange-des-fruits-et-des-legumes-de-saison/.). When this is not the case, it is better to favor organic (without unnecessary packaging of course).

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

One word: Bravo!
(But I will continue to eat fresh beans from Senegal that don't come by plane .... no, I'm kidding....)

[Exnihiloest]

... The non-organic production method involves more polluting methods ...

On what scale do you see that?
For example, non-organic production is intensive, thus saving space. If France has doubled the area of ​​its forests since the 19th century, when its population has doubled since 1830, it is thanks to intensive agriculture.
If we move towards the generalization of organic agriculture, wild spaces will have to regress, a "more polluting method" in my opinion than non-organic.
As moreover no scientific study shows health benefits to eat organic rather than not organic, I see no other advantage than the possible taste interest.

[Rajqawee]

... The non-organic production method involves more polluting methods ...

On what scale do you see that?
For example, non-organic production is intensive, thus saving space. If France has doubled the area of ​​its forests since the 19th century, when its population has doubled since 1830, it is thanks to intensive agriculture.
If we move towards the generalization of organic agriculture, wild spaces will have to regress, a "more polluting method" in my opinion than non-organic.
As moreover no scientific study shows health benefits to eat organic rather than not organic, I see no other advantage than the possible taste interest.

It's only a problem if we continue to eat so much meat, this story of surfaces. About 4/5 of agricultural land is used directly or indirectly for animals (world). Of course, not all of them can be converted for other uses (pastures in particular), but the fact remains that by reducing the share of meat in our food, we could quite less intensively cultivate without cutting down on wild spaces. .

I know you are perfectly against it.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

... The non-organic production method involves more polluting methods ...

On what scale do you see that?
For example, non-organic production is intensive, thus saving space. If France has doubled the area of ​​its forests since the 19th century, when its population has doubled since 1830, it is thanks to intensive agriculture.
If we move towards the generalization of organic agriculture, wild spaces will have to regress, a "more polluting method" in my opinion than non-organic.
As moreover no scientific study shows health benefits to eat organic rather than not organic, I see no other advantage than the possible taste interest.

And here we are, still saying anything ...