Geological resources: there is not only oil that will miss!

Current Economy and Sustainable Development-compatible? GDP growth (at all costs), economic development, inflation ... How concillier the current economy with the environment and sustainable development.
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 05/06/13, 16:17

Janic wrote:
I reacted to this sentence: "Come on, it was my scratch of the day against the "organic sores"" seeming to emphasize that bio = sores ".

it's from time to time and me all the time: a question of choice!


You see how you lend thoughts ???

1) rant against "organic sores", it was first a play on words; very exactly, a alliteration.

Well, we notice it or not ... I admit that it may not be top!

2) Then, it is well against the "organic sores" (as I would have written against the bigots when it comes to Catholicism), my claw (so the bios who refuse to open their eyes to reality and who follow it like a fad - I don't name anyone; I know it exists because I know some)

This is nothing to say, write, imply that all "bios" are sores!

To be clear, among the bios, there are, in my humble opinion, sores ("eat, it's organic!") ...

3) It is not from time to time that I consume organic; it is regular, but not always and not everything (in particular, I refuse to be "milked" when the price difference is collosal and is not justified by agronomic reasons; also I go the route when the "gain" is not considerable - do you know by eg on classic cabbage, in Alsace, farmers use an "organic" insecticide because it is more effective? Without labeling for all that, so for example, a classic cabbage whose outer leaves are discarded does not choke me ...).

4) Now you always dodge the bottom, who, on this thread, East : is "organic" certified agriculture allowed to use potash and phosphoric fertilizers of geological origin? ? Yes or no ?

In this sense, does it contribute yes or no to emptying finite geological reserves (even very limited in these two cases!)

I remind you that on this point, above, you wrote, something which is not very flattering for me, finally which calls into question an idea which I advance:


first news! what kind of organic farmer are you talking about?
Instead of turning your eyes to the so-called organic, find out from those who have been practicing for 50 years and you may have another look.


It is I who needs another look or you to open your eyes to one of the limits of classic "organic", labeled, French or European ???

See for example:

http://www.dordogne.chambagri.fr/filead ... esRegl.pdf

[for those who are not "specialists": natural phosphates, it is clear; patentkali = http://www.produjardin.fr/engrais-bio/e ... 50-kg.html]

5) Another thing would be the debate on organic labeling in exotic countries (Egyptian potato), when we know the level of corruption in these countries ... I make a point of buying when you want certificates on the black market of one of these countries ... [before getting angry again for nothing, for information, I have 12 years of work in Africa on the clock, without ever having paid a backschich I want to clarify - we is not numerous in this case!]

And something else the carbon footprint of organic from the other side of the world ... [including frozen from China ...]

6) I will open soon on this forum a thread on "How to garden effortlessly [I have heart disease] and" more than organic "?"

I have some experiments going on in my garden. I do sphotos. Well, this year is off to a bad start!

And I would like to stimulate an open reflection but not dogmatic [as long as it doesn't turn into the battle of ragpickers].

My goal (it's a scoop), to produce without fertilizers (even authorized in organic), without treatments (even authorized in organic) and almost without work (but I still hope to harvest!).

As pointed out above, I luckily met Manfred and Frédéric Wenz, who have been cultivating for almost 20 years without working the soil, in permanent cover and are labeled ... Demeter! (Biodynamics). I have met them twice. With other thoughts, it made me try a couple of things ...
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 05/06/13, 18:48

Did67 wrote:Defending your ego at all costs is for me the expression of a deep distress, of a neurosis or whatever ... Like all those who "fight" ceaselessly for anything and everything.


Nice word, to put in your signature if you want :)

This debate begins to remind me of that of "organic fast food at quick"... impossible according to some and yet, we can very well make fries and a burger 100% organic ...

I found the subject: Consumer-durable / fast food-bio-at-quick-t9967.html it will not please Janic (he was not there when we did it)
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 06/06/13, 09:21

christophe wrote:(it was not there when we did it)


No, it doesn't shock me! There is confusion everywhere and the word organic (after having been widely opposed by the official services) has become a fashion reference, without the public knowing with enough information what this word covers.
Then, there are several approaches: the consumer who wants to reduce his consumption of chemicals for various reasons, but who does not necessarily have either a dietetic or health approach. Eating too much and anything, even organic, is no better than eating selectively and stuffed with synthetic products (see the video by Corinne Gouget previously cited). Eating organic should be part of a global approach integrating the dietary, quantitative, health, etc. dimensions. which is unfortunately not frequently the case. From experience I have encountered omnivorous bio, bio who stuff themselves with chemical drugs, VG who smoke drink and other products no better than the jug, organic or not, etc ... so organic fast food (or pseudo organic): why not !
However, do not be under any illusions, supermarkets, fast food and others, do not make organic out of deep conviction but because it is an economic sector to take!
Did67 hello
Like all those who endlessly "fight" for anything and everything.
On the one hand you have to ask yourself why to fight (I prefer the term to defend yourself!) And on the other hand on what! So is ecology a fight or a defense and the two are not the same?
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 06/06/13, 11:41

Janic wrote:Did67 hello
Like all those who endlessly "fight" for anything and everything.
On the one hand you have to ask yourself why to fight (I prefer the term to defend yourself!) And on the other hand on what! So is ecology a fight or a defense and the two are not the same?


It was in response to a remark by christophe. Who I think understood it well.

No reference, let it be clear, to our debate here. With christophe, I am one of the moderators who have had to manage some fanatics; there have been ego battles that fall under what I have described (psychiatry). It was, between us, echoing that.

Another thing is the debate of idea - such as the one we have here - or the expression of points of view or the defense of this or that thing (I am, on this forum, in particular a "defender" of pellet chuaffage; I also testify to a photovoltaic project or a metahnization project on two other wires) ...

So just know that my remark made to christophe had nothing to do with it.

I regret, however, that although reading me, you do not have the courtesy to admit that you made a mistake (on the subject of the thread: the possibility of using natural P and K fertilizers, resulting from a mining operation, in officially labeled "organic" agriculture).

The best thing would have been to apologize for lending me thoughts that I never had or imply that I would have been severely mistaken (passage in blue in my previous post)! But real gentlemen, these days, it is becoming rare ...

I will nevertheless try to remain factual and polite.

[and Christophe will be able to testify that myself, I apologized 3 or 4 times after having misinterpreted a statement, took for me some chiose which was intended for another or even after made an error - of figure, data, calculation ...]

Miantenant, if we want to "philosophize" a little: the question is not that of battle, to defend oneself or to fight ... It is with what means! Honestly? By tasks? By innuendo? By lending opinions never expressed? Or by skidding with insulting words? [this last point, unrelated to our exchanges, but in relation to the life of this forum]
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 06/06/13, 19:53

did67 wrote:The best thing would have been to apologize for lending me thoughts that I never had or imply that I would have been severely mistaken (passage in blue in my previous post)! But real gentlemen, these days, it is becoming rare ...
I will nevertheless try to remain factual and polite.

It is not my habit to be rude, all of my interventions bear witness, even during the Dedelecco era and even with Obamot during our differences.
So I want to apologize if I took this passage in the first degree, but I thought that the confusion was gone when I answered this:
I like this development better!
I reacted to this sentence: "Come on, it was my claw of the day against the" organic sores "" seeming to emphasize que bio = sores ". That said, then overall we agree!

I regret, however, that although reading me, you do not have the courtesy to admit that you made a mistake (on the subject of the thread: the possibility of using natural P and K fertilizers, resulting from a mining operation, in officially labeled "organic" agriculture).

Indeed, the AB uses insoluble mineral readjustments when the soils lack them in order to quickly rebalance the acid / base ratio or enrich a soil exhausted by previous crops. (see the work of Voisin) Now that these withdrawals have a time limit it is inevitable as for all products extracted from the ground whether it is potash, petroleum or copper, etc ... the question that arises is therefore: is it necessary to wait for a natural rebalance by suitable cultural processes which can take a few decades or ward off the most urgent to ensure the income of the farmer. (called conversion period)
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 07/06/13, 12:19

OKAY. Thank you.

It is now clear that my thinking was not wrong (because before being a scratch - it was only the epilogue, to "stimulate" the thinking a little - I wanted to ask the question of exhaustion of certain resources, even if we switch everything to agriculture labeled "organic".

So yes, we will have to think much more deeply!
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 07/06/13, 13:23

By deeper thinking, I mean:

a) not be satisfied with the "organic" label

b) reason well in "cyclical agriculture", that is to say, for the main "ingredients" of biomass, ask the question where do the elements / energy come from? What become of them ..

c) this will therefore concern in particular the question of horizontal transfers: from one plot to another, from one farm to another, from one region to another ...

The specialization of terrorists, including in bio, poses questions from this point of view!

[except in biodynamics, where one of the dogmas is the crop-livestock association, which therefore takes into account the cyclical organization of the elements]
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 07/06/13, 14:44

The specialization of terrorists, including in bio, poses questions from this point of view!
any specialization of the terroirs poses problems, but certain lands hardly allow other possibilities such as vineyards where almost nothing else would grow.
[except in biodynamics, where one of the dogmas is the crop-livestock association, which therefore takes into account the cyclical organization of the elements]
But which poses other problems such as the inadequacy of animal consumption (meat, dairy products) to human physiology, that of the impact of livestock on food and aquifer resources (assuming the extent of this type of practice for the whole planet of course, which is not for tomorrow!). From memory Rudolf Steiner, through anthroposophy, was not expressed in terms of hunger in the world, but rather in terms of philosophy extended to many fields including agriculture.
As for the "organic" label, given all that it can cover, I prefer that of organic practice as at the time when this label did not exist and which combined ancestral practices and scientific discoveries and techniques respectful of life and of the environment.
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 07/06/13, 16:01

Janic wrote: From memory Rudolf Steiner, through anthroposophy, did not express himself in terms of hunger in the world, but rather in terms of philosophy extended to many fields including agriculture.


Indeed ! You are right about Steiner. It's even more than a philosophy. It is a conception of the world in which "spheres" other than thought are also taken into account ...

And what you say, in my mind, shows the limits of "dogmatic approaches":

a) yes, that did not consider world hunger

b) it did not imply any reflection / perception on global warming; the biodynmaic dogma wants that one plows ("to open the earth to the influences of the cosmos"); we now know that tillage also has many negative effects; in addition to the very reduced energy consumption, approaches without tillage (TCS - Simplified Cultural Techniques, or "no tillage", or even "no tillage under plant cover") also aim to let the soil organisms "do the work in peace ", without the upheavals, to optimize their action ...

This approach is incompatible with biodynamics.

c) similarly, tillage is an "accelerator" of the destruction of humus, and as such, can lead to a "destocking" of the CO² fixed in the soil humus ... So it contributes to global warming ... or at least, consists in depriving oneself of a "carbon sink"!

All this does not prevent me from purchasing Demeter products. Simply, it is not an "absolute solution" and even less an "absolute and universal solution" ...
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 08/06/13, 07:50

All this does not prevent me from purchasing Demeter products. Simply, it is not an "absolute solution" and even less an "absolute and universal solution" ...
We live in the 21st century of the Christian era too! Is there an absolute and universal solution without overhauling everything with another universal deluge ?! : Cheesy: : Cry:
The mere fact of sowing one of our current plants is already an abherration, but which nevertheless allows to feed the world population. So except to go back to the cave age or the original paradise, everything is skewed. So all the so-called AB techniques are an effort to limit ecological damage. As HCGeoffroy, founder of La Vie Claire, said: "we are in a period of survival", we must be aware of it!
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Economy and finance, sustainability, growth, GDP, ecological tax systems"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 124 guests