Cash investigation: the chemicals in question

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Cash investigation: the chemicals in question




by Janic » 02/02/16, 13:03

tonight on FR2
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79138
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10976




by Christophe » 02/02/16, 16:24

Visible on the net in streaming here: http://www.francetvinfo.fr/replay-magaz ... 86821.html
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 03/02/16, 10:37

if there are people interested after the 7 days that it remains in replay, I have a digital recording.

Send me an Email address by "mp".

Alas, the debate is "cut": "full memory" on my key!

I very much appreciated the commentary of the farmer who recalled the role that could - if he wanted - play the consumer! If, after all, he understood that the beautiful, shiny and flawless apple, which he instinctively thinks is the "top", is indeed the top of the bitch. And if he gave preference to "normal" apples: some scab spots - without any danger - which indicates that the farmer did not abuse fungicides, occasionally, a toru and "worms" in the fruit, which proves that he did not abuse insecticides but rather fight with "green" means (pheromone traps, which do not work 100%) ...


Dream.

It is futile, finally insufficient, to attack the 6 companies in question. They will always do everything to consume their filth. They will not kill themselves. Ethics in the world of big finance and industry, you have to be very naive to believe it.

So you have to do it. By ethics. Without thinking that this will solve the case!

On the other hand, one can remember Coluche: "When I think that it would be enough for people not to buy them so that this crap does not sell any more!" (and I have a blackout knowing what he was talking about! Laundry?). Damn, 20 or 25 years after his death, do it!
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 03/02/16, 10:57

And yes, it's not glop!
what may surprise is this lack of so-called moral values, in these individuals trapped by their professional situation and at the same time their speech which can shock a posteriori. Indeed, the vast majority of industrialists have claimed the need for their products and the vast majority of the population and therefore of politicians and professional farmers believed in it.
What is to be hoped is that it changes quickly (for our societies it is in decades), but it is rather slow and off to a good start, especially since the afterglow lasts a very long time as shown, finally, this report on mass media!
As Ahmed points out elsewhere "Already, there has been for a long time only one system which has declined in liberal and state variants (according to variable proportions, then the moral criterion is inadequate to analyze the phenomenon. Not that I deny the influence of sad characters *, but because the cause of the nuisance is mainly the result of the behavior of people devoid of the slightest bad intention: they simply act at their level, according to systemic indications, without being aware of the consequences that this induces at the macroeconomic level.
"
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79138
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10976




by Christophe » 03/02/16, 11:08

Did67 wrote:On the other hand, one can remember Coluche: "When I think that it would be enough for people not to buy them so that this crap does not sell any more!" (and I have a blackout knowing what he was talking about! Laundry?). Damn, 20 or 25 years after his death, do it!


Absolutely, this is one of the ideas defended by econology: buying (differently) has much more weight than voting every X years if we want to change society (in a good way)!

The broadcast of this program on the same day as the farmers' demonstrations http://www.franceinfo.fr/actu/economie/ ... des-763287 is probably a coincidence ...but have journalists made the link between the 2?

To know that everything is linked (to put in the right order ... if there is one), I think Didi, as it was your job, you will more or less agree:

a) chemical inputs are a significant operating burden for farmers,

b) mass distribution indirectly imposes high productivity (because a lot of waste and it squeezes prices) therefore chemical inputs to the "max" therefore a) increases

c) the distribution system (long) and consumption (not local or seasonal) requires the use of chemicals to preserve food therefore a) increases

d) the consumer wants the food to last as long as possible therefore a) increases

e) in the end the chemical industry and the large distribution seem to be the big winners of this system ... in short it is still the big guys who win and impose their law

f) and do not talk about health risks for the farmers themselves who play with their lives (less than before but the risk is not zero)

ps: not seen the documentary ...
0 x
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554

Re: Cash investigation: the chemicals in question




by moinsdewatt » 03/02/16, 19:32

Cash Investigation: "20% of pesticides concentrated on 3% of the agricultural area"

By Edouard Lamort on 03-02-2016

François Veillerette, spokesperson for Générations Futures, explains why some departments are more affected than others by these dangerous products.

The case is causing a stir. During the program "Cash Investigation" broadcast Tuesday February 2 on France 2, a map of France representing, in detail and by department, the sales of pesticides classified as dangerous or potentially dangerous for humans was unveiled. The spokesperson for the Générations Futures association François Veillerette, who advised the journalists who carried out the investigation, returns for "the Obs" on this real "work of titans".

Why are the departments of Marne, Gironde and Loire-Atlantique the most affected by pesticides?

- The reason is simple. It is explained by the nature of the dominant cultures of these territories. The Gironde has a large wine-growing area. The same goes for Marne and more generally Champagne as well as Loire-Atlantique, where Muscadet comes from.

In France, vine crops represent 20% of the pesticides used while they occupy only 3% of the French agricultural area. If the field crops [exploitation of cereals, oleaginous or protein plants, Editor's note] use 70% of the pesticides spread on the national territory, they are much more numerous and especially much larger. The density of pesticides observed is therefore lower there than on vineyard operations. It should be borne in mind that the two sectors "asking" for pesticides are viticulture and arable crops. Finally, fruit tree growing should not be underestimated either.

France seems to be cut in half. Why are there fewer phytosanitary products in the east of the country?

- The clear regions listed on this map do not use a lot of pesticides because they have few crops favoring the use of these products. The simplest example is that of the south of France. This region focuses mainly on livestock and benefits from many forests. Mechanically, these territories have less room for arable farming. The existence of mountainous reliefs, the Alps and the Massif Central, also partly explains why eastern France is less dark. Finally, statistically, livestock generally reduces the use of pesticides in a region.

Why is the west of France one of the areas that consumes the most pesticides?


- These regions benefit from an oceanic climate. They are therefore more humid. This criterion may play an important role in the use of certain pesticides. With more humidity, there is automatically a greater development of undesirable ones like mushrooms, slugs or aphids. The west also shelters a plain relief ideal for arable crops. Therefore, pesticides are used more. The Somme meets these criteria, for example.

Which agricultural sectors are the most demanding of pesticides?

- The figures may vary depending on the products grown. According to the Ministry of Agriculture, the apple can undergo an average of 36 pesticide treatments in a year. In Limousin, the cultivation of Golden apples, which is more susceptible to disease, can be subject to 40 treatments over the same period. Lower but still considered important, the consumption of pesticides for beets and potatoes is on average 16 to 18 applications of chemicals in France.

Wheat requires few pesticides. Between 5 and 6 treatments are necessary, more than three times less than the previously mentioned varieties. The number of applications of these insecticides and other fungicides depends very much on the regions. Thus, an apple that is sensitive to humidity is treated artificially more often in Normandy than in Ardèche, where the climate is drier.

What are the solutions to limit the use of pesticides?

- The right choice of varieties cultivated by farmers would be a good lead. It is necessary to pay more attention to the seasons and to no longer produce certain products all year round. The distribution of crops should also be less tight. By doing so, we reduce the proliferation of diseases and de facto the use of pesticides.

New agronomic techniques are also implemented which allow production with profitable returns. The latter would be slightly lower, but farmers would earn more thanks to the reduction in their phytosanitary costs.

Finally, it is necessary to maintain the surroundings of the fields. Do not shave hedges and forests to perpetuate the flora and fauna necessary for more natural production. The cultivated area must not be surrounded by a plant and animal desert.


http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/planete/ ... icole.html
0 x
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554

Re: Cash investigation: the chemicals in question




by moinsdewatt » 03/02/16, 19:32

0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 03/02/16, 19:54

I asked myself yesterday what was represented.

If I understand the legend of the map above, it is simply the tonnage of hazardous pesticides sold by department.

It is disappointing: it would have at least had to be corrected by a factor, the "UAA" of the department = Agricultural Area Used ...

Using x tonnes of dangerous pesticides in such a large department cultivated at 80% and the same x tonnes in such a small department occupied with 60% of forests ... it's not the same.

That said, the "intensely treated" areas (viticulture, market gardening - in the Loire Valley) still stand out.

That is to say the "doses"!

On the other hand, the rather dark color of the Meuse for example surprises me! (same color as Alsace)
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 03/02/16, 20:43

the total tonnage is not the right figure we mix more or less dangerous products

the main problem is that to avoid chemical treatment you have to work more by more rudimentary means

which taxes the work heavily with social charges!

So it's the same problem again, we force the cultivator to use modern means to obtain the productivity that we impose financially and fiscally and then we blame them for polluting

zero-rated agricultural labor and peasant common sense will return! they would rather make people work than buy chemical pigs

the problem does not arise only for agriculture but for all industries! every time a boss has to choose between a method wasting energy or chemicals or a methade using labor the enormity of social charges tilts on the wrong side

ironic remark on the subject of did on culture without work ... to save work you have to work a lot ... it's like to save money you have to pay the price!
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 03/02/16, 20:43

I asked myself yesterday what was represented.

If I understand the legend of the map above, it is simply the tonnage of hazardous pesticides sold by department.

It is disappointing: it would have at least had to be corrected by a factor, the "UAA" of the department = Agricultural Area Used ...

Using x tonnes of dangerous pesticides in such a large department cultivated at 80% and the same x tonnes in such a small department occupied with 60% of forests ... it's not the same.

That said, the "intensely treated" areas (viticulture, market gardening - in the Loire Valley) still stand out.

That is to say the "doses"!


Indeed in the Landes (the largest artificial forest in Europe), the area that remains for cultivation (mainly corn) must take a layer of athletic pesticide ....:frown: :| : Cry: : Evil:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/For%C3%AAt_des_Landes
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : gegyx and 140 guests