# Organic food **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 10, 2017, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/organic-food/784192 "2017-04-10T19:48:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2017, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/organic-food/784192/21 "2017-04-11T21:26:17Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > This seems to be a grossly ignorant exaggeration of the productivity discrepancies between organic and conventional agriculture. \*"…the numbers are discouraging for the organic option. The rubber really hits the road when it comes to yield. To its credit, organic does quite well in many cases: Sweet potatoes, raspberries, canola, and hay all yielded higher nationally than their conventional counterparts… Unfortunately, there’s little hope in feeding the world with higher yields of sweet potatoes, peaches, and raspberries—much less hay. What matters most is the performance of basic row-crops. As it turns out, yields were dramatically lower for these commodities: 40 percent lower for winter wheat, 29 percent lower for corn, 34 percent lower for soy, 53 percent lower for spring wheat, 41 percent lower for rice, 58 percent lower for sorghum, and 64 percent lower for millet. Canola was the only row-crop with greater yields with organic farming. What we might call “secondary staples” did poorly as well. The organic option yielded 28 percent lower for potatoes, 21 percent lower for sweet corn, 38 percent lower for onions, 19 percent lower for snap beans, and 52 percent lower for bell peppers. Perhaps most distressingly, some of the healthiest foods on the planet yielded comparatively poorly under organic production: 42 percent lower for blueberries, 23 percent lower for broccoli, and almost 40 percent lower for tomatoes. Given these figures, a switch to organic agriculture would require a 43 percent increase over current U.S. cropland, according to (plant pathologist and agricultural scientist Steve) Savage.\* As he puts it, “On a land-area basis, this additional area would be 97% the physical size of Spain or 71% the size of Texas.” (Yes, Texas is bigger than Spain.) These are depressing figures, especially in light of the fact that global food demand is entering a 40-year upward trend. It’s no wonder that Savage, who spent part of his career developing organic pest controls, concludes that organic “is too small and unproductive to ever be the ‘solution’ to our need to simultaneously feed the world and protect the environment,”\* > **[Study: Most organic crops less productive than conventionally farmed crops.](https://slate.com/technology/2011/03/study-most-organic-crops-less-productive-than-conventionally-farmed-crops.html)** > > The Food and Agriculture Organization predicts that the global population will increase by 2.3 billion between now and 2050. This demographic... > [@Kimstu](#): > > It also doesn’t take into account the differences in their impacts on soil, water and biodiversity. This is true. There’s a role for good organic farming practices (some of which can be applied to “conventional” agriculture) and the possibility of improving efficiency of organic farming. We’re still a long, long way from meeting the world’s food needs that way. One should be careful before referring to someone like [Norman Borlaug](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/business/energy-environment/14borlaug.html) as a “posturing ‘realist’”. He did a helluva lot more to feed hungry people than anyone at the Rodale Institute and their organic-is-the-only-way allies. \*Dr. Savage wrote a thought-provoking article on [why he doesn’t buy organic food](https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensavage/2016/03/19/why-i-dont-buy-organic-and-why-you-might-want-to-either/#6e7594f569c3). Some of his objections are made on environmental and ethical grounds. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2017, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/organic-food/784192/22 "2017-04-12T01:13:51Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > One should be careful before referring to someone like [Norman Borlaug](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/business/energy-environment/14borlaug.html) as a “posturing ‘realist’”. :dubious: Has anybody here referred to Norman Borlaug in any such way? I doubt it. I also doubt that Borlaug has dismissively and ignorantly misrepresented a productivity difference ranging from about 5% to about 40% as a productivity difference **amounting to literal _orders of magnitude_**. Anybody who did that, pretending that it was some kind of no-bullshit approach to the realities of organic agriculture, would definitely be posturing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/organic-food/784192.md?page=1)