Is Organic Food “Global Warming Friendly?”?

Question

If someone is trying to reduce his or her “carbon footprint” then what is the best way to do so concerning food?

Does organic food take more CO2 to bring it to the marketplace than non-organic?

Does organic food have a shorter shelf life?

Answer 1

Yes I believe so!!!

Answer 2

Organic food's shelf life will be no different. In fact it's not that different at all. Organic is better for the soil locally, and the local environment, less harsh pesticides and so forth to spread out. Organic farming is good for the area it's grown in, but the food is not really that different from what I recall.

As for the footprint, it depends where it's from. Organic food from China still travels by boat, so it's not greener than other non-organic food from China, but again it would be better for the area where it was grown, which is especially good for China.

My suggestion is fairly simple. If it comes from the same area, like in your country or a nearby one, choose organic over non-organic. If it comes from afar and is organic, but you can get the same thing non-organic but more local, get the local, that food has a smaller carbon footprint.

Basically, if 2 items are basically the same, buy organic. If one item is local and the other foreign, always buy the local. It's not only got a smaller footprint, but it's also good for your local economy.

It's what I personally do.

Oh, I have heard recently that organic cereals are better for a person, they're more nutritionally balanced. I always buy Nature's Path cereal, tasty stuff.

Answer 3

Naturally raised food are carbon neutral; meaning that they don't introduce any more carbon to the planet than they take out. The problem comes in when the food is processed and transported. The solution here would be to eliminate processed foods, that is buy organic. As far as transporting the food the best course would be to start your own garden to reduce dependency on groceries. Cut back on restaurants for sure.

Unless the organic food is closer to the market, which most cases is true since they are not grown in the gigantic quantities as comercial farms, or delivered in a hybrid vehicle i doubt that much less CO2 used in delivery. However, it will likely be less.

Finally, organic produce and meat should have the same shelf life. organic 'processed' foods (like chips) will have shorter shelf life since they lack chemical preservatives

Answer 4

I don't believe organic food is markedly lower in carbon emissions, if at all. Both organic and non-organic foods are often shipped great distances, and some organic foods still used petroleum-based fertilizers like the non-organics. The big difference is the absence of pesticides, and sometimes artificial hormones or antibiotics in animals. This difference is quite positive, but is not directly related to global warming.

Certainly the best way to reduce the carbon footprint of our diet is to eat local foods. Read the labels of produce, and don't buy it if it comes from Argentina or something. Basically, this means eating only what's in season. Some people have also suggested that cutting meat out is a good way, but if you can find things like grass-fed beef (not grain-finished), then that's pretty acceptable too.

Answer 5

The answer is so complex it is insane. "Organic" foods often have a shorter shelf life so they are more often grown locally. Buying locally grown food from a farmer's market is usually the best bet. But there is A LOT more to consider. First of all, no meat. Animals produce CO2 and methane, and are inefficient as a food source. Second, no alcohol. The manufacturing and transportation produce a lot of green house gases for something that is not vital to your survival. Third, no rice. Yep no rice. Scientists have recently discovered that rice patties(farms) have a lot of a bacteria that produce CO2 and methane(which is 21 times as harmful as CO2). Fourth, scientists have little idea what is harmful(look at the rice...), and what is helpful(trees in polar regions actually CAUSE global warming. The trees themselves are dark colored and absorb more heat than snow would, and the snow underneath them reflects more light on onto the trees, which is once again stored as energy). Check out some of these links:

A different view(video available at google video)
http://www.lse.co.uk/ShowStory.asp?story=CZ434669U&news_headline=global_warming_is_lies_claims_documentary

Gore refuses to debate. Here's why
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=5ac1c0d6-802a-23ad-4a8c-ee5a888dfe7e

Cosmic Rays?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/11/warm11.xml

May not be so bad
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,481707,00.html

Problems with Carbon Credits
http://green.itweek.co.uk/2007/03/report_slams_of.html

Skeptical scientists
http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2007/globalwarming/SkepticalScientists.asp

I have A LOT more links like this available.

Answer 6

There is an argument that organic farming can help reduce emissions. Poorly managed agricultural land emits a lot of GHGs, such as methane and nitrous oxides. I did a study on the countries that were the worst offenders at emitting GHGs, and some of the worst were so because of large areas of poorly managed farmlands.

A study I just found states that when comparing intensive farmland (non-organic) to nearby non-farmed land, the intensive farmland emitted much more nitrous oxide than non-managed land. As organic farms are less intensive and managed in a way to promote natural ecosystems, it can be concluded that they will therefore have less emissions than intensive farming.

This isn't taking into consideration the time to take the food to the marketplace, so eating organic food that is produced as locally as possible (and not flown in from abroad), and in season, is the best option.

Answer 7

The reason organic foods and locally grown foods are better for a carbon footprint is becasue of the local factor. It costs much less to transport products locally than it does to ship them half way across the country. It really has nothing to do with taking CO2 its more in the emissions of plants and factories that manufacture the products and the vehicles that transport them

Answer 8

No it's not "global warming friendly" & doesn't have anything to do with it! Grow your own. It requires more chemicals to process the food you eat which are not only harmful to you, but to the environment. Organic food is best bought in small quantities, it breaks down faster, isn't loaded with chemicals & preservatives, or artificial ingredients. Follow the money trail with Monsanto & check out the vids on google video. Our nutrients are depleted from all the processing, so they add additives, genetically modify our food. CO2 is not man made! Al Gore is a professional LIAR, only to charge you a carbon tax, wake up. Look at how eco friendly his house is, just type it in your search engine.

Answer 9

I've never seen a study that says it is better (never seen does not mean there is none) I have seen studies that say it is as harmful to the environment as conventional farming just in different ways. I have also seen studies that say it is worse. The overall crop yield/acre is less than conventional farming meaning more land is used. Also since organic foods can only be grown in certain locations at certain times much of the food marked organic has come a long way by plane, which means more CO2 than normal crops which can be grown locally in off seasons via different chemicals.

Answer 10

Organic Food Standard Ruined By Congress
Congress Rams Through OTA Sneak Attack
On Organic Standards Despite Massive Consumer Opposition
From Organic Consumers Association
http://www.rense.com/general68/orgh.htm

1. Synthetic substances are not permitted in processing of items labeled as "organic”, and only allowed in the "made with organic" labeling category.
2. Provisions allowing up to 20-percent non-organic feed in the first nine months of a dairy herd's one-year conversion to organic production are not permitted.
3. All exemptions for the use of non-organic products "not commercially available in organic form" must be reviewed by National Organic Standards Board, and certifiers must review the operator's attempt to source organic.

See:
Here it is, the Pharmaceutical Industry's DIRTY little secret!
http://www.bankindex.com/read.asp?ID=1062

Dangers of Genetically Altered Foods
http://www.mercola.com/2001/jul/14/gm_foods.htm

Genetically Modified Bomb
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4701.htm

A Bioengineered Plague Phenotypes - New Insects/Plants Among Us
http://www.rense.com/general74/bio.htm

FDA poised to change the health & wellbeing of all Americans
http://www.newstarget.com/z020118.html

Gene-Engineered Food
From the Kitchen of Dr. Frankenstein
http://www.counterpunch.org/rich09212006.html

Answer 11

Organics do not use pesticides or any chemicals in their production that is why they are better for the environment. By not using chemicals to prevent infestation or alter the growth pattern the organic farmer is creating a safer and healthier product that also protects the environment.