I think it is an incredibly bad idea. First off, eucalyptus can be very invasive, and it can invade a diverse local population of trees and replace them. Since eucalyptus is a widely-grown plantation crop that is easily pollinated, the GM trees will eventualy contaminate non-GM eucalyptus with their modified pollen.
Furthermore, the corporations marketing these trees refuse the reveal exactly what traits have been modified, and sometimes refuse to reveal the location of the experimental stands. But we know trees are usually genetically modified to have one or more of the following traits: pest resistance, herbicide resistance, lower lignin levels, faster growth, sterility. Any one of these traits poses threats to the ecology of the area in which the trees are planted. It is well documented that beneficial insects such as bees and butterflies incur collateral damage when they come into contact with GM crops with built-in pesticides. There is often an increase in the use of toxic herbicides in conjunction with herbicide resistant GM trees, and there is also a human toll associated with the often indigineous and poor workers who live near or work in the tree plantations - they inhale the Bt toxin in the pollen and are exposed to the herbicides.
Additionally, GM trees are often engineered to have higher cellulose content and less lignin so they are more profitable when processed. Lignin, however, determines the rigidity, strength, and resistance of the tree's structure. Large stands of trees may not perform as expected in the event of flood, winds, or severe weather.
All in all, the rabble should pay attention and let their representatives know that GM trees and crops are bad news and they dont support it.
2007-05-31 07:08:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by Hmmph 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Eucalyputus is ugly, dirty, malodorous... and incredibly stupid as a crop. Grow avocados not eucalyptus (below)
Area necessary to generate 1 GW electrical, theoretical minimum, in square miles
Area Modality
====================
1000 biomass
300 wind
60 solar
0.3 nuclear
Biodiesel yield/acre of crops. The larger the iodine number (the higher the unsaturation) the worse the fuel for storage and use - unsaturated systems polymerize, the mechanism of drying oil paint.
Crop gal/acre Iodine #
===========================
Corn 18 125
soybean 48 130
sunflower 102 125
opium poppy 124 117
olive 129 81
castor bean 151 85
jojoba 194 80
avocado 282 85
coconut 287 10
oil palm 635 37-54
2007-05-28 05:40:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Uncle Al 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
that's good that human beings prefer a greater suitable, air purifier destiny! sometimes i ask your self how a good number of a prediction is per technology and how plenty is made via Media Soothsayers! There in all possibility is greater CO2 interior the ambience. there is further and extra human beings the international inhabitants hasn't slowed! If we are experiencing greater warmth, does not that be good for the flora? it could be good to have genetically changed vegetation, besides. flora and wood soak up CO2 and supply off Oxygen, so does not a larger quantity be good? it could be good if a scientist had a assertion, like a flesh presser, so we could desire to hearken to from the horses mouth! according to possibility scientist could desire to be greater taken with Earth than Mars!
2016-12-30 04:04:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
We are still fighting the introduction of GM crops in Australia because it's been proven to transfer to other crops via bees, etc. Many Japanese companys buy our wheat because we can prove it is not GM crops or is organically grown.
2007-05-28 05:45:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by min 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pish-tush my good man; the opinions of the common mob should have little bearing on the policies of those of us who know better. Let them entertain their tiny minds with 'reality shows' and blood-sports and they will plod their placid, bovine way at the direction of the men in charge.
2007-05-28 07:42:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by John R 7
·
0⤊
0⤋