A new genetically modified rice makes more food, less greenhouse gas

[ConservativeDemocrat]

Genetically modified rice makes more food, less greenhouse gas
A 50 percent boost in rice, with methane dropping by 90 percent.

When it comes to major anthropogenic sources of methane (an important greenhouse gas), livestock and leaky natural gas wells and pipelines might come to mind. However, rice cultivation is also among the largest sources. Microbes in wetlands, where water saturation leads to low-oxygen conditions, produce most of the world’s methane, and rice paddies are essentially human-controlled wetlands.

Down in the warm muck of a rice paddy, the roots of the rice plant release some organic compounds, and they eventually die off and decay themselves, providing the food that microbes turn into methane. Researchers are working on ways to limit that methane production, but this will always be a secondary concern for farmers. Yields rule the day, especially as demand is growing. But a 2002 study hinted at a win-win: increase above-ground growth at the expense of below-ground growth, and yield goes up while methane production goes down.

A great idea, but how to make it happen? A group of researchers led by Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences researchers Jun Su, Changquan Hu, and Xia Yan have used a gene from barley to create a genetically modified rice plant that does just that.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[SoLeftIAmRight]

1. another stupid idea...

the solutions to the destructive force of agriculture are known - gmo's are not part of it

[progressoid]

2. Reducing methane output by 90 percent is a stupid idea?

Considering that methane is roughly 30 times more potent than CO2, it seems like an excellent idea.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

3. I did not say that - sounds like you have an agenda

I said that the solutions to sustainable agriculture exist - any smart person knows (or should know) about them

[DetlefK]

5. Ordinary plants are way too inefficient for sustainably feeding 7 billion people.

Just so you know: Scientists are currently trying to splice a superior version of chlorophyll into the genetic blueprint of plants. Prepare for blue lettuce. Not kidding.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

7. that is not true

there are solutions - gmo's have no part in them

informed people know about sustainable agriculture

[DetlefK]

8. Well, I'm uninformed. Please inform me.

What kind of yields does sustainable agriculture have compared to a conventional agriculture?

How much workforce/money is needed for sustainable agriculture compared to conventional agriculture?

How does sustainable agriculture combat insects?

How does sustainable agriculture combat weeds?

[SoLeftIAmRight]

9. I agree with you

the information is easy to find

your last two questions make me laugh - please open your eyes

your second question is important - yes, money for farm programs should be reallocated
- the question of the amount of labor needed will have to be addressed -

Your first question goes to the heart of the issue - soil - without good soil there is no future agriculture and that is where you should look first

Allan Savory - Gabe Brown - Mike Hands

[DetlefK]

10. That doesn't explain anything.

Soil. There is only so much soil, but the world-population is increasing. We need ever-increasing amounts of food from the same area of the same soil.
How does sustainable agriculture address that?

How many people does it take in sustainable agriculture and how does their salary influence the price of food?

If insects ruin fruits, should we just toss them on the compost-heap or feed them to the pigs like we used to?
Ever heard of the potato-bug? And the famines he caused?

Should we rip out weeds by hand, like we used to?



You answered none of my questions and you didn't even provide a link to support your wild claims. That's bad manners.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

13. I can not open your eyes for you

Solutions are there - you can live with your lack of understanding of them or you can explore them - your choice

[DetlefK]

16. But you COULD answer my questions.

Here's how arguments work: You make a claim, you prove it.



If you had anything backing up your case, you would have googled it within 10 seconds and posted a link. But you didn't. Coincidence?

[SoLeftIAmRight]

17. I gave you three people to study - that is what science is about

look at all the information - not just the information that confirms your beliefs

I will give you a little help - since you seem to have trouble using the google

Ted talk - desertification solution

https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change


Same idea - for farms - this is not his best talk - will keep looking

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=grazing%20cover%20crops%20in%20north%20dakota&qs=RI&form=QBVR&pq=cover%20crops%20north%20da&sc=5-20&sp=3&sk=SC1RI1&first=1#view=detail&mid=ACF38AFC299CB6EE9983ACF38AFC299CB6EE9983



many more - carbon binding farms

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=cover+crops+sustainable+agriculture&FORM=HDRSC3



Organic Agriculture could sequester more than 100% of current annual CO2 emissions
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016128460


Mike Hands for sustainable agriculture in rain forest

Look at alley cropping


These are just a scratch at the surface

[DetlefK]

18. Thank you. Now was this so hard?

[cstanleytech]

46. "How does sustainable agriculture address that?" It cant, no matter what some half baked idiot

might try to claim the truth is we are on a planet that has limited resources and eventually the wheels will fall off and we will be SOL.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

11. So you're saying "Study it out"?

You're making an extraordinary claim without backing it up with evidence, and when humbly challenged, you "agree" with someone else being humble.

This appears to be a manifest improvement on existing rice genomes. If you have a specific objection founded in science, rather than woo, you should raise it. The ball is in your court.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

/ I expect something better than a platitude like "without good soil there is no future agriculture".

[SoLeftIAmRight]

14. reality? platitude?

You have shown me that you are not willing to explore new ideas -

spend a few hours studying the issue - then we will talk about viability

[ConservativeDemocrat]

21. Yes. A platitude

This is about methane and rice fields, not CO2 and combating desertification.

And far more importantly, unlike the topics you're trying to insert into this conversation, this increases crop yields, so it is naturally economical, not a cost that needs to be supported. This new type of GMO rice will be far cheaper in the grocery store, not some high-end expensive item that can only be afforded by those already doing well.

To leave you with a final thought, it isn't even always correct that you need good soils for good crops. Some plants (notably wine grapes) actually prefer poorer soils, as they're evolved to grow in them, and plantings in poor soils naturally discourage competing weeds and parasites that would otherwise flourish.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[SoLeftIAmRight]

25. wrong

Rice - really?

your solution is rice???

and grapes grown in "poorer" soil

you can leave me out of that "Proud Member of the Reality Based Community "

[ConservativeDemocrat]

28. Son, I know the field I'm in.

Literally.

Rice is a staple crop, or rather the staple crop. Nothing else comes close to it. It feeds over half the population of the planet. So in your ignorance you may dismiss it, but for people who understand these things, this is a very big deal.

But since you've been kind enough to write a couple of paragraphs to me on the DU without actually accusing me of being a NAZI, why don't you go google my tag line before you rag on it too much. I wouldn't want you to get too mixed up.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[SoLeftIAmRight]

31. because something IS does not mean that it should be

I do not think we should continue on our current trajectory

Reality-based community is an informal term in the United States, used to refer to people who base their opinions more on observation than on planning

"opinions more on observation"

observe what we are doing to the soil - Mr. reality - and find that if we do not change our system of food production to methods that enrich the land we will have great trouble feeding a fraction of the current population

gmo rice is not the answer

[ConservativeDemocrat]

32. Entire cultures are built around rice

And half the world's population would starve to death without it.

Those are simple, irrefutable, facts.


Let me finally add that usually only the young and well-nourished are so cavalier about food security. You may hate GMOs in the abstract, but there are millions of people today whose next meal depends on them; meals that, unlike fat Americans, they really can't afford to skip. And talking about soil in near religious terms won't change that.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[SoLeftIAmRight]

33. do you read what your write?

more than half of the worlds population depends on one food crop for most of their calories

it does not take a rocket scientist to see that this reality might be more than a little foolish
that is a simple, irrefutable, fact

only a fool believes that the current agricultural system is sustainable
only a crazy person believes that tinkering with genes is the best approach to solving the problems

[ConservativeDemocrat]

34. The poor are not "foolish". They're desperate.

I mean I suppose one could indeed argue that the world's poor to be absurdly foolish in terms of overpopulating the planet, but many of these people come from cultures in which, literally a hundred years ago, 70% of babies didn't make it to the age of two - due to horrific childhood diseases. So they're not particularly used to birth control, or with the idea of valuing women for more than their ability to bear children. President Obama made a point to talk about that in Kenya recently.

Medicine wiped the scourge of plague from humanity, but we're still haunted by famine until we bring overpopulation under control.

In the mean time though, have some heart. It's not a baby's fault that their parents gave them six siblings.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[SoLeftIAmRight]

35. I believe that you do not understand agiculture

and have not looked at the question of sustainability properly

we will all starve if we do not change

be well

diversity is important - remember the potato famine

We need a complete conversion of the agricultural systems.
It will not be fast, easy, or cheap.
The issue is too important to let corporations control make the decisions.


This is only the beginning – hope to spend the time to expand

Sustainable production – less input – co2 sequestration – no gmo's


Start with

Allan Savory – Ted Talk

http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change

Then
Gabe Brown
Soil health

This talk is directed to farmers that have a anti-environmental bend – so less emphasis on environmental issues – when speaking to a more enlightened group his talk is less country twang and more science based

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=gabe+brown+soil+health&FORM=HDRSC3#view=detail&mid=4145088DB3EF49DFB8CF4145088DB3EF49DFB8CF


Mike Hands – this is only a little info on this subject – see the full documentary

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=mike%20hands%20inga%20frontline&qs=n&form=QBVR&pq=mike%20hands%20inga%20frontline&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=#view=detail&mid=46F489526F819D99DF6E46F489526F819D99DF6E



People to start with

Allan Savory
Gabe Brown
Mike Hands
Michael White

Concepts to start with

monoculture
alley cropping
no-till
cover crops
mob grazing
soil health
local production
crop diversity
composting
green manure


Other issues

Is it wise to send our soil to feed livestock in other countries
where do farm subsidies go and it that where they should go
are big agri-businesses promoting a form of agri that is sustainable
where is the rain – where is the agriculture


Other resources





Much more to come

If you want more science try Dr. Jill Clapperton

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=gabe+brown+soil+health&form=HDRSC3&first=1#view=detail&mid=A0CCD0CA92DCF1C4A621A0CCD0CA92DCF1C4A621


The problems with big agri corps and their products

Michael White vs Monsanto –

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017282430


Mike Hands – more about inga

http://www.ingafoundation.org/mike-hands/




Ted Talk on neighbor gardens

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017281878



food variety

http://www.upworthy.com/we-used-to-have-307-kinds-of-corn-guess-how-many-are-left


4000 potato varieties

http://cipotato.org/potato/facts/




rice – 40,000 varieties

http://www.riceassociation.org.uk/content/1/10/varieties.html



Apples

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/04/heritage-apples-john-bunker-maine

[ConservativeDemocrat]

36. You're talking to a farmer

And though I don't grow rice, I know what I'm talking about.
You be well as well.
We're going to have to agree to disagree.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Cleita]

27. Maybe population reduction by giving women full power over

their fertility and reproduction would be more successful than introducing questionable products into the food chain.

[progressoid]

22. Yes, I have an agenda.

Combating global warming.

[muriel_volestrangler]

39. Yes you did, in the title of your reply #1

It says "another stupid idea", if you can't read it any more.

[roody]

4. How much pesticide and herbicide does it need?

[Xipe Totec]

6. And is the seed self-propagating, or do you have to buy it again for each crop? nt

[ConservativeDemocrat]

12. Terminator seeds are largely a myth, outside of experimentation

Hell, it's even a myth that Monsanto sold them.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Xipe Totec]

15. Who said anything about terminator seeds? I'm talking about Monsanto Lawsuits

When farmers purchase a patented seed variety, they sign an agreement that they will not save and replant seeds produced from the seed they buy from us. More than 325,000 farmers a year buy seed under these agreements in the United States. Other seed companies sell their seed under similar provisions.

http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/why-does-monsanto-sue-farmers-who-save-seeds.aspx

Nice misdirection though.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

19. i think some people have an agenda

thanks for your good information

[ConservativeDemocrat]

20. Your question makes no sense unless you're talking about terminator seeds

Because this is the result of research being done in Sweeden.

Presumably the biologists involved in the creation of these seeds will want to make some money off of their work. But the business details haven't been worked out yet.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[roody]

23. In other words, no, people will not

be permitted to save their seeds.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

24. You can assume anything you want.

I have no idea how the researchers will be paid. Perhaps the government of Sweden will buy out their interest, and give the results away. Who knows?

You certainly don't.


But, while we're on the topic, Mr. High and Mighty, when you work do you expect not to be paid?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Cleita]

26. More frankenfood to pollute our food chain. No thanks.

I can't eat bread anymore because the wheat has been altered into something different. Now the scientists are messing with my rice.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

29. Wheat hasn't been altered, but I think I know what your problem is

Glyphosate, also known as roundup, is quite often sprayed on wheat crops prior to harvest. Wheat naturally matures its seeds at an accelerated pace when the plant starts to die, so by using the spray the farmers increase the yield.

Unfortunately glyphosate is flat out not safe. There are studies that show that it alters the gut bacteria, and other hints that it may even be a carcinogen. Many people also have strong allergies to it.

Much of the rise of so-called "gluten intolerance" is almost certainly misidentified glyphosate allergic reactions, and worse - much of the so-called "organic" wheat flour (all "non-GMO" mind you) sold in the U.S. is polluted with the same amount of glyphosate as the regular stuff.

If you're rich, you can test this out by ordering actual bread from France, and seeing if you can tolerate it. http://www.lepetitfrancais.com/

Again though, this has absolutely nothing to do with GMOs whatsoever. Try not to get the two issues confused.

- C.D. Proud Member of he Reality Based Community

[recycled60]

37. RoundUp needs to be outlawed

Not really but it does need to be kept away, far away from anything someone or some thing you value might eat. Even using on the lawn or flower bed is not good for what ails you. Weeds die but so do the bacteria that encourage good plant growth that eventually discourage weeds.
BTW CD - agree that the sustainability spokesman above needs to get his act together if he want any converts. If you want to win folks over to your side you first need to not insult them and second to offer up some support of your position. Both of which you do well. Reminds me of this: [link:

|

[ConservativeDemocrat]

38. It needs more study to be able to outlaw it in foodstuffs

Mind you, I don't have a problem with it to kill poison ivy. Or in the off-season. (It degrades quickly.) But at the very very least Organic foods shouldn't have it.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[recycled60]

41. I don't have the links handy but.....

I think the newest studies will show it to be a totally unacceptable chemical combo and force Monsanto to remove it from all markets.

[Orrex]

43. I'll just leave this here

[ConservativeDemocrat]

44. I doubt that any study will result in it being outlawed entirely

It has too many applications outside that of food production.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[darkangel218]

30. I pass, thank you. Nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

40. And, because the words 'genetically modified' scare people, this will be delayed 5 to 10 years

while they figure out a way to achieve the same thing with traditional breeding methods.

After larger-scale trials and more precise measurements of exact methane emissions and yield of the genetically modified rice, Sun says, the next step is to use traditional breeding to make a rice variety that’s “basically the same scientifically” as the genetically modified rice, including the same gene. “Right now of course it’s a GMO issue, and we cannot deliver this variety directly to farmers. We have to use traditional breeding methods and breed the new, society-acceptable variety for farmers.” This will take an additional five to 10 years.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/539536/new-gmo-rice-for-higher-yield-less-global-warming/

[drm604]

45. Ridiculous, isn't it?

We complain about the right being anti-science, and they are. Overall they're much worse about it than the left. But the left can also be anti-science. For some reason, on the left, it's mostly about food, even to the point of rejecting things that could be good for the climate, something we're otherwise very interested in protecting.

We chastise the right on climate change; telling them that they're going against the vast majority of scientific opinion. Their response is to point to the dissident few who disagree, and to claim that scientists are being threatened or bought out by people with ulterior motives.

But the left does the same thing with things like GMO. They go against the vast majority of scientists and, when this is pointed out, point to questionable websites to support their fears, and say that the scientists are being controlled by Monsanto.

[Orrex]

42. Has Vandana Shiva declared this rice evil yet?

If not, then she's behind schedule.