It isn't easy being GREEN - Political Fever

Curmudgeon · #1 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 09:27 PM

Democrats planning the convention in Denver are having trouble going green! Imagine that!
Wall Street Journal

Quote:

DENVER -- As the Mile High City gears up to host a Democratic bash for 50,000, organizers are discovering the perils of trying to stage a political spectacle that's also politically correct.

Consider the fanny packs.

With biodegradable balloons and organic snacks, Denver Democrats hope to stage the "greenest convention" ever. See examples.
The host committee for the Democratic National Convention wanted 15,000 fanny packs for volunteers. But they had to be made of organic cotton. By unionized labor. In the USA.

Official merchandiser Bob DeMasse scoured the country. His weary conclusion: "That just doesn't exist."

Ditto for the baseball caps. "We have a union cap or an organic cap," Mr. DeMasse says. "But we don't have a union-organic offering."

Quote:

..."lean 'n' green" catering guidelines.

Among them: No fried food. And, on the theory that nutritious food is more vibrant, each meal should include "at least three of the following colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple, and white." (Garnishes don't count.) At least 70% of ingredients should be organic or grown locally, to minimize emissions from fuel burned during transportation. "One would think," says Mr. Burns, "that the Democrats in Denver have bigger fish to bake -- they have ruled out frying already -- than mandating color-coordinated pretzel platters."

Democrats say the point is to build habits that will endure long after the convention. To that end, the city has staged "greening workshops" attended by hundreds of caterers, restaurant owners and hotel managers. "It's the new patriotism," Mayor Hickenlooper says.

Laura Hylton, general manager of Biscuits & Berries catering, agrees in principle. But she has been testing her recipes using local ingredients for weeks and still can't get the green peppercorn sauce right when she uses white Colorado wine. The state's high-altitude wine industry took off in the early 1990s and produces some award-winning labels, but Ms. Hylton says diplomatically, "It's a little...lacking. Our wineries out here aren't what you'd see in California or France."

Quote:

Joanne Katz, who runs the Denver caterer Three Tomatoes, will take one for the green team by removing her fried goat-cheese won tons with chipotle pepper caramel sauce from the menu. But she questions whether some of the guidelines will have the desired earth-saving effects.

Compostable utensils, she says, are often shipped from Asia on fuel-guzzling cargo ships. As for the plates: "Is it better to drive across town to have china delivered to an event and then use hot water to wash it, or is it better to use petroleum-based disposables?" she asks.

Any thoughts on this subject?

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #2 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 09:33 PM

Yea, I don't know what the big fuss about organic is, given there really is no set US standard for organic. Organic suppliers can actually say whatever they want and slap the organic label on it.

Moreover, organic foods require more agricultural land, which ultimately displaces more animals and does more harm over a wider area because it's inefficient and can't produce the volume of food required using the same land. I don't get the whole organic = green fad.

As for the utensils, distance travelled isn't always a deciding factor, as sea travel is very efficient relative to the quantity of items delivered. It's almost impossible to calculate every variable, though, in normal consumption.

AnnEsthesia · #3 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 09:36 PM

Links to facts would be nice instead of just opinion.

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #4 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 09:37 PM

They are facts. Not opinion. It's actually common knowledge that organic farming's inefficient.

AnnEsthesia · #5 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 09:38 PM

So, get some links and prove it. That is a major component in debate.

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #6 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 09:43 PM

sigh. This is like proving to someone 2+2=4.

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #7 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 09:43 PM

Moved to other thread*

Chan · #8 (**permalink**) 06-26-2008, 09:21 AM

And here I was hoping this was a thread about Kermit the Frog.

Zephyr · #9 (**permalink**) 06-26-2008, 10:00 AM

I don't really see the point of the OP.

Birdzeye · #10 (**permalink**) 06-26-2008, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

A little pesticide does you good but 'organic' farming harms the world - Telegraph

Organic is essentially another bullsh*t fad. There is really no evidence it's safer, it doesn't actually taste better, and it it's yields can get up to 20-50% less than technological intensive agriculture. In fact, you even even get sick from it if the manure isn't handled properly, and many pests that aren't killed end up causing problems. Add the ridiculous expense for the fancy label and it just plain sucks.

I got more coming.

Here's another from the International Journal of Science explaining why Organic is a healthful dose of bullsh*t. It is a for pay article, but the first paragraph explains what I am talking about generally. It indicates that organic farming is low yield and the tone of the article is that there's no scientific evidence to support their claims and that it's not actually better for the environment. It wastes land, which displaces more animals and causes a greater footprint. In order to get the same yield, the total area of farmland must be increased significantly.

Access : : Nature

BBC NEWS | Disposable planet

Here is the article listed above in Nature.

So there we have it.

Myth 1: Organic foods taste better
Myth 2: Organic foods are safer
Myth 3: Organic farms have higher biodiversity
Myth 4: Organic farms are efficient.
Myth 5: Organic farms are environmentally friendly.

It sounds cute and happy and fuzzy and "green" but it's superficial and just plain....bullsht--a heaping pile of pseudocience and quackery. We ought to use GM more extensively, but like with vaccines and nuclear power, people are sheeple, gullible, and are afraid of it. Easy targets for propaganda. If we would drop the chemical, artificial pesticides as organics want us to, we would lose roughly half the grain supply we now produce, unless we significantly increased farmland.

These are both opinion/commentary pieces. Let's see some REAL evidence, please, like some scholarly research results in a peer reviewed journal. (Granted, Nature is peer reviewed, but the link cited is, as I said, just a commentary.)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name		Remember Me?
Password