Saturday 31 March 2012

A 'Vertical Greenhouse' Could Make a Swedish City Self-Sufficient

By Julie Ma
The future of urban farming is under construction in Sweden as agricultural design firm Plantagon works to bring a 12-year-old vision to life: The city of Linkoping will soon be home to a 17-story "vertical greenhouse."

The greenhouse will serve as a regenerating food bank, tackling urban sprawl while making the city self-sufficient. Plantagon predicts that growing these plants in the city will make food production less costly both for the environment and for consumers, a key shift as the world's population grows increasingly urban-80 percent of the world's residents will live in cities by 2050, the United Nations estimates. "Essentially, as urban sprawl and lack of land will demand solutions for how to grow industrial volumes in the middle of the city, solutions on this problem have to focus on high yield per ground area used, lack of water, energy, and air to house carbon dioxide," Plantagon CEO Hans Hassle says.

The greenhouse is a conical glass building that uses an internal "transportation helix" to carry potted vegetables around on conveyors. As plants travel around the helix, they rotate for maximum sun exposure. Hassle says the building will use less energy than a traditional greenhouse, take advantage of "spillage heat" energy companies cannot sell, digest waste to produce biogas and plant fertilizers, and decrease carbon dioxide emissions while eliminating the environmental costs of long-distance transportation. And growing plants in a controlled environment will decrease the amount of water, energy, and pesticides needed. 


View the Original article

Friday 30 March 2012

Farming Communities Facing Crisis over Nitrate Pollution, Study Says

By Stett Holbrook
Nitrate contamination in groundwater from fertilizer and animal manure is severe and getting worse for hundreds of thousands of residents in California's Central Valley farming communities, according to a study released Tuesday by researchers at the University of California, Davis.

Nearly 10 percent of the 2.6 million people living in the Tulare Lake Basin and Salinas Valley might be drinking nitrate-contaminated water, researchers found. And if nothing is done to stem the problem, the report warns, nearly 80 percent of residents could be at risk of health and financial problems by 2050.

High nitrate levels in drinking water have been linked to thyroid cancer, skin rashes, hair loss, birth defects and "blue baby syndrome," a potentially fatal blood disorder in infants.

The report is the most comprehensive assessment so far of nitrate contamination in California's agricultural areas.

The problem is much, much, much worse than we thought," said Angela Schroeter, agricultural regulatory program manager for the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, a state water agency.


View the Original article

Thursday 29 March 2012

Fifty-Five Members Of Congress Call On FDA To Require Labeling Of Genetically Engineered Foods

Center For Food Safety, This morning a bicameral letter signed by 55 Members of Congress was sent to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Margaret Hamburg calling on the agency to require the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods. The bicameral, bipartisan letter led by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) was written in support of a legal petition filed by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) on behalf of the Just Label It campaign and its nearly 400 partner organizations and businesses; many health, consumer, environmental, and farming organizations, as well as food companies, are also signatories.  Since CFS filed the labeling petition in October 2011, the public has submitted over 850,000 comments in support of labeling.

"Consumers are being misled about the foods they are purchasing," said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director for the Center for Food Safety.  "FDA's two-decade old decision is bad policy based on outdated science and must be revoked.  The American consumer deserves the same fundamental freedoms and choices of other nations' citizens."

In the U.S. there is overwhelming public demand-consistently near 95%-for the labeling of GE foods.  The U.S. policy of not requiring GE labeling makes it a stark outlier among developed and developing nations.  Nearly 50 countries have mandatory labeling policies for GE foods including South Korea, Japan, the United Kingdom, Brazil, China, Australia, New Zealand, the entire European Union, and many others.

In its 1992 policy statement, FDA allowed GE foods to be marketed without labeling on the basis that they were not "materially" different from other foods.  However, the agency severely limited what it considered "material" by targeting only changes in food that could be recognized by taste, smell, or other senses - applying 19th century science to the regulation of 21st century food technologies.  The outdated standard has no legal basis in the statute and was adopted by FDA despite a lack of scientific studies or data to support the assumption that GE foods are not materially different from conventional foods.


View the Original article

Wednesday 28 March 2012

Marin's Organic War on Pests

By Nels Johnson

Veteran county landscape chief David Hattem and his colleagues are waging a nontoxic war against pests, armed with weeding gloves, mulch, custom vermin traps, rodent-hunting owls and other organic weapons including predatory insects.

You could hardly see the 2,000 tiny encarsia formosa stingless wasp pupae, or the 1,000 delphastus catalinae beetles Hattem spread in the foliage and interior gardens inside the Marin County Civic Center on Thursday. They joined 250 cryptolaemus beetles released in the building a couple weeks ago.

The predatory critters feast on white flies and mealybugs while posing no harm to workers, visitors or gardens. It was the third time in a year that bugs have been unleashed to combat other bugs at the Civic Center.

Hattem's crew in the past year also battled an invasion of sow bugs at the county jail with organic "Eco Exempt" products, erected owl nesting boxes at the Civic Center, deployed several dozen custom box rat traps with small entry holes that block other animals, pulled weeds by hand and installed "sheets" of mulch to repel invasive plant growth.

It's all part of the county's award-winning integrated pest management program that has become a national model of how to curb weeds, rats, wasps, garden bugs and related pests without harming the environment. The goal is to minimize use of chemicals while eliminating use of toxic material whenever possible.


View the Original article

Tuesday 27 March 2012

Regional Democrats urge FDA to label GMOs

By Jason Hoppin
Santa Cruz - Highlighting a growing issue in California and across the county, a group of 55 Democratic lawmakers on Monday urged the Food and Drug Administration to require the labeling of genetically modified foods.

A letter sent to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg endorses the approach taken by a group of environmentalists, food labeling advocates and organic food producers who are petitioning the agency to reverse a 20-year-old, hands-off policy toward alerting consumers to genetically altered foods.

"Two decades later, I think we've seen a shift in consumer dialogue. People want more information," said Colin O'Neil, a regulatory policy analyst at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Food Safety, who praised the letter.

In 1992, the FDA declined to label genetically altered food, reasoning that if it looks, smells and tastes similar to non-modified foods, no label was needed. But later FDA rulings - including one dealing with irradiated food - have taken a stricter line and called for more disclosure.

"At issue is the fundamental right consumers have to make informed choices about the food they eat," the lawmakers' letter reads. "Labeling foods doesn't imply a product is unsafe or will be confusing to consumers as some may argue."

FDA officials could not be immediately reached for comment. More than four dozen countries require labels on genetically altered food.

The letter was signed by both California's U.S. Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, and 14 Democratic members of Congress, including Reps. Anna Eshoo, of Palo Alto, and Sam Farr, of Carmel, the latter of whom represents the fertile Salinas and Pajaro valleys.

The federal petition is separate from a statewide initiative now circulating to put food labeling on the November ballot. The California effort would slap a general label on any genetically modified food, while the FDA petition aims to note which specific ingredients have been modified.


View the Original article

Monday 26 March 2012

Organic Produce from China: Can You Trust it?

By Deborah Kotz
A few days ago, my mother forwarded me a link to a local TV news report accusing Whole Foods of selling organic frozen vegetables, under its 365 brand, that were picked and packaged in China -- including one called California Blend. While some Chinese farmers, no doubt, stick to guidelines for growing organic by curtailing their use of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, many may not, and it's tough for a consumer to discern from the packaging, according to Charles Benbrook, chief scientist of the non-profit Organic Center.

I stopped by Whole Foods today and found frozen organic edamame that came from China -- see the photo of the product above -- but was unable to find other frozen vegetables from China.

Whole Foods spokesperson Heather McCready told me via e-mail that the company was well aware of the "misleading and inaccurate" news report that first ran in May 2008.

"As of the summer of 2010, we are no longer sourcing any of our Whole Foods Market 365 Everyday Value frozen vegetables from China EXCEPT for frozen edamame (shelled and unshelled, organic and conventional)," McCready wrote. "We want to be clear that we didn't stop sourcing from China because of quality or food safety concerns."

Whole Foods said it was a business decision made after finding other suppliers in the United States and elsewhere that could supply the same or better quality at cheaper prices.

I did notice that several packages of the store's organic frozen vegetables were packaged in Mexico and wondered how much trust consumers can put into organic seals from other countries. In the United States, the organic seal falls under the regulation of the US Department of Agriculture with strict standards on the use of artificial chemicals, irradiation, and genetic engineering. That seal can also be used for foods packaged in other countries that have US accredited inspectors.


View the Original article

Sunday 25 March 2012

Fake Meat America Could Love by Tom Philpott

By Tom Philpott
I've always recoiled from highly processed and packaged fake meat: you know, turkeyesque tofu logs for the holiday table, or pink, spongy "not-dogs" for the summer grill. But in last Sunday's New York Times, Mark Bittman raised a provocative question:

 Isn't it preferable, at least some of the time, to eat plant products mixed with water that have been put through a thingamajiggy that spews out meatlike stuff, instead of eating those same plant products put into a chicken that does its biomechanical thing for the six weeks of its miserable existence, only to have its throat cut in the service of yielding barely distinguishable meat?  Why, in other words, use the poor chicken as a machine to produce meat when you can use a machine to produce "meat" that seems like chicken?            

Bittman's point is spot-on. You can't directly eat the kind of corn and soy that dominates US farmland-it isn't readily digestible. Modern livestock farms are really factories for turning those crops into animal flesh that can be transformed into steaks, chops, wings, nuggets, and whatnot. And in doing so, Bittman points out, factory farms rack up enormous collateral damage: horrific suffering for sentient creatures, huge stores of manure that can't be safely recycled into soil, over-reliance on antibiotics, routine abuse of labor in factory-scale slaughterhouses, and more.

It's especially tragic, then, the meat produced in these factories is pretty flavorless, especially if you've tasted a truly free-range chicken against a factory one, or a grass-fed burger alongside its feedlot analogue. So why, Bittman asks, not leave the birds, hogs, and cows out of it and just directly consume the feed crops after they've been processed to taste something like meat? By doing do, you sacrifice little or no flavor, while sidelining a whole raft of destructive practices.

Bittman points to a company called Savage River Farms that has produced a soy-based product that mimics chicken, down to the way it shreds. Bittman says he couldn't tell it from real chicken when he was served a burrito made with it.


View the Original article

Saturday 24 March 2012

Can Grass-Based Ranching be Scaled up Sustainably?

By Tom Laskawy
You've probably never heard of Frank Stronach. Sure, he's a Canadian billionaire - yes, they have them there! - and an auto-parts cum horseracing magnate. But rather than hanging up his wrench spurs retiring, he's decided to try his hand at turning grass-fed beef back into a mass-market product.

According to this report in Macleans (Canada's equivalent of TIME magazine), Stronach is buying up land outside of Ocala, Fla., at a furious pace - 70,000 acres and counting. His plan: to create a massive ranch with "30,000 cattle, a 61,000-sq.-foot abattoir that would slaughter up to 300 cows a day, and a biomass power plant that would extract methane from manure." It's a grand vision:

 Stronach's Adena Springs ranch plans to market its beef to Florida grocery stores for consumers keen on fresh local produce, as well as serve the meat at Stronach's network of racetracks. There are plans for a restaurant chain that would serve Adena Meats, and Stronach hopes to expand the business across the United States and Canada.

But it's not just the numbers that caught my eye. So did the fact that he intends to put slaughter facilities on the ranch itself and to raise and finish the cattle on grass. According to Adena Springs' General Manager Mark Roberts, Stronach - echoing many a sustainable livestock farming advocate - expects the cows "will have all good days and then one bad day."

Despite those sentiments, at the scale he's planning, he's not exactly a latter-day Joel Salatin (who believes the proper scale for an individual operation is small). And he stands in contrast even to one of the few "large-scale" natural meat operations already out there - Niman Ranch, which achieved its significant capacity through a network of small farms.



View the Original article

Friday 23 March 2012

A Brief History of Genetically Engineered Trees

By Sarah Harrison

Even the introduction of non-GE tree monocultures has been proven to have an incredibly damaging effect on local eco-systems and communities. Eucalyptus trees are already considered to be an invasive species in Florida and California and have a whole host of associated problems due their flammability and high demand for water.

Despite all the evidence, the USDA continues to support development of these and other GE trees, so what are the links between the multinational companies and the regulatory bodies that are supposed to protect the environment? With ArborGen's pending controversial application to the USDA to grow flowering GE Eucalyptus trees in commercial plantations across the US it seems appropriate to have a look at the history of GE field trials across the globe and the regulation (or lack of it) that has been in place over the last 20 years.

Early GE Trials

The first field trials of GE trees were started in Belgium in 1988 when researchers began to develop GE Poplars which were genetically modified to be resistant to herbicides. By 1999 the Biotech nightmare was a reality with multinationals such as Monsanto, International Paper, Fletcher Challenge Forests and the Westvaco Corporation supporting GE tree trials at over 116 sites in 17 countries including Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Finland, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain, UK, USA and Uruguay.

The first trees to get the GE treatment were the fast growing varieties such as Eucalyptus, Poplars and Pines with the intention to produce crops that were herbicide and/or insect resistant, faster growing and produced higher yields for the timber and pulp industries.  Naturally all of these tendencies would result in higher profit margins for the companies that were investing in them rather than enhanced benefit to the environment.


View the Original article

Low Doses, Big Effects: Scientists Seek 'Fundamental Changes' in Testing, Regulation of Hormone-like Chemicals

By Marla Cone


That is a main finding of a report, three years in the making, published Wednesday by a team of 12 scientists who study hormone-altering chemicals.

Dozens of substances that can mimic or block estrogen, testosterone and other hormones are found in the environment, the food supply and consumer products, including plastics, pesticides and cosmetics. One of the biggest, longest-lasting controversies about these chemicals is whether the tiny doses that most people are exposed to are harmful.

In the new report, researchers led by Tufts University's Laura Vandenberg concluded after examining hundreds of studies that health effects "are remarkably common" when people or animals are exposed to low doses of endocrine-disrupting compounds. As examples, they provide evidence for several controversial chemicals, including bisphenol A, found in polycarbonate plastic, canned foods and paper receipts, and the pesticide atrazine, used in large volumes mainly on corn.

The scientists concluded that scientific evidence "clearly indicates that low doses cannot be ignored." They cited evidence of a wide range of health effects in people - from fetuses to aging adults - including links to infertility, cardiovascular disease, obesity, cancer and other disorders.

"Whether low doses of endocrine-disrupting compounds influence human disorders is no longer conjecture, as epidemiological studies show that environmental exposures are associated with human diseases and disabilities," they wrote. 


View the Original article

Thursday 22 March 2012

Occupy Monsanto to Visit a Genetically Modified Congress

By Adam Eidinger

WASHINGTON DC - On Friday, March 16, 2012, Occupy Monsanto's agents of change with the Genetic Crimes Unit (GCU), a group designed to protect America from genetically modified foods, will wear bio-hazmat suits when they visit Congress. The group will gather at Capitol South Metro station at noon on March 16 to highlight how chemical company Monsanto is contaminating our political process. The GCU opposes Monsanto's bid to increase spraying of food with toxic weed killers like 2,4 D (the main ingredient in Agent Orange), genetic contamination of the organic food supply, and other risks associated with genetically modified food (GMOs).

The GCU will arrive at the metro station wearing bio-hazmat suits to assess whether Members of Congress and their staff have been victims of genetic crimes. The GCU will hold a banner that reads, "Congress is Genetically Modified," as they circulate on Capitol Hill sidewalks. This day of action is part of a larger international call to 'Occupy Monsanto' taking place all over the globe including Spain, Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and at least 28 cities throughout the US.

"In the name of Wall Street profits, chemical corporations such as Monsanto genetically engineer crops to withstand high doses of their toxic weed killers that contaminate our food and water, and have not been proven safe. We deserve to know what we are eating. Virtually every major country requires labeling of GMOs in foods so their citizens can make informed choices, including all of Europe, Japan and even China," said GCU's Ariel Vegosen. "Monsanto's lobbying dollars are pouring into politicians so its clear we have a GMO contaminated US Congress that threatens our health and the health of the planet," says Vegosen.

WHO: Occupy Monsanto's Genetic Crimes Unit (GCU)
WHAT: ID'ing Victims of Monsanto's Genetic Crimes by GCU Agents in Bio-Hazmat Suits
WHEN: Friday, March 16, Noon
WHERE: Cannon Building: Independence Ave. SE, Washington, DC, 20540, corner NJ Ave

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has introduced three bills addressing concerns with GMOs. In addition, more than 900,000 people have signed onto the JustLabelit.org citizens' petition to the Food and Drug Administration for GMO labeling (the most to sign an FDA petition ever). Last fall about 100 people marched in the Right2Know March from New York to the White House to demand President Obama keep his campaign promise to label GMO foods. Video of the promise can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v

View the Original article

Wednesday 21 March 2012

California Farms Get Testy Over Water Quality

By Melinda Burns

The world's most pervasive groundwater pollution problem - nitrate in drinking water - is under scrutiny in the richest farming region of the United States.

This week, a report for the California Legislature revealed that 250,000 people living in Central California, including four of the top five agricultural counties in the U.S., are currently at risk for nitrate contamination in their drinking water. Many of them are among the poorest Californians.

Nitrate, in this instance, is a byproduct of nitrogen fertilizer. In drinking water, high concentrations of it can interfere with the oxygen-carrying capacity of infants younger than six months, and, if left untreated, may lead to death from "blue baby" syndrome. Some studies suggest that long-term consumption of nitrate in drinking water may increase the risk of Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and cancer, including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Europe began tackling the problem in 1991 by designating "vulnerable zones" where the groundwater and streams were polluted with nitrate. Those zones now encompass 40 percent of the landmass in the continent. Today, 27 countries test for nitrate at 31,000 monitoring stations on or near farmland; and, with some overlap, at 27,000 monitoring stations in lakes, streams, and the ocean. Since 1991, reports show, nitrate use has dropped off sharply in Europe.


View the Original article

Tuesday 20 March 2012

GE Mosquito Makes Floridians Part of Oxitec's Grand Experiment

Food & Water Watch, Statement from Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director, Food Water Watch

"The Florida Keys Mosquito Control District meets tomorrow to discuss the application from British firm Oxitec to release genetically engineered mosquitoes in the Florida Keys.

"We cannot stress strongly enough how dangerously misguided this application is. Oxitec hopes to use the neighborhoods and precious ecosystem of the Keys as their private, for-profit laboratory. The shame of it is, the company has no evidence the GE mosquitoes will even work in their stated aim of controlling Dengue fever. This feels much more like Oxitec testing its living, breeding technology than a serious attempt to control disease, and the people of Florida deserve protection.

"The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Germany said in February that the 'risk assessment' conducted in advance of the release of Oxitec's GE mosquitoes in another country has been 'scientifically deficient' and made 'questionable pivotal scientific assertion

View the Original article

Monday 19 March 2012

Environmental Groups Sue EPA Over Gulf Dead Zone

By David Bailey
Several environmental groups are suing the government to curb pollution of the Mississippi River with fertilizers and other contaminants blamed with creating a "dead zone" the size of Massachusetts in the Gulf of Mexico.

In separate federal lawsuits filed Tuesday, the groups asked judges to force the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to set base guidelines for state water quality standards and for wastewater treatment, both aimed at reducing pollution in the Mississippi River Basin.

The basin stretches from the Rocky Mountains in the west all the way to New York state in the east. It funnels water south through the agricultural heartland and industrial states to Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico.

Along the way, it gathers nitrogen that stimulates excessive algae growth in the dead zone from rainfall, runoff from farms and livestock production and wastewater treatment plants.

"The Mississippi River and the entire Gulf of Mexico has long been treated as the nation's sewer," Matt Rota, director of science and water policy for the Gulf Restoration Network told reporters at a news conference on Wednesday.

"Current efforts by the EPA and the Mississippi River states just simply are not enough," Rota said, describing the dead zone as "one of the many ongoing insults to the Gulf ecosystem."

The Gulf Restoration Network, the Natural Resources Defense Council and other groups said they filed the lawsuits after petitions to the EPA in 2007 for stronger wastewater treatment rules and in 2008 on water quality standards went unfulfilled.

The EPA, which denied the petition to set water quality standards for nutrients last year, said it was reviewing the lawsuits. It has not responded to the petition to update the wastewater treatment standards.


View the Original article

Sunday 18 March 2012

Tell WalMart to Reject Monsanto's GMO Corn

There is growing evidence of health hazards associated with genetically modified (GM) food and feed, which ISIS has reviewed extensively over the years. Health hazards linked to Bt toxins include organ damage in lab animals, diarrhea, increased water consumption, decrease in liver weight, damage and death of human kidney cells in culture, allergies in humans, changes in blood chemistry, and mass deaths of sheep grazing on Bt crops residues:

Bt Toxin Kills Human Kidney Cells

Bt Brinjal Unfit for Human Consumption.

Mass Deaths in Sheep Grazing on Bt Cotton

GM Egg Plant Contains Bt Toxin Linked to Hundreds of Allergy Cases and Thousands of Sheep Deaths.

More illnesses linked to Bt crops

GM Feed Toxic, New Meta-Analysis Confirms

Now Monsanto is introducing GM Bt corn for direct human consumption.

The organisation SumOfUs has generated a petition  calling on Walmart not to sell Bt corn in their shops. Please sign on! Their statement is reproduced below.

This is where the war to protect our food supply begins. In just a few weeks, farmers will begin planting Monsanto's largest genetically modified corn crop in history marketed directly to consumers. This is not just any corn - it is genetically engineered to include Bt toxin, a pesticide that ruptures the stomach of the insects that eat it.

Monsanto has never tested its Bt corn on humans, yet it insists it is safe. But rats who ate Bt potatoes suffered intestinal damage, and thousands of livestock who grazed on Bt cotton plants got sick and died. Monsanto claims that Bt toxin breaks down in our digestive systems - but it has been detected in the blood of pregnant women and unborn babies.

Monsanto's sweet corn could be on dinner plates soon - sold unmarked, unlabelled, and untested on humans. Monsanto's first foray into the selling this potentially toxic GM corn straight to consumers is in the US. But if it succeeds, they won't stop there - they're already started growing cotton, eggplant and potatoes with the same toxin. 


View the Original article

Saturday 17 March 2012

Wisconsin Legislation May Strip Towns of Authority to Stop Fracking

By Sara Jerving

One of the few tools for Wisconsin citizens to protect their health and land from the hazards of expanded frac sand mining across the state could be weakened by a newly introduced bill in the state legislature.

The state's Senate is considering a piece of legislation today aimed at "limiting the authority" of Wisconsin cities, villages or towns to enact a "development moratorium ordinance" -- a mechanism used recently by several local governments across the state to set aside time so they can investigate the effects of proposed mining on their community.

Sand mining corporations have expanded operations in Wisconsin over the past few years, taking advantage of the lax regulations of non-metallic mining in the state. They are after the state's sand resources, which are high in silica content, for use in the controversial "natural" gas and oil extraction process of "fracking" -- which has been linked to contaminated water supplies across the country. Much of Wisconsin's sand is the ideal shape and strength -- and the state's geologic profile has made it more accessible here than in other parts of the country -- turning the state into a top targeted provider for the "natural" gas and oil industry.


View the Original article