Brad Plumber over at Ezra Klein's Wonkblog writes my thoughts better than I do :-)
While my comments about CAFO's in my post the other day are sure to offend many, I did try to choose my words carefully. There are many ethical and environmental issues that surround CAFOs, and I'm not dismissing those issues.
But we should be aware of indirect consequences of CAFOs. Some of those indirect consequences can be good for feeding the world and even good for the environment. It's only responsible to spell out all of those tradeoffs, and I see that as my job. There are good arguments to be made that modern industrial agriculture is good for the environment in much the same way as high-density urban living is good for the environment: by concentrating these activities we leave less of a footprint on the planet as a whole.
Incidentally, unlike the other guy in the news these days, I think "wonk" suits Wonkblog very well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Renewable energy not as costly as some think
The other day Marshall and Sol took on Bjorn Lomborg for ignoring the benefits of curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed. But Bjorn, am...
-
It's been a long haul, but my coauthor Wolfram Schlenker and I have finally published our article with the title of this blog post in th...
-
The other day Marshall and Sol took on Bjorn Lomborg for ignoring the benefits of curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed. But Bjorn, am...
-
A couple months ago the New York Times convened a conference " Food for Tomorrow: Farm Better. Eat Better. Feed the World ." ...
No comments:
Post a Comment