All I want is an environmentalist consumer org that doesn't fall for the organic hogwash

@SomeMichGuy Organic food uses a lot more land area for the same yield. That said, I'm researching now and it looks like it's good for cotton.

@BlueVeins I've seen some different studies but they are talking about certain types of crops.

I don't see why organic fruit trees, fir instance, would require more land, and even the stated 40% in a German study might overestimate what is required.

But framing it that way--yield per acre id the only measure--ignores other measures, incl. effects upon the soil, health of the consumers, cost of additional chemicals soil conditioners, pesticides, etc., and their effect upon the ecosystem.

Sustainable, right-sizing of yields is important...and teaching Westerners NOT to overeat.

@SomeMichGuy Organic tends to use more land bc there's less yield per acre, which is in turn because of more interference from weeds & pests. It's true that land use isn't the end-all be-all (though health of consumer can be resolved by washing your damn vegetables), but land use is pretty important among all things.

@BlueVeins The study I saw quoted that more land was used for, e.g., nitrogen-fixing plants between the intended crop.

Of course, the growers could be smarter. The Native Americans used maize/corn, beans, squash in a mix which keeps the soil in better condition. All of those are harvestable crops.

Washing your vegetables doesn't fix things, because you sprayed poison into the air, it got in the soil, it ran off and got into water.