Re: GE in OZ -Reply -Reply
On Thu, 1 May 1997, Bob MacGregor wrote:
> Ann said:
> What will convince
> people, I believe, is not the holism or ecological soundness of
> alternative approaches, but rather, their cost-effectiveness.
> I say "Amen" to that comment! Under the current structure of production
> and marketing, whoever supplies the marketplace with the cheapest
> product of acceptable quality wins. . .
> My bet is that the strawberry
> growers will find some other way to fill the supermarket shelves with
> berries after methyl bromide is finally scrapped. The point is that there is
> a myriad of alternatives -- including a lot of cost-saving ones -- out there
> waiting to be found and put into use.
But doesn't the scrapping of methyl bromide have to do more with politics
and environmental awarness and less to do with economics? Leaving too
much to the economic imperative seems a little to risky to me, and this
focus seems to sideline other equal paths to reducing chemical use. . .
University of Oregon