[Peakoil] ABN Amro casts doubt on GM crops - please publicise ; Unconscionable behavior by US multinationals

[tuohy]

http://www.virtualmetals.co.uk/pdf/ABNWAR0710.pdf

Although the yields from GM crops are impressive, the cost of GM seed is
becoming increasingly expensive and, in some cases, seed prices border on
extortion. Whether European farmers realise it or not, a fundamental shift
is taking place in the economics of agriculture which, while allowing for
greater productivity and potentially higher income, will see farmers’
operating costs jump dramatically. In other words, farmers – perhaps
unwittingly – will come to shoulder a larger part of the risk if a crop
fails or a market price collapses.

For example, during 1975-97, US soybean farmers spent an estimated 4%-8% of
their gross income purchasing seed. By 2009, farmers planting GM soybeans
spent 16.4% of their income on the seed, and those planting Monsanto’s
Roundup Ready 2 soybeans this year will have spent 22.5% of their gross
income on seed purchases. At Monsanto, CEO Hugh Grant is already on record
for announcing plans aimed at doubling gross profits for the biotech group
by 2012 and, although some revisions to his forecast have been necessary
because of the impact on the market of aggressive competition from Chinese
fertilisers, he is well on the way to achieving this goal. It might almost
be seen as a licence to print money.

How did we get here?

The arguments for and against GM crops frequently become emotionally tangled
up in all sorts of scientific detail. Promoters of GM, especially
trailblazers such as Monsanto, maintain that their products are safe,
although GM seed companies lack a sufficient track record to offer any
farmer or consumer an iron-clad guarantee for the eventual success of his
crops or produce. Nevertheless, GM advocates maintain that the benefits
vastly outweigh any unquantified risks at the moment. They show that crop
yields rise, agricultural-related diseases are fewer, and water use through
the development of drought resistant seeds can be significantly reduced.
There is no shortage of evidence showing that agricultural productivity has
grown exponentially in the past 200 years as a result of scientific farming
practices and the judicious use of fertiliser. Around 1800, an English
farmer could expect to harvest under half a tonne of wheat from an acre of
land. By the early 1970s, that figure had risen to about 1.5 tonnes/acre
and, it had virtually doubled to 2.9 tonnes/acre by 2007, according to the
UK’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. All this was
achieved without the benefit, or the unquantified risk, associated with GM
crops.

Then there is the thorny issue of independent testing of GM crops. Safety
testing has been carried out by the biotechnology companies themselves and
deemed acceptable. When testing has been conducted by independent bodies,
the results are less convincing and, although some of the research has
spawned horror newspaper headlines, it should make governments and
regulatory agencies pause for thought. As anyone who has conducted
scientific research knows, data can be massaged until the required answer is
produced. Biotech companies like Monsanto, Pioneer and Syngenta prohibit the
publication of any independent research into their products without their
permission, through restrictive end-user agreements.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://act-peakoil.org/pipermail/peakoil/attachments/20100814/e673da87/attachment.html