Pick a reason to transition to organic. In this blog we add a little color to the potential economic, environmental, and health benefits that come with the transition to organic farming.
Economic Advantages
“Organic agriculture has the potential to secure the global food supply, just as conventional agriculture is today, but with reduced environmental impact.” This is according to a report that came out of the Food and Agricultural Organizations of the United Nations (FAO) International Conference on Organic Agriculture and Food Security.
Agroecological farming methods could double global food production in just ten years, according to a report from the United Nations. Agroecological practices, like organic practices, attempt to mimic natural processes and rely on the biology of the soil and environment rather than synthetic sprays and other inputs.
Switching to organic methods in communities where people struggle to feed themselves and their families can lead to a harvest 180% larger than that produced by conventional means.
Organic farmers have the potential to make more money with less land than conventional farmers. And the organic market is still growing. Organic food sales in the United States have grown from $13 billion in 2005 to $49 billion in 2018, a compound growth rate of 6.74% per year.
Organic farming is also enriching communities and creating jobs. Research clearly shows the long-term economic viability of established organic systems for both farmers and the nation.
Rural American communities are in dire conditions because of the conventional agricultural trend of replacing labor with chemicals and machinery. Organic agriculture has the potential to turn that trend around.
Organic agriculture promotes job creation, providing for more than 30% more jobs per hectare than non-organic farms, according to a report from the United Nations.
The addition of on-farm processing and direct marketing, two practices fostered in organic systems, further increases the opportunities for job creation. More of the money invested in an organic farm operation goes towards paying the people who work the land.
Six Midwestern land-grant university studies found organic grain and soybean systems returned higher profits due to organic price premiums. Even without the premiums, half of the organic systems were still more profitable. The other half quickly made up the difference and surpassed the conventional systems when the price premiums were added.
In the first thirty years of running the Farming Systems Trial, Rodale found the organic systems were nearly 200% more profitable than the conventional systems. The average net return for the organic systems was $558/ acre/year versus just $190/acre/year for the conventional systems.
Rodale also found that even without a price premium, the organic systems are competitive with the conventional systems. Marginally lower input costs make the organic systems economically competitive with the conventional system, even at conventional pricing.
Rodale found the most profitable grain crop was the organically grown wheat netting $835/acre/year, and no-till conventional corn was the least profitable crop netting $27/acre/year.
Energy
As the world’s energy crisis continues, smart and efficient use of resources will become increasingly important. Currently, conventional agriculture uses a massive amount of oil to manufacture, transport and apply fertilizers and pesticides. All these processes release large amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Figures from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) say that agricultural land use contributes 12% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Data from Rodale’s first thirty years of running the Farming System Trials show:
- The organic farming systems used 45% less energy than conventional systems.
- Diesel fuel was the single greatest energy input in the organic systems.
- Nitrogen fertilizer was the single most significant energy input in the conventional systems representing 41% of the total energy.
- Production efficiency was 28% higher in the organic systems than in the conventional systems, with the conventional no-till system being the least efficient in terms of energy usage.
Emissions
The Rodale Farming Systems Trial data shows conventional systems contribute much more greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere.
Conventional systems emit nearly 40% more greenhouse gases per pound of crop produced than the organic systems.
The biggest greenhouse gas emissions from direct inputs in the conventional system came from fertiliser production and on-farm fuel use.
The biggest greenhouse gas emissions from direct inputs in the organic system came from fuel use and seeds.
Health
Conventional systems rely heavily on pesticides (herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, etc.), many of which are toxic to humans and animals. Numerous studies have begun to capture the true extent of how low-level exposure to pesticides could be quietly causing severe health problems in our population. The toxins are nearly inescapable in the water we drink, the food we eat and the air we breathe.
Atrazine exposure during pregnancy has been linked to lower math and reading skills in children.
Researchers measured organophosphates in the urine of children and discovered levels of chemical indicators up to 14 parts per billion. All of which disappeared when they were put on an organic diet.
Glyphosate-based herbicides, currently legal in our food at low levels, have been shown to cause DNA damage, infertility, low sperm count, and prostate or testicular cancer in rats.
Pesticides (including ones that have been banned for years) have been found in breast milk and umbilical cord blood.
Inactive ingredients in herbicide and pesticide brands are just as toxic, if not more so than the active ingredients, and these ingredients aren’t tested for human health impacts before being released.
Research has found certain agricultural chemicals can alter our DNA, meaning the effects can be passed on through the generations.
More than 17,000 pesticide products for agricultural and non-agricultural use are currently on the market. Exposure to these chemicals has been linked to brain/ central nervous system disruption, breast, colon, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, kidney, testicular, and stomach and other cancers.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required testing of less than 1% of the chemicals currently in commerce.
Rodale sampled for herbicide and nutrient leaching into groundwater in the Farming Systems Trial and found:
Water leaching from the conventional system more frequently exceeded the legal limit of 10 parts per million for nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in drinking water compared to the organic systems.
Atrazine leaching in the conventional system sometimes exceeded the maximum contaminate level set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for drinking water. And concentrations in all conventional samples exceeded 0.1 parts per billion, a concentration that has been shown to produce deformities in frogs.
After a three-year transition period, organic yields match conventional farming methods and generate profits of close to 200% higher for organic corn and soybeans, over conventionally grown crops.
Factor in 45% less energy consumption, nearly 40% less greenhouse gas emissions, increased local job creation in the community, and the benefits, not just to human life, but to our environment and all life on our planet, a compelling case can be made to transition acreage over to organic farming methods.
Key Takeaways From the Ongoing Test
Environmental Impact
In 2017, the Farming System Trial found that conventional farming systems leach Atrazine, a herbicide known to disrupt human and animal endocrine systems, in amounts between 1 and 3 parts per billion into the water table.
Replicated controlled studies on frogs have shown that exposure to atrazine at just 0.1 ppb causes significant changes to male frogs’ hormonal profiles, rendering them hermaphroditic. Humans may tolerate higher levels of atrazine than amphibians, but the chemical’s marked effect on animals and ecosystems at levels lower than previously thought is cause for concern. Organic systems, which do not rely on synthetic inputs, leach zero Atrazine.
Nutrient Density
Organic oats grown in systems utilizing legume cover crops contain a significantly higher total protein concentration along with a suite of essential and non-essential amino acids. The Farming System Trial also found significantly greater soil carbon and nitrogen (the building blocks of proteins) in both organic systems compared to the conventional system.
Yields
In 2016, the no-till organic manure system produced 200 bushels of corn per acre — a record-breaking yield for Berks County, Pennsylvania, United States, (the Farming Trial System location) that was almost twice the conventional no-till system.
The Big Benefit of Moving into Organic Production: Soil Health
Certifiers and other organic production specialists recommend having your soil tested to determine nutrient availability before establishing future crop and livestock rotations.
According to the Environmental Working Group and soil scientists at Iowa State University, America’s “Corn Belt” is losing topsoil up to 12 times faster than official government estimates.
Over a multi-decade, and ongoing trial, The Rodale Institute found that:
- Soil health in organic systems increased over time, but conventionally farmed systems remain unchanged.
- Rodale used Carbon as the testing metric for soil health. Carbon performs many essential functions in soil, such as acting as a capacitor for plant nutrients, allowing the soil to bind together, maintain temperature, providing a source of food for microbes, binding heavy metals and pesticides, influencing water holding capacity and aeration.
- Carbon levels are highest in an organic manure system, followed by the organic legume system, compared to lower levels and a net loss of Carbon in a conventional farming system.
The benefits of increased levels of Carbon in the soil in organic systems are:
- Water percolates through the soil more efficiently. This means excess water does not run off the surface taking the soil with it, but instead recharges groundwater reserves, while leaving the soil where it belongs — in the fields.
- Organic system soil, because of higher levels of Carbon is significantly more efficient regarding the holding and access of water. This explains organic crops outperformance in times of drought.
- Alternatively, when nutrients are applied in synthetic forms, they leach or pass through the soil more quickly than nutrients derived from manures, composts, or cover crops.
- Essential nutrients are lost from the soil when rain falls, or snow melts, resulting in negative impacts on succeeding crops. One reason the application of synthetic forms of nutrients (ie, nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium) is problematic is that the nutrients do not remain available to the plants.
Think of organic soil as being “stickier,” able to hold more of the “good stuff” for a longer period of time, while chemical systems lose the “good stuff” more quickly.
