<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>bryanlarsen</author><text>The criticisms of conventional farming are valid, but that doesn&amp;#x27;t mean that organic farming is any better.&lt;p&gt;I believe that organic farming is much more likely to cause soil degradation and environmental harm than conventional farming for several different reasons:&lt;p&gt;- organic farming&amp;#x27;s main tool to combat weeds and regrowth is tillage, which causes immense amounts of damage to the soil directly and allowing the soil to blow away or wash away.   Conventional farmers know how damaging tillage is and are increasingly moving away from it as pesticide alternatives become available.    It was tillage that turned the fertile crescent of Mesopotamia into the deserts of Iraq.&lt;p&gt;- Organic farmers still use pesticides and herbicides, but they are limited to those that are certified organic.    Organic pesticides and herbicides aren&amp;#x27;t necessarily any safer for human consumption or for the environment, they&amp;#x27;re just &amp;quot;organic&amp;quot;.   For example, some organic farmers literally salt their soil.   When the only thing you have in your toolbox is a hammer, that&amp;#x27;s what you use, even when the situation calls for a scalpel.&lt;p&gt;- Conventional farmers care far more about the value of their land than organic farmers do.   Farmers don&amp;#x27;t have retirement funds, they&amp;#x27;ve just got land on which they&amp;#x27;ve spent the last 40 years paying off the mortgage.   A conventional farmer with healthy soil can sell his land for a lot more than one with unhealthy soil.   An farmer with land that&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;certified organic&amp;quot; doesn&amp;#x27;t care, it&amp;#x27;s that &amp;quot;certified organic&amp;quot; stamp that he&amp;#x27;s getting paid for.&lt;p&gt;- Organic herbicides and pesticides are much less efficient than conventional ones.  So they have to use much larger quantities.  Which means more runoff.   For instance, they sometimes spread massive amounts of manure on their fields, cause massive algal blooms in the waterways and destroying them.&lt;p&gt;- Conventional farmers are constrained by economics.   They&amp;#x27;re selling a commodity, where price == marginal cost.   So the only way to make a profit is to have lower costs per unit of output than your competitors.   Their major costs are diesel, herbicides &amp;amp; pesticides -- minimizing those is both good for the farmer&amp;#x27;s pocketbook and the environment.    An organic farmer&amp;#x27;s price is not set at the marginal cost, so it&amp;#x27;s often better for them to increase inputs to increase yields, even when it&amp;#x27;s not as efficient.&lt;p&gt;P.S.   I gave 5 arguments.   They are not equal.  The first one (tillage) is orders of magnitude more significant than the other 4.   Tillage destroys the soil, and is far more &amp;quot;unnatural&amp;quot; than any sort of herbicide or pesticide organic or conventional.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ThePhysicist</author><text>The thing with conventional farming is that a lot of the costs (in terms of environmental damage which needs to be repaired) are currently externalized, i.e. payed for by the society, which indeed makes industrial farming more cost-effective than organic farming, at least for the farmer (though in many countries you can charge a good premium for organic food, which will often outweigh your additional cost). The same is true for the current industrialized way of raising livestock.&lt;p&gt;The real problem is properly accounting for all costs incurred by a given farming technique, which is difficult as the farming lobby seems to be one of the most effective ones in the world (at least judging from a European perspective).&lt;p&gt;In addition, the argument that industrial farming consistently produces higher yields than any organic farming technique seems at least a bit dubious to me, as there is a plethora of techniques that have been investigated over the years, and again the outcome of any study depends heavily on the timescale that you look at: Sure, heavy use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides will increase yield in the short run, it might actually decrease yields in the long term by degrading soil quality and triggering a biological arms race that makes it impossible to do farming without the use of heavy pesticides in the long run. Also, the external cost in terms of health effects on the population is still poorly researched and not accounted for in most cost calculations.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Yes, organic farming will kill us all</title><url>https://shift.newco.co/yes-organic-farming-will-kill-us-all-12d900979cf2#.gojjvvvs6</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>kuschku</author><text>And there is a huge unspoken problem yet.&lt;p&gt;In many areas of northern Germany, even with the extremely strict limits on fertilizer and pesticides that Germany has, the drinking water, rivers and oceans are getting so massively polluted that we’re seeing massive algae blooms and drinking water slowly becoming undrinkable.&lt;p&gt;It’s a massive problem, and there’s no way to solve these without massively reducing fertilizer and pesticide use.&lt;p&gt;If the choice is between being able to feed less humans, and having no drinking water, I’m sure which one I’ll pick.&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Because I’m getting downvoted, here are some sources:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; EU sues Germany over water tainted by nitrate fertilizer&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The European Commission has lost patience with Germany over the high concentration of nitrate fertilizer in its ground water. Taxpayers could now end up paying hundreds of millions of euros in fines.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;europa.eu&amp;#x2F;rapid&amp;#x2F;press-release_IP-16-1453_en.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;europa.eu&amp;#x2F;rapid&amp;#x2F;press-release_IP-16-1453_en.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.dw.com&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;eu-sues-germany-over-water-tainted-by-nitrate-fertilizer&amp;#x2F;a-19225653&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.dw.com&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;eu-sues-germany-over-water-tainted-by-n...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.thelocal.de&amp;#x2F;20161107&amp;#x2F;eu-sues-germany-over-water-polluting-farming&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.thelocal.de&amp;#x2F;20161107&amp;#x2F;eu-sues-germany-over-water-...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.euractiv.com&amp;#x2F;section&amp;#x2F;agriculture-food&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;eu-takes-germany-to-court-over-high-nitrate-levels&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.euractiv.com&amp;#x2F;section&amp;#x2F;agriculture-food&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;eu-ta...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>ThePhysicist</author><text>The thing with conventional farming is that a lot of the costs (in terms of environmental damage which needs to be repaired) are currently externalized, i.e. payed for by the society, which indeed makes industrial farming more cost-effective than organic farming, at least for the farmer (though in many countries you can charge a good premium for organic food, which will often outweigh your additional cost). The same is true for the current industrialized way of raising livestock.&lt;p&gt;The real problem is properly accounting for all costs incurred by a given farming technique, which is difficult as the farming lobby seems to be one of the most effective ones in the world (at least judging from a European perspective).&lt;p&gt;In addition, the argument that industrial farming consistently produces higher yields than any organic farming technique seems at least a bit dubious to me, as there is a plethora of techniques that have been investigated over the years, and again the outcome of any study depends heavily on the timescale that you look at: Sure, heavy use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides will increase yield in the short run, it might actually decrease yields in the long term by degrading soil quality and triggering a biological arms race that makes it impossible to do farming without the use of heavy pesticides in the long run. Also, the external cost in terms of health effects on the population is still poorly researched and not accounted for in most cost calculations.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Yes, organic farming will kill us all</title><url>https://shift.newco.co/yes-organic-farming-will-kill-us-all-12d900979cf2#.gojjvvvs6</url></story>