by Pat Tigges
Several teachers and parents have expressed concern to me about school fund-raising events that involve selling organic cotton T-shirts. Convinced they are helping, junior eco-nuts pressure parents and friends to purchase overpriced shirts to “save the environment”. These same shirts are plied from various outdoor clothing company catalogs.
Following is a simple explanation that can be used with kids, or a teacher, to expose these marketers for the frauds they are. In addition to proving that organic cotton is bad for the environment, it should open the door to explaining how selling ‘environmental friendliness’ is a very profitable business. As with political or breakfast cereal ads, those who tout organic do not tell the whole truth.
Draw three equal squares on the board or piece of paper. The first square represents land required to produce one bale of cotton grown conventionally. The other two squares represent the land required to produce that same bale of cotton grown organically.
Under the squares, and aided by discussion, make a list of things that might influence environmental friendliness. The list may contain many things but should include land use, water use, wildlife effects, erosion, water and air pollution, use of resources (energy, gas, oil, steel, etc.), and pest control.
Discuss each thing on the list to determine which method is more environmentally friendly. Following are some points to be made, but discussion will bring out more:
Land: Which uses more land and disturbs more wildlife?
Water: Which requires more water to irrigate?
Erosion: Which opens more soil to wind and water erosion?
Pollution: Double the tractor and harvester time means twice the air pollution from burnt fuel and oil. Twice as much soil surface disturbed means twice the blowing dust and sediment runoff.
Use of resources: More equipment for more land means more energy (oil/fuel), more steel, aluminum, iron and other resources.
Pesticides: Both use pesticides, but organic often uses them in heavier amounts since they are not as effective. Organics are just as carcinogenic, just as toxic (I have a great photo of killing fish with rotenone).
Pat Tigges is president of the Pacific Northwest Aerial Applicators’ Education Foundation (PNWAAEF).
Reprint permission given by AgAir Update, P.O. Box 850, Perry, GA 31069 - an international agricultural aviation publication.
Return to Spreading the Facts