This week we mourn the loss of climate scientist Dr. Stephen Schneider and share why science and technology, not ideology, should guide agricultural practices worldwide.

Climate warrior Stephen Schneider is dead at 65

Stephen H. Schneider, Ph.D., passed away on Monday, July 19.  He was an influential Stanford University climate scientist and wrote many books on the effects of climate change. He advised every Administration on climate policy since the 1970s and was passionate about educating the public about climate issues.

Dr. Stephen Schneider interviewed with CBI at the 2009 AAAS Meeting

We met Dr. Schneider at the 2009 AAAS Conference and filmed a video interview with him. In the interview Dr. Schneider shared that he believed agricultural biotechnology is an important part of the solution to helping farmers reduce their carbon emissions and combat the effects of climate change. View the video interview with Dr. Schneider.  READ MORE »

Want to learn more about ag biotech? Check out the stories below to read the news we thought was important this week!

 Supreme Court lifts the ban on GM Alfalfa Seeds

The Supreme Court decided to overturn a lower court’s ban on planting genetically modified alfalfa seeds on Monday, a sweeping victory for Monsanto Co. in what was the first ruling by the Supreme Court over genetically modified organism (GMO) crops. The ruling, a 7-1 decision, allows the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to consider a partial deregulation of alfalfa during the time when USDA is completing its Environmental Impact Statement, which is necessary before full deregulation of the genetically engineered alfalfa at issue in the case can occur.

 Expert says Australia should focus on wheat breeding technologies, including GM Wheat

At an International Grains Council Conference, Peter Reading, managing director of Australia’s Grains Research and Development Corporation said that Australia should focus its energies on wheat breeding technologies, including GM wheat, in order to address the decline rates in Australia’s wheat productivity growth.  However, GM wheat is not expected to be available for another ten years.

 Lack of communication between scientists and public, Jia Hepeng says

In a piece Thursday on how well scientists inform the public about food safety, Jia Hepeng said that China’s conflict over genetically modified crops can only be resolved through improved communication between scientists and the public. Citing events such as the Ministry of Agriculture’s announcement that it had issued biosafety licenses to two pest-resistant rice varieties and one phystaze maize, Hepeng calls for more refined, reader-friendly ways of presenting ongoing research on GM crops and better systems for decision-making, regulation, and monitoring.

This week we were pleased to see that researchers at Stanford University were finally able to put to rest the argument that conventional farming is bad for the planet. In fact, they found that modern farming REDUCED the amount of greenhouse gases entering the earth’s atmosphere by the end of the 20^th century. Other ag biotech news we liked this week:

Study finds that modern farming helped reduce greenhouse gas emissions

According to researchers at Stanford University, modern high-yield farming significantly reduced the amount of greenhouse gas emissions entering the Earth’s atmosphere by the end of the 20^th century. The study found that novel farming techniques prevented as much as the equivalent of 590 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide. Any policy intended to lower the amount of greenhouse gas emissions into the Earth’s atmosphere, the researchers concluded, should entail the improvement of crop yields. READ MORE »

Doug Jones holds up the book, “Tomorrow’s Table”. Looking on are the moderator from the League of Women voters and David Mitman.

Washington Friends of Farms & Forests helped coordinate an educational program about biotechnology in agriculture with the League of Women Voters.

About thirty people attended the March 25, 2010 event entitled, “Seeds of Change” held in Olympia. Two speakers compared their perspectives of the advantages and disadvantages of heritage seeds, genetically modified seeds and reused seeds.

Understanding the available science and technology is critical to solving the challenges of feeding the world. The intent of the program was to help the public better understand the use of biotechnology in agriculture as well as the perspective of seed savers. David Mitman spoke about the advantages of planting and saving natural seeds. Douglas R. Jones spoke about providing ample food, fiber, and now fuel, for a growing population. 

READ MORE »

C. Kameswara Rao, Executive Secretary of the Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education in Bangalore, published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal about the decision by Indian government officials to impose a moratorium on genetically modified Brinjal (eggplant).

Rao believes this decision by the Indian government is not based on science. He writes that genetically modified crops, including Bt Brinjal, have been thoroughly tested and evaluated.  In fact, “about 200 scientists and experts from over 15 public and private-sector institutions” participated in the agronomic and biosecurity evaluation of Bt brinjal from 2000-2009. The group found the crop safe for food and feed use and approved Bt Brinjal for commercialization in October, 2009.

Rao argues that this decision by the Indian government disproportionately hurts Indian farmers, and echoes the sentiments of Rajesh Kumar, an Indian farmer who recently published an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal criticizing the government’s decision to restrict biotech crop use. Farmers in India lose between “50-70 percent of their annual marketable eggplant yield to two insects” every year. Through an advanced gene Bt Brinjal can withstand the pests and farmers can produce more yields. The same gene has been inserted successfully into several other biotech crops such as cotton, corn and potatoes.

Despite the proven success of these biotech crops and the relief they can bring by increasing food yields, he believes the Indian government reacted to misleading claims about biotech crops when issuing this decision. Rao believes that this rejection of science will only hinder India’s progress and delay the commercialization of a crop that could benefit millions.