Are genetically modified crops really the ultimate solution to climate change in agriculture?

As climate change advocates continue hammering the world’s farmers, many are leveraging the opportunity to push⁢ genetically ‍modified crops⁤ as the cure.

Since 2019, there’s ⁤been a palpable shift in the language surrounding genetically modified (GM) crops, which has reached a fever pitch.

The internet is‍ now flooded with university articles and research studies proclaiming GM crops are ⁢more environmentally friendly than their organic counterparts.

“Agricultural ⁢land use is a key component in both sides of the net-zero equation … crops can be engineered to more efficiently capture carbon dioxide and turn it into oxygen or store⁣ it in the soil,” the World Economic Forum stated on its website.

Due to the intensity of drought conditions affecting key farming regions worldwide and controversy over fertilizer usage, some governments that have had long-standing bans on GM crops are⁢ changing their tune.

In July, the European Commission tested the waters on a rules ‌revision for using genetically modified organisms ⁤(GMOs).

One ⁣member said loosening the region’s ‌famously strict “no GMO”‍ policies to include some plants bred with more updated gene-editing technology would give struggling farmers more resilient crops.

Presently, 26 countries have either ‍partially ⁣or entirely banned GMOs ‍in agriculture.

Many are European nations, including⁣ France, Germany, and Italy.

Other holdouts include India, Russia, and China. An⁢ additional 60 nations have also imposed “significant restrictions” on GMO use, according to a⁢ recent analysis.

The same study noted a “lack of trust and confidence by the public in ‌regulatory processes behind GMOs.”

Regardless, the bandwagon is already rolling, and GM⁣ crops are now part ​of ‌the climate change hard sell ‍for governments and farmers ​around the globe.

But​ supporters of organic agriculture are speaking up amid a growing body of evidence that throws cold​ water on GM crops’ earth-friendly claims.

“We must be cautious not to view GM crops as a silver bullet for addressing all aspects of agriculture’s impact on climate change,” Zahid Adnan told The Epoch Times.

Mr. Adnan is the founder of The Plant Bible and advocates for organic farming and gardening practices. He believes organic farming plays‍ a crucial role in addressing climate concerns. These aspects include building ⁤healthy soils, promoting biodiversity, and minimizing external inputs.

High And Dry

One of ‍the alleged sell points for increasing GM crop ​production is modified plants​ can‍ be engineered to require less water.

While these assertions have floated around the scientific community for a decade, drought conditions impacting multiple growing regions over the past couple of years have put these claims to the ‍test.

Some estimates say GM crops require up to 25 percent less water to thrive. At a glance, this is great news. Especially for drought-impacted staple foods like corn⁤ and soy.

There’s just one problem.⁣ So far, GM crops are being⁢ crushed by drought just as hard as‍ their organic counterparts.

Approximately 94 percent of ⁤soybeans and 92 percent of corn planted in the United States are GM crops.

Prolonged dry conditions are taking a toll on both of these sectors.

In January, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) lowered its 2022 corn estimates by‍ nearly a quarter million bushels and was 9 percent less than 2021. It was reportedly the lowest corn estimate since 2012.

What began as a wildly optimistic outlook for 2022’s soy harvest‍ ended up‌ 4 percent lower than the previous year.

But dismal drought predictions for the most widely ⁤planted GM crops doesn’t stop there.

June this year witnessed 58 percent of the American Midwest struggling with moderate or worse drought conditions.

Consequently, the USDA ⁣said 64 percent of the area’s corn production and 57 percent of soy have been affected.

Moreover, it’s not just a United States phenomenon. Gene-edited crops struggle to prove their drought tolerance in other major farming nations.

In Argentina,‌ GM crops comprise 63 percent ‌of total planting. Concurrently, the South American agricultural giant is also witnessing their GM ⁣corn​ and soy production⁢ wither beneath a historic drought.

As a result, the USDA slashed Argentina’s ⁢corn and soy projections in March this year. Estimates for soy were cut by⁢ 20 percent, representing the ‌most significant monthly hit‌ to ⁤the nation’s soybeans in more‍ than 10 years.

Curiously enough, Argentina⁤ accounts for 13 percent of the world’s total GM crops.

On the other end of the⁣ spectrum, Mr. Adnan said⁢ organic crops and agricultural practices use time-tested methods of conserving water. No need to grab​ DNA by the reins.

“Organic practices such as ​mulching and efficient irrigation ‌techniques contribute to water conservation, a vital concern in regions facing water scarcity due to climate change.”

Corporate Rebranding

“A lot of research suggests ⁢that GM crops can be engineered to use less water and emit fewer greenhouse gases than conventional crops.

“However, it is important to note that not all GM crops are created equal,” Kafi Sajjad told The ​Epoch Times.

Mr. Sajjad works in research at Organic ‍Foods Corner. He says not every GM crop can deliver on the rapidly growing ⁢list of climate-friendly promises.

“Some GM crops have been designed to withstand herbicides, while⁢ others have been designed to resist​ pests. The environmental impact of GM crops will vary depending on the ⁣specific trait that has‌ been engineered.”

He also believes organic‌ crops offer as ⁤many, if not more, environmentally friendly benefits.

“Organic crops are⁤ grown ​without the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, which can pollute⁤ waterways and harm wildlife. Additionally, organic crops can help to improve soil health, which helps to sequester carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

This underscores another point GM crop supporters claim ⁤is an advantage over⁢ organic: less fertilizer and chemicals are needed.

However, as with the drought tolerance⁤ assertion, there are holes in this argument.

Traditionally,⁢ organic crops aren’t grown with pesticides or synthetic fertilizers, or in the worst-case scenario, very little. In fact, most synthetic pesticides and fertilizers aren’t allowed on ⁢any crop or ⁢product bearing the coveted USDA organic seal.

Corporate agricultural and genetic science groups argue a⁢ lot of the bad reputation surrounding GMOs in farming stems from a misconception of the types of chemicals used on crops.

This brings to mind the whole Monsanto-Roundup debacle, which began in 1996.

Back then, the now non-existent Monsanto released a GM soybean resistant to the purported cancer-causing chemical known as glyphosate.

It was a prominent ingredient found in the company’s infamous Roundup herbicide. Monsanto released its GM ⁢glyphosate-resistant corn just a⁤ few years later.

Fast forward to 2020—two years after ⁤Bayer purchased Monsanto—the pharmaceutical giant was forced to settle more than 100,000 cancer litigation suits caused by ​Roundup exposure at almost $11 billion.

Over the span of⁤ decades, farmers used Roundup in their ⁢fields, particularly with GM crops.

Monsanto once claimed Roundup was “safer than table salt.”

Follow the Money

That cuts to the core of the counterargument many have pointed out:⁢ Corporate ⁢GM crop engineers knowingly sold a chemical linked to cancer for decades. So how ⁣is the ​public expected to trust other players in big agriculture?

Well, the answer is they don’t have to. That’s because Bayer is one of the largest GM seed sellers in the⁣ world.

Other major gene-edited seed players include Corteva and Syngenta. People may know the former as the famous chemical giant DuPont, and ⁢the⁢ latter is part of the Chinese state-owned company ChemChina.

Bayer and Corteva​ alone dominate around 40 percent of ⁢the world’s seed market.

“It⁣ is important to understand the broader ​context and long-term ⁣effects of relying on these [GM] crops to address‍ agriculture’s role in climate change,” Robert Oates told The Epoch Times.