Anti-GM campaigner backs GM at recent lecture
He gave the 4th Chris Lamb lecture at the John Innes Centre and made an appeal to apply 'scientific scepticism' to environmental campaigning, while at the same time ridding debate of jargon.
One of founders of anti-GM movement, he helped develop the anti-GM narrative still in use today.
Trawling scientific journals while researching a book about climate change, he started to think he should apply scientific evidence to other campaign issues.
"I still strongly hold to the environmentalist label and the essential values that make environmentalism such an important philosophy," he said.
Supporters argue GM would increase yields and reduce pesticide usage. Supporters include the Environment Secretary Owen Paterson who gave his support to genetically modified food production in December.
But critics have highlighted the problems of herbicide intolerance, superbugs and wildlife threats. Those against the introduction of GM production say pesticide use in the US is higher than before GM.
"I realised genetic engineering technology could be a powerful tool to address planetary boundaries, such as issues with the nitrogen cycle," said Lynas.
He said food production was limited by nitrogent availability, 'but we had overcome this by synthesising around 120bn tonnes of atmospheric nitrogen a year into fertilisers'.
"This is a good thing because it keeps more than half of humanity alive, but it has doubled the nitrogen cycle on land."
"Environmental impacts include eutrophication and the release of nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere."
"Not using GM technology is risky in itself," said Lynas.
"It is regulated out of existence in most of Africa."
"It is effectively illegal to use this technology in any environmentally beneficial way in most of the world except in very specific applications."
He outlined the major challenge of how to feed a growing world population on limited land, with limited water and within the context of a very rapidly changing climate.
"Back in 1995 we didn't know everything that we know today. Now after two trillion GM meals have been served and eaten, I don't think we need to discuss the safety of GM. We need to begin roll back a decade and a half of pointless regulation which is strangling an important new technology."
"My fellow environmentalists say they respect scientific consensus on all issues and certainly they do with climate change. I think it is time to move on and to start focusing on the real problems the world faces."
The Lynas School of pseudo-scientific environmentalism
Twenty-two pieces of junk science from the Lynas Manifesto
Please enter your name
Please enter your comment
Your comment submitted successfully.Please wait for admin approval.
Some error on your process.Please try one more time.
GM crops are good for the economy and can reduce the amount of pesticides u...
Demand from smaller European markets has helped drive strong growth for UK ...
A lack of engineers, not enough people promoting the land-based industries ...
Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss is launching the National Pollinator ...
Agricultural specialists have welcomed a potential financial boost for youn...
As retailers continue to participate in a highly competitive race to the bo...
New farm business income data from Defra, which focus on income from March ...
Agriculture has remained one of the industries in which workers are most li...
Prime arable land in the UK has seen a substantial year-on-year growth in p...