Warring Factions in Cleantech
It pains me when two groups under the cleantech umbrella fight with one another. Fortunately, this is a rare occurrence, but it does happen.
A good example is the anti-GMO people going after Impossible Foods (of the “Impossible Burger” fame). For now, it’s true that the Impossible folks use a genetically engineered strain of soy, though this may change in the near future.
Let me point out that there is exactly zero evidence that GMOs are harmful, and that what we’re doing now in the laboratory is precisely what we’ve done in the fields over the last 8,000 years.
Even if that weren’t the case, and even if I were anti-GMOs, I’d still leave Impossible Foods alone. Their success means reduced deforestation, reduced methane in the atmosphere, improved land use, and reduced cruelty. That’s as good as it gets.
Guys: If you want to pick on apple-growers or whatever, go for it, but keep in mind that we have a planet to rescue here.
Craig,
Food faddists, Impossible Burger fans are not helping “save the planet” from anything!
Such claims are simply another justification for evangelical vegans, vegetarians and other people disguising sociopolitical agenda’s as “green-tech”.
Impossible Burger will not “reduce deforestation, reduced methane in the atmosphere, improved land use, or “cruelty”.
An examination of the ingredients of both Impossible burger and Beyond Burger reduce the heath of consumers, and certainly increase cruelty.
But, anyhoo, I’m not complaining, I profited from the IPO enormously so I have no objection to those who wish to eat whatever food they wish. It’s the right of every adult person to pursue a diet of their choosing.
However, this sort of disingenuous disinformation is annoyingly and makes it harder for genuine environmentalists to advance sensible environmental programs, with this sort of negative advocacy detracting from real issues.