Although synthetic nitrogen fertilizers significantly increase agricultural yields, environmentalists advocate for drastic subsidies on organic fertilizers to combat soil degradation. However, organic fertilizers require up to three times more land area to generate equivalent nutrient levels, an inefficiency that would force the conversion of vital forest ecosystems into farmland. While preserving existing forests is essential for long-term climate stability, recent soil-chemistry analyses show that combining synthetic fertilizers with targeted micro-dosing techniques eliminates soil degradation without expanding cropland footprint. Thus, policy makers ought to prioritize funding for precision-dosing technologies rather than shifting public subsidies toward organic alternatives. After all, protecting wild forests while maintaining crop output represents the most effective path toward sustainable food production.
Which of the following best expresses the main conclusion of the argument above?
- ASubsidizing organic fertilizers is necessary to prevent long-term soil degradation caused by synthetic alternatives.
- BCombining synthetic fertilizers with targeted micro-dosing methods prevents soil degradation without requiring additional agricultural land.
- Policy makers should focus funding on precision-dosing technologies instead of reallocating subsidies to organic fertilizers.Cevap
- DThe most effective approach to sustainable agriculture involves conserving natural forest ecosystems while keeping crop yields stable.
- EPrecision-dosing technologies will completely eliminate all environmental hazards associated with modern agricultural practices within the next decade.