digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Future Without....Chocolate?

greenopolis.com — Future generations may never have a sweet tooth to feed.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Arez16, on 07/14/2008, -1/+18No chocolate could result in a sad future for many! The farmers who grow the beans..and people who eat chocolate everywhere!

    Although I am sure some synthetic chocolate will be produced or something.
    • raytibbitts, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1More likely people will learn to rotate their crops.
      "Oats, peas, bean and barley grow..." (and chocolate)
      • Y0tsuya, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Says in the article that cocoa trees live to be 100. How do rotate that?
      • raytibbitts, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1D'oh. Expensively.
      • raytibbitts, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1But, how do they live so long if they kill the soil so bad?
        If they stop producing, time to rotate to something that restores what cacao takes out, so the farmer can keep profiting from the land?
      • Y0tsuya, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Since the soil is depleted, they lowered the longetivity 30, but I don't know how long it will take to replenish the soil.
    • Elranzer, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3Chocolate rations are up 20 grams this week. The war with Oceania rages on.
  • SecondCherry, on 07/14/2008, -13/+8I see no real problem with chocolate becoming the luxury product it used to be - let's face it, most people eat way too much of it.
    • ECgulls10, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3that's a great point that people do eat to much of it...but i bet, like Arez16 said, the corporate world will just make a synthetic chocolate instead of losing profits.
      • thatsmyaibo, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Which would probably be WAY less healthy. In fact a lot of studies show cocoa (especially dark) is good for you in moderation.
    • Gemfinder, on 07/14/2008, -1/+15Given that dark chocolate has more antioxidants than any other plant-based food out there, I'd contest that.
      Chocolate is good for you, they recommend that you have an ounce every day. Just lay off the milk chocolate.
    • feliks2, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1So you used to be (are?) fat, huh?
  • ssn697, on 07/14/2008, -1/+37I HAVE to have chocolate available once a month for my girlfriend, or all hell will break loose!
  • boardingal08, on 07/14/2008, -1/+5I'm a chocoholic, I would be so sad if there was a limited supply of this amazing treat! My sweet tooth would go insane!
    • chuckDontSurf, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1I like a chocoholic, but for booze.
      (yes, I ripped that off from the onion)
  • jfaris, on 07/14/2008, -4/+2We wouldn't be able to have a cake like this: http://digg.com/apple/MacBook_Pro_Chocolate_Cake
  • greenguy2323, on 07/14/2008, -2/+32A world without chocolate? That's a world not worth living in!
    • Paranoidmarvin, on 07/15/2008, -3/+1The cake is a lie... and so is the chocolate.
  • kdawgr, on 07/14/2008, -0/+2"hybrid varieties have been grown on cleared land as mono-cultures...the soil quickly becomes degraded and the lifespan of plants can be cut from 75 or 100 years, to 30 or less. When the trees die and the land is exhausted, farmers must move on and clear more rainforest to plant cocoa."

    there's a larger issue than just the idea that chocolate production would decline (which, let's be honest, would be tragic), but in addition, it's a huge problem with the idea behind short-term v. sustainable agriculture and the effect that is has on the farmers' livelihoods, who are, most likely, grossly underpaid as it is.
  • Fangsinmybeard, on 07/14/2008, -0/+16Now that is the way to boost a green revolution. Tell them that they can't have chocolate because their lifestyle makes the cocoa trees die off. Wow the truth hurts when they take away your favorite food.
  • RoboCafaz, on 07/14/2008, -1/+8The loss of chocolate will ultimately lead to the extinction of men... Because the women will kill us all when their cravings cannot be met...
  • computerusr, on 07/14/2008, -0/+4I no longer have a reason to have children.
    • maanwi, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3Overpopulation plays a role in this. Thanks for doing your part. :)
  • brianbb98, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4I CANT drink your milkshake... :(
  • digbird, on 07/14/2008, -1/+14Frankly, this article would have a lot more credibility if it was in a regular news website and had an author with a name other than "Green Tea."
  • Metatron197, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo....
    This sucks
  • ousthouse, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3I see no bias here.
  • poidh, on 07/14/2008, -1/+9Sounds like ***** to me. Chocolate will always have a place.
  • ZaZ2137, on 07/14/2008, -1/+2What will we feed our women when that time of month comes around? :(
    • Y0tsuya, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2I don't know. What did women eat before we discovered chocolate?
      • burjzyntski, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1nuts, squirrels, and bison.
      • GreyICE, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3I think men just blocked them in the back of the cave for a week.
  • buckchoris, on 07/14/2008, -7/+1How about my white chocolate down there.
  • leerayIG88, on 07/14/2008, -8/+2I make chocolate from my ass. Want some? I have a cup...right here.
  • Arasaka, on 07/14/2008, -0/+1"[Chocolate] will become so rare and so expensive that the average joe won't be able to afford it."

    Quick! I must eat as much as I can right away!


    There's irony there. Look for it.
  • JasonCox, on 07/14/2008, -0/+8If chocolate goes, I'm taking you all with me.
  • txsln, on 07/14/2008, -1/+3"Future generations may never have a sweet tooth to feed. John Mason, the executive director and founder of the Ghana based organization Nature Conversation Research Council (NCRC) believes that in 20 years times, chocolate will be much like caviar today."

    Except caviar sucks and chocolate rules.
  • Jared80KA, on 07/14/2008, -0/+1Please... think of the fat people!!
    • borez, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Every girl I've ever known with a chocolate addiction has been slim... nuff said.
  • qazws, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2A world without oil, money, torture, and war.
  • zanixmechanix, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1So no bananas and chocolate in the future
    http://digg.com/environment/Say_Goodbye_to_the_Ban ...

    There goes my Hot Fudge Sundays as well!
  • beersnob, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Simple economics....Supply decreases, price increases. As price increases, more people will grow it!
    • Y0tsuya, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1RTFA. The land will no longer be productive.
  • Seldon2639, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2I'm only going to quibble with one thing in this:

    "Future generations may never have a sweet tooth to feed". That's a misuse of the concept of a "sweet tooth". The fact that we may no longer have chocolate with neither remove the ability to feed a sweet tooth, nor remove the desire for sweets. When I saw this article, the headline and subtitle got me to expect that the sweet tooth itself was dying out.
  • Evolutuon, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3There'll be some fake substitute, don't worry.
  • remo2012, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Eat a Potato Pizza instead!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9iKIU02Ft0
  • wheezy360, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3I'm eating a chocolate bar while reading this.
  • whiteguysamurai, on 07/15/2008, -2/+8As long as there is marijuana, i could care less.
    • Pinkshisno, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1No more brownies?
    • LucifersDad, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Munchies
    • wheezy360, on 07/15/2008, -1/+5*Couldn't* care less.

      Sorry, big bet peeve.
      • whiteguysamurai, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2That's fine, it's how i learn not to do such things.
    • triad203, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Do tell!
      You could care less?? Under what circumstances, exactly, would you care less than you already do?
  • swaters210, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3Oompa, Loompa, doom-pa-dee-do
    You can't afford our *****!
  • IG64, on 07/15/2008, -1/+0As long as I still have my fruit candy.
  • MarshalBanana, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1the age of mockolate begins!
  • SilverBlade2k, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3A future without chocolate is probably better for us anyways. Less chocolate to feed our already-fat asses means less fat-asses in the long run.
    • Y0tsuya, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1We will revert to our traditional body weights: poor people will be bone-skinny, and the rich will be fat. As it should be.
    • maanwi, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Chocolate is a very healthy food, if eaten in moderation. It's the sugar and partially hydrogenated oils in low quality chocolate that does the harm.
  • dyuhl, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5I have friends who take trips to Europe and they bring me back chocolate candies from different countries. After my first taste, I have never liked Hershey's chocolates again.
  • anarchytv, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1a world without the insatiable hunger for bananas or chocolate or crack cocaine production... would be a world with... gasp... rainforests... again
  • aksn1p3r, on 07/15/2008, -1/+1i'll die without chocolate
  • smurfsahoy, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Basically nothing in this article says anything to support the notion that chocolate is going to become rare or expensive. The article is about non sustainable farming methods. Sure, that COULD lead to chocolate becoming scarce. Or it could just lead to more rainforest being chopped down. Just because rainforests being cleared is a bad thing and the author doesn't like it doesn't mean it's not going to happen.

    The organization that is interceding doesn't really matter either as far as chocolate availability goes. If they succeed, we'll have chocolate AND rainforests. If they fail, we'll have chocolate and fewer rainforests. Both scenarios can very well involve plenty of chocolate.
  • kpaphysicist, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2I would go absolutely crazy without chocolate. Sure, I can go a long time without it. But knowing that it's not there anymore, I would want it even more.
  • borez, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Damn it, no more chocolate, no more thin girls.

    /completely serious comment
  • ADVIZR, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3I hope they don't reduce our chocolate ration.
  • allisonleigh, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1buh buh buh *****.
  • topace3000, on 07/15/2008, -2/+2Wow, retarded, baseless speculation. Awesome.

    You people are as stupid as tabloid readers.
  • WishItWerePaul, on 07/15/2008, -1/+0who gives a ***** about caviar, I WANT MY CHOCOLATE!!!
  • DeFex, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Hersheys is chocolate in the same way kraft processed "cheddar flavor" squares are cheese.
  • km9999999, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1*gasp*
  • grantmoore3d, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Damnit... now I'm craving chocolate so badly right now.... gah, I'm as bad as a woman on her rag
  • spyd3rweb, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Most chocolate candy is HFCS, sugar, wax, food coloring, artificial flavors, with only a miniscule amount of actual chocolate anyways. I'm sure they'll manage.
  • wassim2k, on 07/15/2008, -1/+5Sensationalism......at its best.
  • Philbert, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1I guess we'll all have to learn to like carob. (eww..)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 68 of 68 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.