Is this a silver bullet ?

[thesilentone]

No.

Actually looking at the main greenhouse gas emissions helps. Close to sixty percent of the sources are electricity generation and transport. Compared to around twelve percent from agriculture.

The solution is to massively curtail recreational air travel, and stop all countries burning coal. That's day one. Agriculture, farting cows etc should be way down the list.

The VOC emission levels from power generation and transport are controlled by the EU air quality standards, and are being reduced. However, that in itself means nothing if they are excessively high by volume. It is very difficult to fit a carbon filter on the front and rear end of an animal. I wonder how much humans ' belching and farting ' contribute to global warming ? Do we need to stat eating sea-weed, and as for Vegans, well I dread to think

It is interesting to note, research shows, Vegans do create more gas, therefore adding to Global Warming.

There must be a slogan there somewhere.

' Change to Vegan-ism, and blow the Planet away '

 

[Poorbuthappy]

If you class 9 years as ' rapidly breaks down in the atmosphere '

Methane is a very effective greenhouse gas. While its atmospheric concentration is much less than that of carbon dioxide, methane is 28 times more effective (averaged over 100 years) at trapping infrared radiation. The atmospheric residence time of methane is approximately 9 years.

But I also read somewhere that in the right grazing conditions bacteria/ soil fauna recycle the methane produced by cattle.

It seems to me we (or scientists) are very good at looking at individual elements of an ecosystem and not the whole picture.

Co2 and methane from grazing animals is part of a natural cycle. Burning fossil fuels is releasing long term stored carbon.

 

[thesilentone]

But I also read somewhere that in the right grazing conditions bacteria/ soil fauna recycle the methane produced by cattle.

It seems to me we (or scientists) are very good at looking at individual elements of an ecosystem and not the whole picture.

Co2 and methane from grazing animals is part of a natural cycle. Burning fossil fuels is releasing long term stored carbon.

The summary of this report would indicate around 10%.

https://www.savory.global/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2015-methane.pdf

 

[Poorbuthappy]

The summary of this report would indicate around 10%.

https://www.savory.global/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2015-methane.pdf

As an over all average it seems.
An holistic approach has the potential to negate it reading further in that report.

"Healthy, well-aerated soils - a characteristic quality of grasslands under Holistic Planned Grazing - harbor bacteria called methanotrophs, which break down methane. Soil-based decomposition of methane may be equal to or greater than ruminant methane production, depending on animal den sity, soil type and soil health."

 

[hendrebc]

Couldn't watch the video internet is too slow but I know the argument about seaweed I've read it before.
@Agrispeed educate them. Don't you sequester 3kg of carbon for every litre of milk you produce? That's a sh!t load of carbon and makes feeding seaweed look a bit stupid when you consider it will use up carbon to harvest it, dry it and cart it about. All you need to do is turn cattle out to graze that would be a great start instead of burning up carbon to carry their feed in and burn more carbon carting their sh!t back out. Add in the right grazing techniques and that's a lot of carbon stored in the soil out of the way. And it produces really healthy not only sustainable food but regenerative farmed food helping restore the environment and offsetting a lot of the carbon that's being burnt.

 

[JCMaloney]

Would harvesting,drying & transporting said sea weed not have a detrimental environmental impact?

 

[delilah]

"Healthy, well-aerated soils - a characteristic quality of grasslands under Holistic Planned Grazing - harbor bacteria called methanotrophs, which break down methane. Soil-based decomposition of methane may be equal to or greater than ruminant methane production, depending on animal den sity, soil type and soil health."

that needs turning into layperson speak and posting in the 'livestock are part of the solution' thread as a suggestion for a future one in the series.
And get rid of the 'may be greater than' and just say 'is'. The opponents of livesock farming aren't shy of being definitive, neither should we.

 

[ISCO]

Our milk works out at 900 g CO2e/l ( although due to yield increase I think it will be lower this year) UK average is 1400 and the figure everyone uses is the world average of 2400.

Organic soya milk is around 600 so in theory I'm not that far away if seaweed helped me get on par with organic soya milk that's huge selling point.

Only thing I will say and it's just my opinion is that some of the people pushing emissions agenda are using it to bolster a vegan message and have no interest in the message that UK agriculture is not that far away.

I agree on the Vegan agenda.
We need some publicity using figures on emissions such as you quote.

 

[___\0/___]

https://twitter.com/NFUmilkman/status/1138725901892542464?s=09

Just popped up on my feed via a retweet from NFU dairy.

 

[Spud]

They argue emissions from cows (alone) contribute 4.4% to Climate Change, double the climate impact of aviation.

Yep, and they ignore how much cows contribute. Methane emitted by cows is largely sequestered by the pasture on which they graze, which wouldn't be there were it not for cows. Not withstanding all the things produced and provided by grazing livestock, meat milk leather pharmacuticals etc etc. Aviation, by comparison, provides transport and pollution, nothing positive environmentally, and for the most part, not obligatory to human life.

 

[thesilentone]

In the UK we have a surplus of grass during spring/summer/autumn, however we are only a very small player (as is the UK) in worldwide emissions (China and the USA are the Giants). In addition, if we make grazing part of Mrs May's '
UK to become first G7 nation to make zero net emissions law

Will we need to reduce herd sizes.

 

[texelburger]

Yep, and they ignore how much cows contribute. Methane emitted by cows is largely sequestered by the pasture on which they graze, which wouldn't be there were it not for cows. Not withstanding all the things produced and provided by grazing livestock, meat milk leather pharmacuticals etc etc. Aviation, by comparison, provides transport and pollution, nothing positive environmentally, and for the most part, not obligatory to human life.

I read somewhere that the area of grass needed for 1 livestock unit sequestration twice the carbon that the livestock unit emits.Grass fed beef and lamb is the best food to save the planet ,a Vegan diet is,well,the opposite. Of course people can twist anything to suit their own agenda and,unfortunately, if people read it enough times on social media they then start to believe.

 

[ISCO]

Yep, and they ignore how much cows contribute. Methane emitted by cows is largely sequestered by the pasture on which they graze, which wouldn't be there were it not for cows. Not withstanding all the things produced and provided by grazing livestock, meat milk leather pharmacuticals etc etc. Aviation, by comparison, provides transport and pollution, nothing positive environmentally, and for the most part, not obligatory to human life.

That is the problem though. People will not give up air travel as it would affect there enjoyment of life. Whereas red meat is easy for most to give up as it only 20 minute experience 2 or 3 times a week and there are alternatives. Everyone then feels good about doing there bit for planet and carries on flying etc.

 

[Scribus]

If you class 9 years as ' rapidly breaks down in the atmosphere '

Methane is a very effective greenhouse gas. While its atmospheric concentration is much less than that of carbon dioxide, methane is 28 times more effective (averaged over 100 years) at trapping infrared radiation. The atmospheric residence time of methane is approximately 9 years.

As I said, methane rapidly breaks down in the atmosphere whereas CO2 does not -

this is represented by the constant term, reflecting the result from models that show that even after a thousand years, over 20% of emitted carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere.

The legacy effect of methane is miniscule compared to that of carbon dioxide.

https://www.scitechnol.com/peer-rev...atmospheric-halflife-u53c.php?article_id=6097

 

[texas pete]

That is the problem though. People will not give up air travel as it would affect there enjoyment of life. Whereas red meat is easy for most to give up as it only 20 minute experience 2 or 3 times a week and there are alternatives. Everyone then feels good about doing there bit for planet and carries on flying etc.

20 minutes 2 or 3 times a week. Some folk would be chuffed to bits to get that much meat enjoyment.

 

[Hampton]

They argue emissions from cows (alone) contribute 4.4% to Climate Change, double the climate impact of aviation.

Most sensible figures give aviation emissions at 12-15%.

 

[Hampton]

Heard a guy on the radio saying that electric cars were the answer, never once broaching the subject in his mind of how all the extra electricity would be produced to power the cars!

 

[hendrebc]

Heard a guy on the radio saying that electric cars were the answer, never once broaching the subject in his mind of how all the extra electricity would be produced to power the cars!

Or all the power and raw materials and the power to get the raw materials to make the damn cars. We'd be better off stopping building the cars and keep fixing the old ones. But the economy needs the cars to be built

 

[R tea]

https://www.flightradar24.com/48.5,2.38/4

A live stream of planes active in the sky. I can’t see a few cows stopping the planet warming up!

 

[Hampton]

https://www.flightradar24.com/48.5,2.38/4

A live stream of planes active in the sky. I can’t see a few cows stopping the planet warming up!

Wow, that is crazy when you see it like that (assuming it is true?)