- Location
- Carmarthenshire, West Wales
just sent this off after listening to the World at 1 during lunch, I wonder if I will get a response?
Dear Sir/Madam,
.
I am an avid Radio 4 listener as well as an organic/regenerative farmer.
I have just been listening to The World at 1, and they interviewed Dale Vince, who was saying something along the lines of, we need to stop eating meat for climate change, these type of comments were not questioned.
I would counter, that soil sequesters Carbon when grazed, especially in an regenerative way. Regenerative farming, means (with animals mob grazing) and prioritising allowing the soil biology to work, this makes the soil more fertile (by drawing down Carbon).
If we took grazing animals out of the equation, not only would 2/3 of the land in the UK come out of production, but the remaining 1/3 would have to gain it's fertility from artificial fertlisers, which are made by the use of Natural Gas, as well as continuing to lose soil organic matter (held Carbon).
I have also read that permanent pasture, when planted with trees emits Carbon as the trees grow, so newly planted woodland is only Carbon equal to grazing land (and only if the wood is never allowed to rot or burn). I recently read that the highest emitter of Carbon is actually wood rotting.
I have also read an article saying that large areas of Australia will probably have to be abandoned to agriculture, even if we limit climate change to 1.5 degrees. Bearing this in mind, is it sensible to stop farming 2/3 of the UK land bearing this in mind?
I hope you will look into these number crunching questions.
Yours
Dear Sir/Madam,
.
I am an avid Radio 4 listener as well as an organic/regenerative farmer.
I have just been listening to The World at 1, and they interviewed Dale Vince, who was saying something along the lines of, we need to stop eating meat for climate change, these type of comments were not questioned.
I would counter, that soil sequesters Carbon when grazed, especially in an regenerative way. Regenerative farming, means (with animals mob grazing) and prioritising allowing the soil biology to work, this makes the soil more fertile (by drawing down Carbon).
If we took grazing animals out of the equation, not only would 2/3 of the land in the UK come out of production, but the remaining 1/3 would have to gain it's fertility from artificial fertlisers, which are made by the use of Natural Gas, as well as continuing to lose soil organic matter (held Carbon).
I have also read that permanent pasture, when planted with trees emits Carbon as the trees grow, so newly planted woodland is only Carbon equal to grazing land (and only if the wood is never allowed to rot or burn). I recently read that the highest emitter of Carbon is actually wood rotting.
I have also read an article saying that large areas of Australia will probably have to be abandoned to agriculture, even if we limit climate change to 1.5 degrees. Bearing this in mind, is it sensible to stop farming 2/3 of the UK land bearing this in mind?
I hope you will look into these number crunching questions.
Yours