Methane

[delilah]

This one is almost useful:

Using the impact share figures from Monday's IPPC AR6 report global methane emissions in the last decade break down like this:

View attachment 979289

Fossil fuels released as much methane as ruminants did and have been under reporting this for years.

Landfills are a pretty big deal on it as well. At least we get food in return for the ruminant emissions, we get nothing for the landfill ones.

The easiest methane emissions to tackle are actually the coal, oil and gas ones (stop mains leaks, stop or capture leaks at wells) and the landfill ones (collect it and use for heating).

The report also states that the major issue is from rising methane emissions and these are in Asia, The Americas and Eastern Europe.

Finally, and critically, it states that cutting methane emissions will only buy time (around 11 years) to get on with DEEP AND PERMANENT cuts in carbon dioxide emissions in all countries and that doing one without the other will be pointless.

Ruminant methane is a very small part of the problem, blown out of all proportion because it suits everyone else's narrative.

Have you got any links to published evidence on the methane emissions variability within species? It would be very useful to have.

Asked this on another thread where that graph appeared, will ask again as it's bugging me:
if 'wild animals' are 0%, how can 'enteric fermentation and manure' be 15% ? Are buffalo, antelopes etc designed different from cows ?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Asked this on another thread where that graph appeared, will ask again as it's bugging me:
if 'wild animals' are 0%, how can 'enteric fermentation and manure' be 15% ? Are buffalo, antelopes etc designed different from cows ?

Firstly, these figures are all estimates. Nobody actually measures all these things accurately so the figures all come from mathematical models and we all know their weaknesses.

Secondly, the percentage hides a figure so low that it rounds to zero %.

Another point: none of these figures count sequestration in pasture. Carbon held in trees is counted but not in the soil because these spreadsheets use methods that pre-date current understanding around sequestration.

We are pushing the bounds of accepted science.....

 

[delilah]

Secondly, the percentage hides a figure so low that it rounds to zero %.

Next obvious question then: How many domesticated ruminants are there ? And how many wild ruminants are there ?

 

[DaveGrohl]

Firstly, these figures are all estimates. Nobody actually measures all these things accurately so the figures all come from mathematical models and we all know their weaknesses.

Secondly, the percentage hides a figure so low that it rounds to zero %.

Another point: none of these figures count sequestration in pasture. Carbon held in trees is counted but not in the soil because these spreadsheets use methods that pre-date current understanding around sequestration.

We are pushing the bounds of accepted science.....

Never hurts to be reminded of the poor quality of the data /science behind all this.
It's all pretty shameful/embarrassing given quite how highly and widely these figures are worshipped by those in power and in the media.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Next obvious question then: How many domesticated ruminants are there ? And how many wild ruminants are there ?

Again, all estimates but...

Have you seen the figures quoted that farm livestock (just cattle, sheep, pigs, goats, chickens and turkeys) greatly exceed the weight of all non domesticated land animals now?

 

[delilah]

From Wiki:

Methane production by meat animals, principally ruminants, is estimated 15–20% global production of methane, unless the animals were hunted in the wild.[45][46]

Why ? What is the difference ?

 

[Henarar]

From Wiki:

Methane production by meat animals, principally ruminants, is estimated 15–20% global production of methane, unless the animals were hunted in the wild.[45][46]

Why ? What is the difference ?

perhaps whoever put that on wiki don't like farm animals but likes hunting

 

[delilah]

The Chillingham cattle then, they aren't contributing to UK GHG emissions ? Someone explain the difference, biologically. Because I'm confused.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

The Chillingham cattle then, they aren't contributing to UK GHG emissions ? Someone explain the difference, biologically. Because I'm confused.

I would have thought it makes it harder to defend the use of bovines in rewilding projects where they are not actively being used for meat production.

The whole issue around the science of land sequestration and ruminant methane has a distinctly "wild west" feel at the moment where everyone and their dog are making claims to suit themselves in the absence of scientific consensus.

 

[delilah]

where everyone and their dog are making claims to suit themselves in the absence of scientific consensus.

Except UK ag.

 

[DaveGrohl]

I would have thought it makes it harder to defend the use of bovines in rewilding projects where they are not actively being used for meat production.

The whole issue around the science of land sequestration and ruminant methane has a distinctly "wild west" feel at the moment where everyone and their dog are making claims to suit themselves in the absence of scientific consensus.

Yeah, cos scientific concensus is alway right of course.

This is my biggest problem with all of the climate change/fossil fuels stupour the world is in. The "science" is shocking. It feels entirely like the days when vitamin C was used by sailors to ward off scurvy but the powers that be wouldn't have it. No no no. That's the level of debate we're currently at imo. Not that I was there of course, ahem...

 

[Tarw Coch]

Except UK ag.

No difference in U.K. ag, any amount of posts on here on why cows aren’t the problem, the carbon cycle etc.
Ok, some of our leaders are making ridiculous claims but they’re not grass roots farmers and never will be, they’re just looking out for their next job on some quango and the possibility of a honour

 

[HatsOff]

Thanks to the people who have collected these charts togeter. I need to go look again at the IPCC report.

Factually, cows do produce methane... but understanding what that means in terms of climate change has been developing and as far as I can see, the IPCC haven't made a big deal of it and it's seems like the science has got to a point where reducing ruminants numbers 'buys time but won't solve anything'.

But what did happen is the Environmental groups - with large numbers of vegans and vegetarians on staff - leapt onto the idea that their diet could save the world. That's where the narrative has got us, but it seems has left the science behind.

We could do with a good synopsis of where the science is with this. What UK agriculture can or is doing. And send it to all our MPs...

 

[DaveGrohl]

Thanks to the people who have collected these charts togeter. I need to go look again at the IPCC report.

Factually, cows do produce methane... but understanding what that means in terms of climate change has been developing and as far as I can see, the IPCC haven't made a big deal of it and it's seems like the science has got to a point where reducing ruminants numbers 'buys time but won't solve anything'.

But what did happen is the Environmental groups - with large numbers of vegans and vegetarians on staff - leapt onto the idea that their diet could save the world. That's where the narrative has got us, but it seems has left the science behind.

We could do with a good synopsis of where the science is with this. What UK agriculture can or is doing. And send it to all our MPs...

Yup, you've got it in a nutshell. The sad thing is the "buys time" bit is irrelevant because it doesn't actually buy any significant time at all because the reduction in relevant carbon emissions from wiping edible ruminants from the planet in an instant is of the order of a couple of percentage points. These calculations have been done. When I left school that meant there was another 98 odd % left to worry about. Then we're quickly back up to 100 %. It's a while since I left school though.

 

[delilah]

that professor on farming today did admit that ruminants had in the past at least have prevented and may still be preventing an ice age.
the ruminants should be applauded for that shouldn't they

Just hearing the Prof again he seems to go round in circles. At least Stuart Roberts is clear in his message: We need to cut cow numbers, we need to spend more money on feed and genetics.
FFS.

 

[Top Tip.]

Just hearing the Prof again he seems to go round in circles. At least Stuart Roberts is clear in his message: We need to cut cow numbers, we need to spend more money on feed and genetics.
FFS.

Why is he not brought to account for statements like that ,I know if one of our reps at NFUS was to come out with a comment like that they wouldn’t be in the job for long.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Why is he not brought to account for statements like that ,I know if one of our reps at NFUS was to come out with a comment like that they wouldn’t be in the job for long.

Because its union policy.....

 

[primmiemoo]

Is Farming Today aware of TFF?

 

[Top Tip.]

Because its union policy.....

I think it is time for a rethink

 

[delilah]

Is Farming Today aware of TFF?

I have previously sent Caz Graham some info compiled from here, will drop her a line pointing to this thread.
The thing is, and as Caz would correctly point out, it isn't Farming Today blaming cows, they just ask the questions, it is the NFU, AHDB et al giving the wrong answers to those questions that is the issue.