Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Livestock
Livestock & Forage
Methane
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="white_stuffed" data-source="post: 7662986" data-attributes="member: 1751"><p>And the other problems. Some of which are harder to argue ourselves out of than others. </p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Problem 2</strong> – demand for meat and dairy in developing regions</p><p><em>Stabilising global ruminant methane emissions at today’s levels would require those of us in, for example, Europe, the Americas and Oceania who already eat much more than the global average to reduce our consumption, given the growth in the world’s population and the rising demand for meat and dairy in developing regions that currently have much lower consumption per capita.</em></p><p></p><p><strong>Problem 3 – globally, ruminant numbers are increasing</strong></p><p>Stabilisation is in any case not on the cards. Projections are for an increase in ruminant production, and this translates into increases in methane (and other) emissions and, consequently, in extra warming (in reality, regardless whether reported using GWP100 or GWP*). Failure to curtail the demand for ruminant products will make it harder, if not impossible, to meet the climate commitments set out in the Paris Agreement.</p><p></p><p><strong>Problem 4</strong> – its not just the methane – it’s land use and land use opportunity cost</p><p><em>There is a potential opportunity cost in not using this land for other climate mitigation purposes, including for carbon capture and/or bioenergy, or for other reasons such as biodiversity conservation. It is worth emphasising that even if we had a ‘separate basket’ climate policy that treated methane differently to CO2, land-use would likely prove the ultimate constraint on ruminant production, since most models suggest we will require substantial additional land for <a href="https://www.tabledebates.org/building-blocks/methane-and-sustainability-ruminant-livestock" target="_blank">carbon sequestration</a> and bioenergy if we are to reach net-zero CO2 emissions within a timeframe compatible with warming at 1.5-2 °C above pre-industrial temperatures</em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="white_stuffed, post: 7662986, member: 1751"] And the other problems. Some of which are harder to argue ourselves out of than others. [B]Problem 2[/B] – demand for meat and dairy in developing regions [I]Stabilising global ruminant methane emissions at today’s levels would require those of us in, for example, Europe, the Americas and Oceania who already eat much more than the global average to reduce our consumption, given the growth in the world’s population and the rising demand for meat and dairy in developing regions that currently have much lower consumption per capita.[/I] [B]Problem 3 – globally, ruminant numbers are increasing[/B] Stabilisation is in any case not on the cards. Projections are for an increase in ruminant production, and this translates into increases in methane (and other) emissions and, consequently, in extra warming (in reality, regardless whether reported using GWP100 or GWP*). Failure to curtail the demand for ruminant products will make it harder, if not impossible, to meet the climate commitments set out in the Paris Agreement. [B]Problem 4[/B] – its not just the methane – it’s land use and land use opportunity cost [I]There is a potential opportunity cost in not using this land for other climate mitigation purposes, including for carbon capture and/or bioenergy, or for other reasons such as biodiversity conservation. It is worth emphasising that even if we had a ‘separate basket’ climate policy that treated methane differently to CO2, land-use would likely prove the ultimate constraint on ruminant production, since most models suggest we will require substantial additional land for [URL='https://www.tabledebates.org/building-blocks/methane-and-sustainability-ruminant-livestock']carbon sequestration[/URL] and bioenergy if we are to reach net-zero CO2 emissions within a timeframe compatible with warming at 1.5-2 °C above pre-industrial temperatures[/I] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Livestock
Livestock & Forage
Methane
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top