Monbiot's TV show.....Apocalypse Cow: How Meat Killed the Planet

[Robin1966]

No, we need to improve the methods of recycling carbon, it's what nature does. what could be greener?

Except that energy demand is growing and will continue to do so, so while that will help, we still need to move away from fossil fuels....quickly.

 

[Poorbuthappy]

Global greenhouse gases from agriculture are around 24-28 percent, so globally there's a problem, yes. But, UK GHG emissions are between 6-10 percent, so we're not too badly actually.

Err, not according to UN figures.
GHG emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land uses are 24-28%.
Agriculture is 10-11%.
Livestock farming approx 1/2 of this.
And UK livestock farming is 2-2.5 times better than the global average.

 

[Scribus]

Except that energy demand is growing and will continue to do so, so while that will help, we still need to move away from fossil fuels....quickly.

But in our rush we appear to be cocking things up, the deforestation of Wales and shipping biomass in from Canada are two recent examples on this thread. Then there is another ongoing thread that questions the role of carbon in climate change anyway.

 

[Fuzzy]

Yes, that's biomass, not biogas. Two different things.

Thank you for pointing that out.

@Cowabunga referred to both and i agree with all he said regarding all 3 fuels mentioned in his post.

I did helpfully title my response This is in relation to DRAX power Station

My own knowledge is mainly limited to the heavy engineering projects i have worked on prior to moving into farming, briefly;
Nuclear- most of the UK power stations + 2 oversees plants
CHP - several in the UK and a few in europe
Biomass - Worlds largest Poultry litter power station
Biomass - Straw burning at 2 uk power stations
District Heating/ Power Station - Several plants in Denmark
Combined Cycle Power plant using HRSG
Standby power station for the CAA

 

[Robin1966]

But in our rush we appear to be cocking things up, the deforestation of Wales and shipping biomass in from Canada are two recent examples on this thread. Then there is another ongoing thread that questions the role of carbon in climate change anyway.

There's plenty of evidence on skeptical science but you have to do a fair bit of reading https://skepticalscience.com/

 

[Robin1966]

There's plenty of evidence on skeptical science but you have to do a fair bit of reading https://skepticalscience.com/

However, I agree that biomass probably isn't the best solution.

 

[Robin1966]

Err, not according to UN figures.
GHG emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land uses are 24-28%.
Agriculture is 10-11%.
Livestock farming approx 1/2 of this.
And UK livestock farming is 2-2.5 times better than the global average.

Okay thanks. That's close enough to what I said. I haven't looked at the stats for a while I must admit. ?

 

[Poorbuthappy]

Okay thanks. That's close enough to what I said. I haven't looked at the stats for a while I must admit. ?

How to alienate your farming readers in 1 easy post.
10- 11% is near enough to 24-28% is it?
Bet you wouldn't say that if it was talking about reducing your hourly rate by 11% but someone said 28% is "near enough".

 

[Robin1966]

Okay, so IPCC 2014 shows agriculture, forestry, land use at 24 percent of global emissions: https://www.globalagriculture.org/report-topics/climate-and-energy.html

Which is pretty much what you said, so yes you're right. As I said, I hadn't checked the stats for a while and thus read, incorrectly, the 24 percent as just agriculture. So that actually means that the picture with regard to agricultural emissions is even better than I thought, thankfully. ?

 

[Poorbuthappy]

Okay, so IPCC 2014 shows agriculture, forestry, land use at 24 percent of global emissions: https://www.globalagriculture.org/report-topics/climate-and-energy.html

Which is pretty much what you said, so yes you're right. As I said, I hadn't checked the stats for a while and thus read, incorrectly, the 24 percent as just agriculture. So that actually means that the picture with regard to agricultural emissions is even better than I thought, thankfully. ?

Problem is, that's what we're up against - people often quote as you did.

 

[egbert]

The trouble is, trying to get a piece in the mainstream media is pretty difficult for a relatively unknown freelance journalist like me (unfortunately it all too often it seems to be who you know not what you know). If I had the chance of a reply in The Guardian though, make no mistake, I would berate Monbiot severely.

have you tried presenting them with copy on spec?

 

[Robin1966]

Problem is, that's what we're up against - people often quote as you did.

Sure, but I rightly admitted my mistake when it was pointed out to me, so that's the difference.

 

[Robin1966]

have you tried presenting them with copy on spec?

Hmm, not really I must admit. There's so much emphasis on pitching that sending stuff in on the hop is discouraged, but it's worth a try I guess. Also, I've since remembered, the Independent, HuffPost and Metro are all currently looking for opinion pieces, so I will try those first I think.

 

[Pilatus]

There's plenty of evidence on skeptical science but you have to do a fair bit of reading https://skepticalscience.com/

I find it interesting that the above website came up when playing Devils Advocate I Googled , "Is ice increasing anywhere on the Artic or Antartica". It turns in to a complex subject ,far more complex than I can understand,when they get in to sea ice and land ice.

 

[Cowmangav]

After Monbiot popped up on the BBC's World Service at about 2am on Thursday , and claimed grassland didn't absorb carbon I was unsure of what this programme featuring three vets would be like. Turned out to be an interesting , if not a comforting listen . At least the issues were discussed rationally . Can't be easy being a German vet in Australia with climate change denier customers ! Sad to think she has lost the large animal part of her practice through drought.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csyp1g

 

[Robin1966]

I find it interesting that the above website came up when playing Devils Advocate I Googled , "Is ice increasing anywhere on the Artic or Antartica". It turns in to a complex subject ,far more complex than I can understand,when they get in to sea ice and land ice.

Exactly. The science is very complex. So you have to do a lot of reading and analysing, or just trust the word of climate scientists, who are the professionals in this area.

 

[Robin1966]

After Monbiot popped up on the BBC's World Service at about 2am on Thursday , and claimed grassland didn't absorb carbon I was unsure of what this programme featuring three vets would be like. Turned out to be an interesting , if not a comforting listen . At least the issues were discussed rationally . Can't be easy being a German vet in Australia with climate change denier customers ! Sad to think she has lost the large animal part of her practice through drought.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csyp1g

Thanks, I'll watch that in a bit.

 

[renewablejohn]

Yes, that's biomass, not biogas. Two different things.

Not really Biomass can either be burnt inefficiently in power stations like Drax or converted direct into more efficient biogas.

 

[renewablejohn]

6 months according to this https://www.saskwind.ca/blogbackend/2016/1/14/carbon-and-energy-payback-of-a-wind-turbine

Would be even less if you used the new wooden towers instead of steel towers.

 

[JP1]

Radio4 PM tonight

Some vegan loon being interviewed, then over to a speaker about regenerative agriculture, mob grazing etc. Then presenter asks vegan to basically demolish all the arguments before returning to the regenerative lady with the preface "well meat is a high carbon causing, intensive business" before asking her to dismantle the vegan's spouting

Talk about BBC bias