Soya, whats the right way of it.

[Macsky]

Is the deforestation strictly to grow soya in its place? Or is there much of the ground that is put down to grass as I read somewhere, to graze the cattle that have been displaced by soya being grown on their native plains?

 

[andybk]

different neighbour was going to grow lupins , they didnt because he was told they are quite difficult to get rid of (as volunteers )

 

[tepapa]

Is the deforestation strictly to grow soya in its place? Or is there much of the ground that is put down to grass as I read somewhere, to graze the cattle that have been displaced by soya being grown on their native plains?

Think it's all part of the process. They can't cultivate straight after clearing as there is still a mass of timber branches and roots left so grass it down and use it for cattle. Hence why cattle farming gets blamed for deforestation. After a few years of stuff rotting down and a bit more clearing it becomes cropable and they plant soya and the cattle move further into newly deforested areas.

 

[Simon Chiles]

different neighbour was going to grow lupins , they didnt because he was told they are quite difficult to get rid of (as volunteers )

More twaddle. A volunteer Lupin wouldn’t make it through winter and can be easily controlled by herbicide.

 

[yellow belly]

We produce our own high protein feed in the uk most plants in England where the feed stock is grown
byproducts of
ethanol production wheat and maize
starch production wheat
Cerestar Wheat
and rape crushers

adding up to several million tonnes of high protein meal
unfortunately because of dubious environmentle reasons the uk rape production is half what it was 5 years ago

the feed from brewing and distilling also has higher protien than the original grain

if the vegans really want to use a sustainable protein they should use the faba bean grown in the uk
we export a lot to Egypt and North Africa where it is one of the staple food they use

 

[Boysground]

We produce our own high protein feed in the uk most plants in England where the feed stock is grown
byproducts of
ethanol production wheat and maize
starch production wheat
Cerestar Wheat
and rape crushers

adding up to several million tonnes of high protein meal
unfortunately because of dubious environmentle reasons the uk rape production is half what it was 5 years ago

the feed from brewing and distilling also has higher protien than the original grain

if the vegans really want to use a sustainable protein they should use the faba bean grown in the uk
we export a lot to Egypt and North Africa where it is one of the staple food they use

This is the point the vegans/antis etc miss. Much of the food fed to cattle is the byproduct of human food production.

I have fed a lot of Trafford gold in the past, it became too expensive mainly due to the cost of getting it to Wiltshire. There should be more protein for livestock grown in the uk but realistically how economic is it, I’m buying beans to replace rape meal, they cost me £200/ t before rolling, as a milk producer I don’t really want to pay more than this as rape meal then becomes the product of choice. If I was allowed to feed soya it is also about the maximum I could pay before soya is the choice.

But as the one who runs the arable enterprise here I am not keen to grow any more beans they are just too unreliable, flints and chalk just make peas a no go, I have no idea about the potential of lupins but keen to give anything a go. I’m growing Lucerne on the arable farm this year for black grass reduction and more cow protein.

Perhaps the government should realise that by banning nicatinamoides they have perhaps increased the amount of soya that will be brought into the country because of the reduction in rape area.

Bg

 

[ollie989898]

Think it's all part of the process. They can't cultivate straight after clearing as there is still a mass of timber branches and roots left so grass it down and use it for cattle. Hence why cattle farming gets blamed for deforestation. After a few years of stuff rotting down and a bit more clearing it becomes cropable and they plant soya and the cattle move further into newly deforested areas.

They grow huge acreages of corn as well in these areas of South America. And if it wasn't corn or soya it would be something else again. The problem is you have a developing country that has large numbers of people who are looking to earn cash however they can, even if it means cutting down and selling illegally harvested exotic timber. Of course, they are cottoning on to the tourist trade and can make money far more easily from that but big corporations (probably with the complicit nod of their government who wants the foreign currency) are well down the road of growing big acreages of commodities for export.

 

[Renaultman]

Obviously monogastrics can't deal with a lot of crude protein of the sort a cow or sheep would routinely ingest. They need a higher quality protein that doesn't cost the Earth.

Fishmeal anyone?

Please no

 

[andybk]

Please no

whats wrong with fishmeal ? especially if its the waste from regular fishing . catching specifically for feed is a different matter

 

[Renaultman]

whats wrong with fishmeal ? especially if its the waste from regular fishing . catching specifically for feed is a different matter

It bloody stinks.

 

[som farmer]

It bloody stinks.

so it might, but it's some f-ing good stuff ! We are told early man developed by making fire, and eating cooked meat, and the protien from that encouraged brain development, that's just given me a nasty thought re vegans, lack of right protien, brain shrinks........... So if we are relying on plant protien to feed to stock, are they missing out of other protiens and amino acids, which were in processed animal waste, that are simply not present in plant's ? I do not think we will ever be allowed to use food derived from animals by product, again, BSE and F+M made that certain, so will develop better substitutes, off thread, but interesting thoughts,

 

[white_stuffed]

Can anyone explain the right way of soya production? having an argument with someone who says 90% is grown for livestock and only 10% for humans but is the oil not removed from it for human use and what's left is soya as we know it ?

I found this really interesting report on soya, mainly looking at drivers of deforestation but lots of good stuff in there. https://www.transportenvironment.or...0_11_Study_Cerulogy_soy_and_deforestation.pdf

4.1. The global soy market The soy crop is primarily an animal feed crop. While about 2% of global production is consumed directly by humans in products such as tofu Goldsmith (2008), about 90% of the global crop is crushed to produce soy meal for animal feed and soy oil, with the remainder fed to animals directly as soybeans OECD-FAO (2020). The price of soybean oil is higher (per unit mass) than that of soybean meal, but as shown in Figure 27 the meal still provides most of the value from the soybean crush because more meal is produced. Meal accounted for about two thirds of the value on average across the 20-year period shown.

 

[white_stuffed]

There's a lot of interesting stuff in there, including this bit re biofuels, I hadn't realised quite how much biofuels contributed to deforestation.

Over the past 15 years, biofuel policy in Europe has created an additional source of soy oil demand, with significant volumes of material imported either in raw form or processed into biodiesel. As of 2019, something like 2 billion litres a year of soy oil biofuels were being consumed in the EU. Through this biofuel demand, as well as through imports of soy meal as livestock feed, the EU has contributed to an export business that, in South America in particular, has long been identified as a major driver of deforestation. The EU’s recast Renewable Energy Directive (RED II) continues to offer support for food-based biofuels including soy oil biodiesel and renewable diesel1 , but introduces a new category of ‘high ILUC-risk’ biofuel feedstocks, for which support will be gradually eliminated between 2023 and 2030. Palm oil has been labelled as high ILUC-risk, but while soy oil was identified as the biofuel feedstock second most strongly associated with conversion of high carbon stock areas the initial EU assessment found that it was below the threshold for action.

 

[Exfarmer]

I found this really interesting report on soya, mainly looking at drivers of deforestation but lots of good stuff in there. https://www.transportenvironment.or...0_11_Study_Cerulogy_soy_and_deforestation.pdf

View attachment 951712
4.1. The global soy market The soy crop is primarily an animal feed crop. While about 2% of global production is consumed directly by humans in products such as tofu Goldsmith (2008), about 90% of the global crop is crushed to produce soy meal for animal feed and soy oil, with the remainder fed to animals directly as soybeans OECD-FAO (2020). The price of soybean oil is higher (per unit mass) than that of soybean meal, but as shown in Figure 27 the meal still provides most of the value from the soybean crush because more meal is produced. Meal accounted for about two thirds of the value on average across the 20-year period shown.

Their is some funny maths there!
Looking back over the last 25 years, there has certainly been ups and downs in the market, but it is difficult to find times when the oil value was not close to twice the value of the meal as a proportion of the milled constituents.
Currently in a tonne of soya, there is about $440 dollars of oil and $210 of meal

 

[betweenthelines]

It's grown for the oil is-hardly anyone would grown it just to process into animal feed. Just the same as OSR

 

[white_stuffed]

Their is some funny maths there!
Looking back over the last 25 years, there has certainly been ups and downs in the market, but it is difficult to find times when the oil value was not close to twice the value of the meal as a proportion of the milled constituents.
Currently in a tonne of soya, there is about $440 dollars of oil and $210 of meal

Where did you get your figures and proportions from? I know it is a knotty calculation, I've got this explanation (it is a few years out of date but the proportions and relative prices are approx the same) from https://marketviewdb.centrec.com/uploads/briefs/MVI (18-5) Value Concepts- EPV.pdf
£3.56 out of total value £10.70 = 33% oil value and 67% feed.

oil yielded from crushing a bushel of soybeans (11.12 lbs/bu); quantity of meal yielded from a bushel (43.38 lbs/bu), hulls 3.9lb/bushel

 

[white_stuffed]

Is the deforestation strictly to grow soya in its place? Or is there much of the ground that is put down to grass as I read somewhere, to graze the cattle that have been displaced by soya being grown on their native plains?

Think it's all part of the process. They can't cultivate straight after clearing as there is still a mass of timber branches and roots left so grass it down and use it for cattle. Hence why cattle farming gets blamed for deforestation. After a few years of stuff rotting down and a bit more clearing it becomes cropable and they plant soya and the cattle move further into newly deforested areas.

It's complicated....

From the Cerulogy report:-

“One simple way to categorise episodes of deforestation is by identifying new land uses that replace lost forest – for instance cattle pasture, agriculture or urban expansion. This can sometimes be referred to as identifying the ‘proximate causes’ of deforestation (Geist & Lambin, 2002). Identifying the link between soy farming and deforestation is complicated by the fact that soy is often not planted directly after a deforestation event. It is common for deforestation to be followed by a period of cattle pasturing and then by one or two years of dry rice cultivation to prepare the land before soy is planted as a long-term arable crop, such that five years or longer could pass between deforestation and the establishment of the soy crop (Berkum & Bindraban, 2008).

The European Commission assessment of high ILUC-risk feedstock status (European Commission, 2019a) is based on this type of analysis, identifying areas where cropping follows within a few years after deforestation (or peat drainage). There is always some uncertainty in this assessment – in general the more quickly crop establishment follows deforestation the more confident one can be that crop expansion was the cause of the deforestation event, but ignoring crop establishment taking place later could underestimate the real impact. Simply identifying which land uses follow a deforestation event may not, however, provide a full picture of the underlying causes. It does not consider the value of timber extracted during deforestation, any relationships between agricultural systems or the role of infrastructure development. Geist & Lambin (2002) reviewed identified drivers of tropical deforestation (up to 1996) from 150 cases in the literature and concluded that “tropical deforestation is … best explained by multiple factors and drivers acting synergistically rather than by single-factor. Assessing proximate causes of deforestation allows a greater degree of certainty than trying to assess underlying drivers – assessing what type of vegetation is currently grown on a given land area is a more tractable question than trying to assess what informed the decision to remove tree cover in the first place”

 

[Exfarmer]

Where did you get your figures and proportions from? I know it is a knotty calculation, I've got this explanation (it is a few years out of date but the proportions and relative prices are approx the same) from https://marketviewdb.centrec.com/uploads/briefs/MVI (18-5) Value Concepts- EPV.pdf
£3.56 out of total value £10.70 = 33% oil value and 67% feed.

oil yielded from crushing a bushel of soybeans (11.12 lbs/bu); quantity of meal yielded from a bushel (43.38 lbs/bu), hulls 3.9lb/bushel
View attachment 951916

Sorry, I was using some innaccurate figures I will remove the previous post
That is I would , but for some reason the site will not let me