U.K. dairying and “Climate Change”

[coomoo]

So on countryfile the house builder payed the dairy to quit milk to offset phosphate pollution

Wimpy homes pm me for my contact details....

Your not needing phosphate pollution to make your spot anymore desirable to Wimpy

 

[betweenthelines]

Housed herds
Every farm to install renewable energy
Injected slurry
No maize
Manipulated diets (see first line)

And that’s just off the top of my head

There's so much questionable information floating about that I doubt if more than a few hundred people in the world know and understand it all and know the direction individuals and businesses should be going.

All the ideas above have a valid counter argument.
Housed herds need all their feed bought to them by fuel burning kit, turning cows out to graze doesn't.
Same with slurry, the less time the cows are housed, the less slurry there is to deal with. Low level application will use less fuel than injecting it.
Why stop growing maize? We should be developing varieties that can be harvested for the grain so we reduce imports. (And maize loves slurry)
Grass & clover will be the lowest cost diets. What can be better than turning sunshine into food (albeit via livestock) and clover gives you free nitrogen.

With regard to the Carbon footprint of farming or anything else, it just depends where you stop counting. A full aircraft flying across the Atlantic may be considered carbon efficient in terms of carbon burnt per mile travelled per passenger, but what about building the plane, constructing the airport, travelling to the airport etc. etc. etc.
We all know the argument about dairy milk produced in the UK versus milk substitute from irrigated Californian Almonds.

 

[bigw]

Christ this is depressing. A good farmer is carbon efficient I’d say.

Hardly depressing as there will be oppertunities for those who stay in the industry especially ones with a good paying contract.

 

[kiwi pom]

It appears the Americans have it sorted John kerry stated on Marr this morning that we don't need to give up quality of life we just need to allow science to come up with solutions we don't know about yet

I think there's more chance of new tech saving the planet, than just cutting down on meat and dairy.

 

[Bramble]

Completely agree, unless consumption changes then methane/CO2 emissions will only move overseas.

Similar to recycling - we don’t have the facilities to do it here so stick it all on a boat to India/Bangladesh/China where they just burn it or bung it in the sea, but it’s OK ‘cos they give you a nice certificate saying it’s been disposed of.

If the government want to go down this route they should be pushed to legislate that imported food comes with some sort of CO2 passport, including transport emissions

BBC report this morning that UK plastic being dumped and burned in Turkey instead of being recycled. Turkey takes 40% of our plastic waste.

Great example of us exporting our environmental responsibilities. Well done Greepeace for the investigation

 

[Sid]

This was floating round the internet the other day.
Shows that cutting cattle numbers will have an effect that most folk probably never thought of.
Bit like the banning of any new opencast coal mining. --
The brick makers are wondering where their next load of clay is coming from

View attachment 961370

Should tattoo that on every vegan as a reminder to them.

 

[devonbeef]

Payout per cow, circa 400 quid year index linked for 20 years, 5 500kw windmills and 500 acres of panels. Wild bird meadow the rest and watch the world starve, but in a renewable way

At the mo all planning their next flight abroad, They only care as long as their life is not effected.You couldn't make it up. Hypocrisy at the highest level.

 

[GeorgeK]

BBC report this morning that UK plastic being dumped and burned in Turkey instead of being recycled. Turkey takes 40% of our plastic waste.

Great example of us exporting our environmental responsibilities. Well done Greepeace for the investigation

Meanwhile it turns out solar panels are only cheap if you don't object to slave labour. The unseen costs of the green revolution.

China uses Uyghur forced labour to make solar panels, says report

A report says 45% of the world's supply of a key panel component is obtained by a system of coercion.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[jerseycowsman]

“Meat and dairy consumption must fall if Britain is to meet its 2050 net zero target”

No doubt we will see strenuous attempts to achieve this perhaps even by legislation.

So the question is:

How are you, as dairy farmers in the front line, going to react?
What do you think will be coming down the line?

Explain the carbon cycle to all the scientists that seem to have forgotten it

 

[jerseycowsman]

So what are you doing different now than you were 10 years ago to be increasing organic matter.
But when your organic matter breaks down to create new soil it releases all it's carbon as carbon dioxide

Can you explain the chemistry of OM releasing carbon as it becomes soil?

 

[br jones]

BBC report this morning that UK plastic being dumped and burned in Turkey instead of being recycled. Turkey takes 40% of our plastic waste.

Great example of us exporting our environmental responsibilities. Well done Greepeace for the investigation

i belive we paid the turkish company to take it ,is that our fault ?

 

[mixed farm]

The most helpful thing to do to lower emissions and your carbon footprint is not to have children. So every one with children shouldn't be allowed to lecture about this. And everyone without children can do as they want cause the next generation isn't their problem! Global warming debate solved!

 

[frederick]

Can you explain the chemistry of OM releasing carbon as it becomes soil?

So organic matter is named as such because it is material that contains carbon. Soil is simply a collection of minerals. As the organic matter decays to just minerals so soil the C is released as CO2.
This is why it is only the increase in organic matter that can be counted as carbon sequestration.

The trouble is as you increase the organic matter of the soil you increase the biological activity and hence the increase in CO2 emissions. From what I have read it is not long until a new equilibrium is reached when capture equals release.
The greatest opportunity for sequestration is probably turning arable soils into permanent pastures but I have yet to see much scope in increasing permanent pastures annual capture.

 

[Bramble]

i belive we paid the turkish company to take it ,is that our fault ?

Depends if we as a society actually want to take responsibilty for the plastic we end up using, or we just pay lip service to the idea of recycling by getting someone else to ‘dispose’ of it.

You can be sure all the stuff that ended up in Turkey came with all the correct paperwork for those who sent it there from the UK

Now substitute ‘exporting plastic‘ for ‘importing food’. Yes we may reduce methane emissions from the U.K. but we are only moving the problem somewhere else in the world.

Consumption is unlikely to change much in reality, people will still eat meat/dairy products

 

[frederick]

Depends if we as a society actually want to take responsibilty for the plastic we end up using, or we just pay lip service to the idea of recycling by getting someone else to ‘dispose’ of it.

You can be sure all the stuff that ended up in Turkey came with all the correct paperwork for those who sent it there from the UK

Now substitute ‘exporting plastic‘ for ‘importing food’. Yes we may reduce methane emissions from the U.K. but we are only moving the problem somewhere else in the world.

Consumption is unlikely to change much in reality, people will still eat meat/dairy products

It's worse than that we are likely to export our food production to the less efficient and therefore increase the carbon footprint.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

So organic matter is named as such because it is material that contains carbon. Soil is simply a collection of minerals. As the organic matter decays to just minerals so soil the C is released as CO2.
This is why it is only the increase in organic matter that can be counted as carbon sequestration.

The trouble is as you increase the organic matter of the soil you increase the biological activity and hence the increase in CO2 emissions. From what I have read it is not long until a new equilibrium is reached when capture equals release.
The greatest opportunity for sequestration is probably turning arable soils into permanent pastures but I have yet to see much scope in increasing permanent pastures annual capture.

Actually "soil" also includes huge quantities of living organisms, all with carbon in their bodies. A significant proportion of the carbon in a healthy soil is in this form.

Much of this carbon remains trapped in the soil and is recycled there into new organisms.

 

[betweenthelines]

i belive we paid the turkish company to take it ,is that our fault ?

Would the same logic apply to paying someone abroad to plant trees to offset the carbon emissions of air travel?

Passengers/air lines can say "Well, we paid X to plant the trees, we are being good boys" even though they know (or never check) that the trees weren't planted?

Just exporting the blame

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

The most helpful thing to do to lower emissions and your carbon footprint is not to have children. So every one with children shouldn't be allowed to lecture about this. And everyone without children can do as they want cause the next generation isn't their problem! Global warming debate solved!

Your point is technically correct. As s parent of only one child I'll accept your rule in return for you agreeing not to force my child to look after you in old age or to complain about provision for the elderly.......

 

[frederick]

Actually "soil" also includes huge quantities of living organisms, all with carbon in their bodies. A significant proportion of the carbon in a healthy soil is in this form.

Much of this carbon remains trapped in the soil and is recycled there into new organisms.

Yes but as you've stated it is recycled so organisms die and decay and this is used by new organisms but it is at a balance point where carbon captured equals carbon release. If this was not the case all our soils would be predominantly organic matter by now.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Would the same logic apply to paying someone abroad to plant trees to offset the carbon emissions of air travel?

Passengers/air lines can say "Well, we paid X to plant the trees, we are being good boys" even though they know (or never check) that the trees weren't planted?

Just exporting the blame

Where the trees are planted is not a huge issue, Whether they are planted and maintained is a very big issue as you say. Even bigger is that we are supposed to be cutting emissions urgently, certainly within 10 to 15 years. Trees take much longer than that to really ramp up their carbon sequestration so trees planted today will take decades to "offset" fossil fuel emissions created today.