Who’s knobbled the BBC?

Muddyroads

Member
Location
Devon
They just did an entire article on global warming on the 10 o’clock news, and all they talked about was burning fossil fuels!
No mention of animals or methane, of trees or cutting meat consumption.
Is the tide finally turning, or was it a momentary blip?
 

Cowabunga

Member
Location
Ceredigion,Wales
They just did an entire article on global warming on the 10 o’clock news, and all they talked about was burning fossil fuels!
No mention of animals or methane, of trees or cutting meat consumption.
Is the tide finally turning, or was it a momentary blip?
Another slow-news day. Not even the tiny but noisy vegan woke minority got a look in. I bet they redouble their efforts in the coming weeks though.
 

delilah

Member
I did. Politely pointed Roger Harrabin to all the stuff on here explaining that cows are the solution not the problem.

(don't think it will have made any difference tbh, more likely a momentary blip, but point being there's absolutely zero point in slagging these people off, they need cultivating)
 

GeorgeK

Member
Location
Leicestershire
I think there's plenty of internal friction in BBC paradise. Lots of agendas and squabbling behind closed doors. For example the business team (who for some reason never cover farming) do a piece on how important it is to the economy to get airlines going again, shortly followed by the environment bunch releasing a piece saying the exact opposite and how flying must be further curtailed. I like to think there are plenty of death stares and snide remarks whenever the opposing groups cross paths, maybe the occasional rich tea biscuit flung in outrage
 

GeorgeK

Member
Location
Leicestershire
But as a country emit twice the amount of the second most polluting nation on Earth, the United States of America.
It's interesting to also look at C02/km2, because while America emits a lot per capita it's a big country with a lot of wilderness to soak some back up. If we are interested in the really important figure which is net emissions then absortion capacity does count, just like with farming.
.
By this measure Singapore is the worst, we are 17 and USA ranks 37. Peru has the least emissions for the area of country.
 
Thats like saying we produce 270 x the pollution of Fiji.
Per capita adds context.
Does context excuse the building of as many coal-fired power stations as they wish, because their emissions per head will still be lower than other countries? Surely that is just using the fact that a fifth of the world's population is Chinese?
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: PSQ

Poorbuthappy

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Devon
If human beings are the cause of excess ghg, surely you have to look at production of it in terms of population? And interestingly (controversially) China are the ones who have tried to curtail population growth too.

Certainly not looking to defend the building of coal power stations though, but they are also doing huge amounts of work on renewable approaches too, as well as a plethora of electric car manufacturers.
 

melted welly

Member
Location
DD9.
It's interesting to also look at C02/km2, because while America emits a lot per capita it's a big country with a lot of wilderness to soak some back up. If we are interested in the really important figure which is net emissions then absortion capacity does count, just like with farming.
.
By this measure Singapore is the worst, we are 17 and USA ranks 37. Peru has the least emissions for the area of country.
thats interesting.

One thing that stuck out for me though, was that a square km of uk “wilderness” ie highlands, moors will have far greater sequestration potential than a square km of Saudi Desert. So I’m not sure how much use these calculations are.
 

Flat 10

Member
Location
Fen Edge
I think there's plenty of internal friction in BBC paradise. Lots of agendas and squabbling behind closed doors. For example the business team (who for some reason never cover farming) do a piece on how important it is to the economy to get airlines going again, shortly followed by the environment bunch releasing a piece saying the exact opposite and how flying must be further curtailed. I like to think there are plenty of death stares and snide remarks whenever the opposing groups cross paths, maybe the occasional rich tea biscuit flung in outrage
I don’t know what snacks bbc staff have but I bet it’s not as working class as a rich tea biscuits. I bet there’s very few biscuits in the building. I reckon it’s all green tea, houmous and carrot sticks.....
 
Tags
health

Rejuvenating swards: Which option is best?

  • 48
  • 0


Written by Brian McDonnell

Maintaining grass quality during mid-season grazing is important. Farmers can maintain quality by entering ideal grazing covers of 1,300 – 1,500kg DM/ha, and grazing down to a residual of 4cm every rotation.

If you are now in a situation where cows are not cleaning out paddocks as well as they should be, leading to the development of steamy grass within the sward, here are some options.

Common options for rejuvenating swards include:

  1. Take a silage cut, probably into bales, remove the material and start again with the aftermath...
Top