Although I am not against "worldwatch" writings, I do Well said Matt,
Although I am not against "worldwatch" writings, I do find them sometimes exceedingly general, is not that cows are not producing methane, I have not yet found any studies of "measurements" under grass-fed conditions (let alone different environment conditions). Cows, surprisingly, can be a solution, as carbon farmers of america are trying and achieving, the problem is that this is happening in a temperate relatively wet condition, as the land gets drier the microbiota that allows carbon fixing in soil, drops dramatically. I find that there has been more done by progressive farmers than by serious researchers, that said, I guess that academia is still hoocked on chemicals and big farm thinking. Abraham de Alba Avila Terrestrial Plant Ecology INIFAP-Ags Ap. postal 20, Pabellón Arteaga, 20660 Aguascalientes, MEXICO SKYPE: adealba55 Tel: (465) 95-801-67, & 801-86 ext. 126, FAX ext 102 alternate: dealba.abra...@inifap.gob.mx cel: 449-157-7070 ________________________________ From: Matt Davies <gmdav...@u.washington.edu> To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Fri, October 8, 2010 5:11:17 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Agriculture in a Steady State Economy This isn't my area of expertise but I fear that the issue is probably more complex than Burak suggests. Though farm animals utilise C from grass and hay (which has been sequestered from the atmosphere) it is a significant simplification to state that this means that livestock production isn't a major source of GHGs. We need to consider the whole agricultural system, not just what the animals might eat. Potential issues might include (off the top of my head): 1) Farm animals are fed a range of things (e.g. alfalfa, corn, silage) which are relatively in-put/energy intensive to produce, harvest and process 2) Land-use for forage crops can lead to the destruction of range and forest land with subsequent C-loss implications from vegetation and soil 3) Livestock management, processing and transport uses considerable amounts of fossil energy 4) Livestock eat C that was sequestered as CO2 but release not insignificant amounts of it as CH4 Some forms of production may have less of a carbon footprint than others. There is likely a big difference between intensive feedlot production of cattle compared to extensive rangeland grazing systems. If anyone can suggest some could papers studying the carbon balance of livestock systems I'd be very interested. Matt Pekin, Burak K wrote: > The claim that livestock are the largest contributor to greenhouse emissions, >particularly CO2, is misleading. Much of the CO2 emitted by farm animals is >from renewable sources, i.e. grass/hay, while CO2 emissions from the transport >industry are from non-renewable sources, primarily oil. > > > _____________________________________ > > Burak K. Pekin > Postdoctoral Research Associate > Department of Forestry and Natural Resources > Purdue University > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news >[mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Rob Dietz > Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 12:59 PM > To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU > Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Agriculture in a Steady State Economy > > Please take a look at Brent Blackwelder's essay in The Daly News -- it's > about >how today's farming practices would be different in a steady state economy. >You >can find the essay here: > http://steadystate.org/food-and-agriculture-in-a-steady-state-economy/ > > Thanks, > Rob > > -- > > Robert Dietz > Executive Director > CASSE > steadystate.org -- Dr G Matt Davies College of Forest Resources University of Washington Room 034, Merrill Hall Box 354115, Seattle, WA 98195-4115 Tel: (001) 206-685-8755 E-mail: gmdav...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/gmdavies
