http://m.farmersguardian.com/49734.article?mobilesite=enabled

HILL and upland farms in Scotland are not being given the credit they
deserve for the substantial role they play in improving the environment
through the removal of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere.This is
according to Dr Jimmy Hyslop, SAC beef specialist, speaking at the launch
of Quality Meat Scotland’s (QMS) latest research and development report.He
said while the role of sheep and cattle as sources of greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, principally methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), is high
profile, the environmental benefit many farms deliver through carbon
sequestration is not generally appreciated.He said calculations which do
not consider the role of grassland in sequestration (capturing and storing
carbon) ignore a huge part of the pollution equation.“At a farm scale
level, several carbon footprint calculators are now available to estimate
the tonnes of CO2 equivalents produced for each enterprise. The results are
usually expressed per tonne of beef or lamb produced,” said Dr
Hyslop.“However, while there is general acceptance grassland does sequester
carbon, no assessment of this is currently undertaken because no accepted
mechanisms exist to achieve this in practical circumstances on
farms.Further research“The next step is for further research to develop
methods to calculate the carbon sequestration potential of land, which will
deliver at a practical farm implementation level.”While there are some
techniques around to look at this challenge, these are very much at an
early stage, said Dr Hyslop. Meanwhile, the livestock industry is being
asked more and more, by processors and retailers, to provide information to
be used to calculate the carbon footprint of their farms.“In Scotland we
have a lot of hill ground with low stocking rates which doesn’t emit much
CO2 equivalent per hectare and vast areas of grassland sequestering
carbon.“We can’t say with certainty these unimproved or semi-improved areas
are sequestering an amount of carbon which would offset the equivalent
being generated by beef and lamb production on these farms because we don’t
have the technology to prove it, however, it probably is the case.”The
latest QMS-funded res-earch project, led by Dr Hyslop, showed extensive
farms with low stocking rates, less than 0.5 livestock units/hectare
(0.2/acre), have low outputs of GHGs and therefore have a low requirement
for carbon sequestration (less than 0.4t/ha or 0.1t/acre) from their own
livestock production.However, these farms in particular, also have large
areas of grassland with the potential to sequester carbon, added Dr
Hyslop.Accepted“The methodology rem-ains to be tested and the figure for
carbon sequestration potential identified in a recent European project
remains to be validated. However, it is widely accepted soils growing
Scotland’s grassland may be capable of sequestering at least a substantial
part of its livestock-based CO2 equivalent emissions.“Further research work
to establish these recent developments in carbon sequestration methodology
is required. This is particularly in the area of actual carbon
sequestration potential of individual grassland sites, to provide reliable
predictors of this under practical farming conditions.”The QMS carbon
projectData and background information on suckler beef and sheep was
collected from 21 farms throughout ScotlandThis information was used in the
calculation of a standard ‘carbon footprint’ for beef and sheep production
systems and then re-calculated to be expressed in terms of carbon
sequestration needed per hectare of grassland to wholly negate these
‘carbon footprints’For each of the 21 farms sampled, the tonnes of carbon
sequestration per ha needed to negate the GHG emissions associated with the
beef and sheep production systems was calculated. The figures range from
0.06-2.89 tonnes of carbon per grassland ha (0.02-1.16t/acre), with an
average value of 1.06t/ha (0.4t/acre)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.

Reply via email to