From: "Thomas Kelly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org
To: <biofuel@sustainablelists.org>
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Power Use
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 15:46:49 -0500
Terry,
You quote The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization as
follows:
"Livestock are one of the most significant contributors to todays
most
serious environmental problems."
You go on to say:
"They also mentioned that livestock produces 9% for CO2 and 37%
methane
and 65% nitrous oxide. Those are world totals."
Where can I find the article you are quoting?
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Dyck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <biofuel@sustainablelists.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Power Use
> Hi Keith,
>
> Because the source of the facts came from the Vancouver Sun's Green
Issue
> in
> Nov. I am not sure of were the Original Union of Concerned Scientists
> study
> is. Here is a quote from Brad Knickerbocker of the Christian Science
> Monitor: "U.S. meat eater are responsible for more tons of CO2 per
person
> than 1 vegetarian per year." The causes are; deforrestation, land for
> feed
> crops, energy for fertilizers, runs to slaugherhouses and meat
processing
> plants, and pumping water.
> The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization's quote.
"Livestock
> are one of the most significant contributors to todays most serious
> environmental problems." This organization also quoted the 18% figure
for
> GHG. They also mentioned that livestock produces 9% for CO2 and 37%
> methane
> and 65% nitrous oxide. Those are world totals.
>
> Terry Dyck
>
>
>>From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply-To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>>To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Power Use
>>Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 02:54:06 +0900
>>
>>Hi Terry
>>
>> >Hi Keith,
>> >
>> >I'm not sure how the math works out but you have to take into
>>consideration
>> >that methane gas is 23 times more potent as a green house gas then
CO2.
>>
>>I didn't forget that, but shouldn't that mean more cars, not fewer
>>cars? Also it's not clear when they say "18% of total global
>>emissions" whether they're referring to methane emissions or total
>>GHG emissions.
>>
>>I think UCS usually gets it right, I don't think they were correctly
>>quoted. But I haven't managed to find the original work at their
>>website.
>>
>> >Also the commercial livestock farms use many times more fossil fuels
to
>> >create food than do organic produce farms. Of course the 100 mile
diet
>>is
>> >important too.
>>
>>Indeed. To sum up, I think the criticism applies to factory farms,
>>which are not farms at all, but it doesn't apply to real farming.
>>Adopting a vegetarian diet is perhaps one alternative to supporting
>>factory farming, but a better alternative is to support sustainable
>>farming, which necessarily includes livestock and meat production.
>>Vegetarianism itself is not a sustainable alternative. As an
>>individual diet choice perhaps, but not as a farming system.
>>
>>Thanks - regards
>>
>>Keith
>>
>>
>> >Terry Dyck
>> >
>> > >From: Keith Addison <keith at journeytoforever.org>
>> > >Reply-To: biofuel at sustainablelists.org
>> > >To: biofuel at sustainablelists.org
>> > >Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Power Use
>> > >Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 19:13:55 +0900
>> > >
>> > >Hi Terry
>> > >
>> > >Thanks for finding the ref.
>> > >
>> > > >Hi Keith,
>> > > >
>> > > >You asked for a link to the the UCS quote. It was from the Green
>> > > >Issue of the Vancouver Sun newspaper in Nov. (Vancouver, BC, Can.)
>> > > >The actual quote was, Methane produced by waste on cattle and hog
>> > > >farms is as hard on the atmospher as 33 million cars. 18% of total
>> > > >global emissions.
>> > >
>> > >But 33 million cars is only about 15% of the number of vehicles in
>> > >the US, let alone globally, how can that equal 18% of global
>> > >emissions?
>> > >
>> > >"Cattle and hog farms" means CAFOs, not farms, or at least in the
>> > >vast majority of cases. I don't think that's the same as what you
>> > >said, "the total of all livestock on this planet".
>> > >
>> > > >>I think the meat industry would account for a lot more than a
>> > > >>paltry
>> > > >>33 million cars' worth of GHGs.
>> > >
>> > >I still think that. The claim of 18% of global emissions from CAFOs
>> > >doesn't sound unreasonable, but the cars bit can't be right, seems
to
>> > >me.
>> > >
>> > >Thanks Terry.
>> > >
>> > >Best
>> > >
>> > >Keith
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >Terry Dyck
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >>From: Keith Addison <keith at journeytoforever.org>
>> > > >>Reply-To: biofuel at sustainablelists.org
>> > > >>To: biofuel at sustainablelists.org
>> > > >>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Power Use
>> > > >>Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:26:10 +0900
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Hello Terry
>> > > >>
>> > > >> >Hi Kirk,
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >If all of us did what we should be doing our houses would be
one
>> > > >> >room heated with Geo Thermal, hot water and electricity by
solar
>>and
>> > > >> >we would walk or bike almost everywere
>> > > >>
>> > > >>This:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> >and we would be totally Vegan.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>... is nonsense, as we've established quite thoroughly many
times.
>> > > >>Please go to the archives and check it out.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>There is no way of raising crops sustainably without using
>> > > >>livestock
>> > > >>in the production system. No vegetarian farming system has ever
>> > > >>survived the test of time.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Please don't argue about it until you've checked it out, no need
to
>> > > >>go over the same old ground yet another time.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> >The Union of Concerned Scientists reports that because of the
>>amount
>> > > >> >of Methane gas caused from feed lots, etc. that the total of
all
>> > > >> >livestock on this planet is equivalent to taking 33 million
cars
>>of
>> > > >> >the road.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>"Feed lots, etc"? What does the "etc" mean?
>> > > >>
>> > > >>I'm sure the amount of GHGs emitted by trees etc is even worse,
>> > > >>should we cut them all down too?
>> > > >>
>> > > >>"Do trees share blame for global warming?"
>> > > >>http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0119/p13s01-sten.html
>> > > >>"Globally, living plants may contribute from 10 to 30 percent of
>> > > >>global methane emissions."
>> > > >>
>> > > >>I haven't seen the UCS report you mention, would you give us a
>> > > >>reference or a link please?
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Anyway you're talking about feedlots, CAFOs, Confined Animal
>> > > >>Feeding
>> > > >>Operations, industrialised factory farms. No CAFOs no meat?
That's
>> > > >>the same mistake enviros make when they attack fuel ethanol
because
>> > > >>they don't like Archer Daniel Midlands and Cargill. There are
other
>> > > >>ways of doing things, as we ought to know by now.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>There've been a number of high-profile critiques of industrial
meat
>> > > >>production and global warming, this is the main one:
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >>http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/library/key_pub/longshad/A0701E00.htm
>> > > >>Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options
>> > > >>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Feedlot cattle, pigs and poultry eat industrialised grain,
produced
>> > > >>with high dependence on fossil-fuel inputs and at high
>> > > >>environmental
>> > > >>cost, and the same applies to the CAFO livestock production
system
>> > > >>itself. Check out how carbon-neutral industrialised grain turns
out
>> > > >>to be. Pastured livestock eat forage.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>With CAFOs most of the methane emissions result from the manure
>> > > >>storage, especially with pigs. With pastured livestock,
especially
>> > > >>with rotational pasture, the manure provides the soil fertility
to
>> > > >>produce multiple following crops, displaces the need for
>> > > >>fossil-fuel
>> > > >>based chemical fertilisers, and does so at a healthy profit. Such
>> > > >>pasture soils sequester very large amounts of carbon.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>I think the meat industry would account for a lot more than a
>> > > >>paltry
>> > > >>33 million cars' worth of GHGs. Well so what, it doesn't have any
>> > > >>future anyway, any more than the rest of the industrial
agriculture
>> > > >>disaster does. It's fossil-fuel dependent every step of the way,
>> > > >>and
>> > > >>measured in food miles that comes to a hell of a long way. It'll
>>bust
>> > > >>all their bottom-lines when carbon accounting starts hitting the
>> > > >>global trade it depends on, the insane distribution system, the
>> > > >>processing. Apart from all of which CAFOs have become a major
>> > > >>bio-hazard.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>No need for it anyway. The future is small, sustainable,
family-run
>> > > >>mixed farms with integrated crop and livestock production, low
>>input,
>> > > >>high output, local markets.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Best
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Keith
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> >Terry Dyck
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >>From: Kirk McLoren <kirkmcloren at yahoo.com>
>> > > >> >>Reply-To: biofuel at sustainablelists.org
>> > > >> >>To: biofuel at sustainablelists.org
>> > > >> >>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Power
Use
>> > > >> >>Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:45:14 -0800 (PST)
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>The message is - It isnt really that important. If it were I
>>would do
>> > >it.
>> > > >> >> So how true is it - at least to him.
>> > > >> >> If it doent motivate him maybe he knows something we dont.
>> > > >> >> So of all people to squander energy it shouldnt be him.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> You might want to look into Cripple Creek Coal which he is on
>>the
>> > > >> >>board of directors.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Kirk
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>Tom Irwin <tomuru at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >> >> Hi Kirk and all,
>> > > >> >> When the message cannot be attacked then attack the
messenger.
>>Ok,
>> > > >> >>so Gore doesn´t walk the talk. How many of us do? We try to,
but
>> > > >> >>there is a long way to go for most everyone in the developed
>>world.
>> > > >> >>It´s the message that´s inportant, not the man.
>> > > >> >> Tom Irwin
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>---------------------------------
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>From: Kirk McLoren <kirkmcloren at yahoo.com>
>> > > >> >>Reply-To: biofuel at sustainablelists.org
>> > > >> >>To: biofuel <Biofuel at sustainablelists.org>
>> > > >> >>Subject: [Biofuel] Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Power Use
>> > > >> >>Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:57:43 -0800 (PST)
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Biofuel mailing list
>>Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>>http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
>>
>>Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
>>http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>>
>>Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
>>messages):
>>http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> RealLiveMoms: Share your experience with Real Live Moms just like you
> http://www.reallivemoms.ca/
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Biofuel mailing list
> Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
> messages):
> http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
>
>
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000
messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
