this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
77 points (89.7% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5153 readers
508 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

the movie is titled: Six Inches of Soil

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

The core point of regenerative ag is to not have to import outside fertilizers/feed. That you replace that with land management -- crop rotation, essentially, giving the land time to regrow on its own.

There's no free energy coming from the cows. It comes from the goddamn sun. If you don't load your pastures with monoculture grass stock and chew it to the dirt every season, you don't have to constantly plow and fertilize it to keep it grazeable.

Don't accuse me of being an industry shill, by the way. I am not from the rurals. I actually read up on this because soil health and soil science is fascinating and this is from where a lot of the research is coming.

And the transportation costs I referred to are costs transporting and producing those fertilizers -- and the supplemental feeds you need when you overextend the land and thus have to stop grazing on them during long stretches.

I'm not sure if this point is lost on you or if you're being obtuse, but you have dodged it again here even though I think I mentioned it pretty directly here.

There's little more damaging to a cow's health than living on concrete or in close indoor quarters. Than standing around in shit all day, breaking open their hooves on curbs, and all that crap.

Your argument here is that it may not work everywhere and is therefore bad... that's a bad argument.

[–] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It comes from the goddamn sun. If you don’t load your pastures with monoculture grass stock and chew it to the dirt every season, you don’t have to constantly plow and fertilize it to keep it grazeable.

Cows aren't necessary.

It comes from the goddamn sun. If you don’t load your pastures with monoculture grass stock and chew it to the dirt every season, you don’t have to constantly plow and fertilize it to keep it grazeable.

Same, but I have actual degrees in Ag. & Life Sci.

When you promote this grazing idea, you're also bringing in land use change, which means that you're destroying food provisioning and, thus, food security, in order to create a luxury commodity for a few people.

If you don't keep in mind what the point is to feed people, you're going to keep missing the big picture.

And the transportation costs I referred to are costs transporting and producing those fertilizers – and the supplemental feeds you need when you overextend the land and thus have to stop grazing on them during long stretches.

Sure. The main problem there is the nitrogen fertilizers, not just because of the production GHGs, but also because of N2O emissions, just like from animal farming.

I’m not sure if this point is lost on you or if you’re being obtuse, but you have dodged it again here even though I think I mentioned it pretty directly here.

It's unclear what you're arguing for. I'm trying to tell you that regenerative grazing is a scam, [2], [3], [4]. If you want to skip those links, go here: https://tabledebates.org/publication/grazed-and-confused they have a short documentary along with the report.

Cows aren't necessary in regenerative agriculture, there are other ways which actually help with restoration and carbon storage.

Your argument here is that it may not work everywhere and is therefore bad… that’s a bad argument.

No, my argument is that it's bad to promote scams and greenwashing.

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 1 points 6 months ago

Then you're arguing against the wrong person.

I've never once said regenerative beef farming is good for the environment. I've only said, consistently, that it is better than more typical industrial practices. And that those arguing that it makes no difference whether it's industrial or regenerative are full of shit.

Read my top-level comment and tell me what in it contradicts this.