Dairy Chitchat 3

whelan2

Are you supposed to run it every year or so?

straight

Cows milking 12.5 litres, 5.13 bf, 4.1 pr. On 4kg nuts. It was good while it lasted. Gave them their last good bale of silage and tomorrow is their last day on grass. Expecting production to nosedive.

Timmaay

1st night the cows have the option of either stay indoors with silage and cubicles or go out to a paddock with a small amount of grass, whole lot happily outside.

visatorro

whelan2 wrote: »

Are you supposed to run it every year or so?

I'd imagine manufacturers would recommend that it's ran a couple of times a year.

Mooooo

visatorro wrote: »

I'd imagine manufacturers would recommend that it's ran a couple of times a year.

I'd imagine for the ones with their own engine it's as much to keep the engine right as anything else. Pto ones shouldn't have the same issue?

Mortelaro

whelan2 wrote: »

Are you supposed to run it every year or so?

We'd usually do a milking with it twice a year
Ours is a 20kva froment magnate running a 12 unit parlour,4 sets of scrapers,bulk tank ,lights and water no bother once the Genny Amber light is constant
I also switch off all power to the house untill everything is running as power dips or surges are not good for electronics
The Amber light is on the wall beside the generator and flashes when voltage is too low or two high
Revs are upped or dropped untill it's constant and not flashing
Its run with the tractor in the low box

The generator is 23 years old and never gave trouble

Downtown123

whelan2 wrote: »

Are you supposed to run it every year or so?

When we installed ours your man told us to run it once a moth or so. Tbh we only run it when needed but between planned outages and breakdowns that could be 3/4 times a year. As another poster said, it’s a pto one so it might not require the ‘exercise’ that a self propelled one might. Run it in low box at 450 revs. 33kva. 12 units , feeders, lights, tank and the dwelling house.

alps

straight wrote: »

Is that not just a fundraiser for the farmers journal. The national dairy show is the dairy farmers day out.

Great presentations. Massive effort between topics and speakers. I imagine this day is heavily subsidised by FJ, but may be wrong. It's not from admission fees they get their income, that's for sure..

wrangler

alps wrote: »

Great presentations. Massive effort between topics and speakers. I imagine this day is heavily subsidised by FJ, but may be wrong. It's not from admission fees they get their income, that's for sure..

IFJ give a lot of money back to farmers,
They also have an input at a lot of events too now, we even had Adam Woods with us in New Zealand......great to have such a professional input to lead discussion

straight

wrangler wrote: »

IFJ give a lot of money back to farmers,
They also have an input at a lot of events too now, we even had Adam Woods with us in New Zealand......great to have such a professional input to lead discussion

More new zealand talk being rammed back farmers throats so is it.

wrangler

straight wrote: »

More new zealand talk being rammed back farmers throats so is it.

No, in my case it my just a huge opportunity to tick another item on my bucket list....a huge tax deductible opportunity too which made it all the better

jaymla627

straight wrote: »

More new zealand talk being rammed back farmers throats so is it.

Nearly choked on my dinner laughing when reading Catherine O Leary yullagising about how her high ebi cows where more environmentally friendly then a low ebi cow, with the emission debacle and carbon tax thing going to come to ahead a lot quicker then first thought, the whole dairy sector could get turned on its head re allowable stocking rates,I wonder will teagasc get it through that high ebi herds are given a derogation over lower ebi herds

TheDairyMan

jaymla627 wrote: »

Nearly choked on my dinner laughing when reading Catherine O Leary yullagising about how her high ebi cows where more environmentally friendly then a low ebi cow, with the emission debacle and carbon tax thing going to come to ahead a lot quicker then first thought, the whole dairy sector could get turned on its head re allowable stocking rates,I wonder will teagasc get it through that high ebi herds are given a derogation over lower ebi herds

The carbon emissions/tax should be on the products not on the cows. Carbon tax on oil is where its used not where its extracted , should be the standard

Gawddawggonnit

TheDairyMan wrote: »

The carbon emissions/tax should be on the products not on the cows. Carbon tax on oil is where its used not where its extracted , should be the standard

Roflmao!

The Nigerians etc are smoking the milk powders and using butter oil for fuel??



I really like your thinking though...First world pollutes and third world pays. That’s nice.
:).

tanko

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Roflmao!

The Nigerians etc are smoking the milk powders and using butter oil for fuel??



I really like your thinking though...First world pollutes and third world pays. That’s nice.
:).

Yeah, if only the Irish were like the French and accepted Carbon taxes wirhout any fuss.

TheDairyMan

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Roflmao!

The Nigerians etc are smoking the milk powders and using butter oil for fuel??



I really like your thinking though...First world pollutes and third world pays. That’s nice.
:).

If the Nigerians are not using milk powders and butter for fuel, what are they using them for?

Birdnuts

jaymla627 wrote: »

Nearly choked on my dinner laughing when reading Catherine O Leary yullagising about how her high ebi cows where more environmentally friendly then a low ebi cow, with the emission debacle and carbon tax thing going to come to ahead a lot quicker then first thought, the whole dairy sector could get turned on its head re allowable stocking rates,I wonder will teagasc get it through that high ebi herds are given a derogation over lower ebi herds

Cynical corporate "Greenwashing" is probably one of the biggest menace to farming, environment etc. atm

alps

Birdnuts wrote: »

Cynical corporate "Greenwashing" is probably one of the biggest menace to farming, environment etc. atm

As Winston Churchill observed, the velocity of an established falsehood tends to outstrip the ability of the truth first to dress and then to accelerate in pursuit.

Copied that today but can't remember where..

jaymla627

alps wrote: »

As Winston Churchill observed, the velocity of an established falsehood tends to outstrip the ability of the truth first to dress and then to accelerate in pursuit.

Copied that today but can't remember where..

Looking at the figures each dairy cow produces 2300kgs of carbon a year, with agriculture accounting for 30% of emissions currently, if cattle numbers remain static with no decreases, its estimated ireland will have to levy a carbon tax of 470 euro a ton to meet 2030 targets.....
It’s very hard to see how we are going to be let continue as is and expand dairy numbers ad hoc, if something was put together where forestry/trees on farm where allowable towards say a individual farms carbon credits, it would leave workable solutions where a certain percentage of land is planted/boundaries and this negates cows emissions but the higher powers will more then likely railroad something into law that’s not as logical as this

patsy_mccabe

jaymla627 wrote: »

Nearly choked on my dinner laughing when reading Catherine O Leary yullagising about how her high ebi cows where more environmentally friendly then a low ebi cow, with the emission debacle and carbon tax thing going to come to ahead a lot quicker then first thought, the whole dairy sector could get turned on its head re allowable stocking rates,I wonder will teagasc get it through that high ebi herds are given a derogation over lower ebi herds

I always thought higher EBI cows did have a lower carbon footprint......or am I missing something? I know EBI is a measure of profit, but a cow that produces more on less inputs surely has to be more environmentally friendly.
Also exports for each country shoudl be taken into account. We export most of what we produce in dairy and beef. If we stop producing these, the production of all this food will have to be met somewhere else, at a greater carbon footprint. Will that be good for the environment?

Panch18

Lads can ye settle a debate here

Are you allowed to put an electric plug in the dairy? Or are there some kind of restrictions on it?

Reggie.

Panch18 wrote: »

Lads can ye settle a debate here

Are you allowed to put an electric plug in the dairy? Or are there some kind of restrictions on it?

I think your only allowed a them 16A blue connections

alps

jaymla627 wrote: »

Looking at the figures each dairy cow produces 2300kgs of carbon a year, with agriculture accounting for 30% of emissions currently, if cattle numbers remain static with no decreases, its estimated ireland will have to levy a carbon tax of 470 euro a ton to meet 2030 targets.....
It’s very hard to see how we are going to be let continue as is and expand dairy numbers ad hoc, if something was put together where forestry/trees on farm where allowable towards say a individual farms carbon credits, it would leave workable solutions where a certain percentage of land is planted/boundaries and this negates cows emissions but the higher powers will more then likely railroad something into law that’s not as logical as this

Grassland sequesters Carbon, but no allowance is being made for it at present because either there is no accurate measurement or the powers that be hold that as a trump card to be played at a further date.

I have seen many figures touted for the amount sequestered and the mid point for me is at 5Tonnes carbon per acre..

alps

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

I always thought higher EBI cows did have a lower carbon footprint......or am I missing something? I know EBI is a measure of profit, but a cow that produces more on less inputs surely has to be more environmentally friendly.
Also exports for each country shoudl be taken into account. We export most of what we produce in dairy and beef. If we stop producing these, the production of all this food will have to be met somewhere else, at a greater carbon footprint. Will that be good for the environment?

Higher EBI cows do not have a lower footprint, but a higher EBI herd does.

Generally output is relevant to input in that it typically takes 10kg DM input to produce 1kg milk solids. A cow producing 1.8ms will be consuming 18kg and a cow producing 2.5kg ms will consume 25kg DM.

The difference is typically in fertility. Fertile herds carry less replacements so less mouths to feed and less emissions. Typically a higher percentage of the high EBI cow's diet is from grass and less from fossil fuel consuming concentrates, and typically a larger platform of the farm sequesters Carbon.

alps

Gives an idea of the Carbon cycle

Panch18

alps wrote: »

Gives an idea of the Carbon cycle

80 calves from 50 cows, that’s where the suckler fellas are going wrong!!!!

straight

alps wrote: »

Gives an idea of the Carbon cycle

Surely if you can get taxed for producing carbon you should be paid for removing it. Some chance of that.

patsy_mccabe

alps wrote: »

Gives an idea of the Carbon cycle

That means the farm is Carbon Negative. Jeez, never knew that. That's some trump card to be keeping .:cool:

Where did you get that?

freedominacup

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

That's some trump card to be keeping .:cool:

They've already sent some men around to take your card away. If the farm organisations want an election issue this is it. The carbon sequestration capacity of farmland belongs to farmers. They've already allocated it to the national pool and to put it simply Michael O'Learys cattle and horses have no more right to it than his planes at the moment. Suits him, you and me not so much.

whelan2

Filled the feeders in milking parlour with buckets this evening as augers broke. Lad who fixes them is on holidays until Wednesday