Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)

Better cows here than on cleared rainforest

  • 27-07-2022 1:34pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 565 ✭✭✭ Esho


    !

    Is it not better for beef to belch away in Ireland to feed demand, rather than to belch on cleared rainforest or in air-conditioned warehouses?


    Think globally , act locally - why reduce the national herd when it will mean an overall worse impact on climate change?



«13

Comments



  • I would like to see the workings on the carbon impact of livestock. My feeling is that the numbers assume grain fed, housed livestock, like a large portion of the global herd, while the Irish Herd is Grass fed, largely outdoor for most of the year. The Carbon Cycle their would be air to grass to cow to air / food. Would imagine the carbon inputs outside of that would be significantly less than grain fed



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,795 ✭✭✭ timmyntc


    I dont believe that carbon sequestered by grass which is then eaten, is counted against beef emissions. It should be, but isn't.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,094 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Sam Russell


    It is not the Brazil forest fires you need to worry about too much. It is the wild fires in Killiney, Portugal, France, Spain, Greece, California, Sydney, and many other places. These fires are a new aspect of climate change. Coupled with widespread drought, this is climate change in action - now, not in 50 years time, or even a decade.

    The once in a century occurrences that now are once a decade. Flash floods in Derry this last week are another example. This is global which includes Ireland.

    Reducing the number of bovines need not affect many farmers if correct mitigation is taken in time. The least profitable parts of the beef system could stop and little effect to the income of those farmers (particularly if they are compensated) but a large effect on emissions. Taking beef animals to the factory earlier would also mitigate the situation. CAP payments are the profit for these farms with a few sucklers - and in fact even the CAP payments are to help cover the losses.

    It all needs to thought out - not just seen as an attack on rural Ireland - wherever that is.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 35,047 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    The entire ethos around science is that an assertion can be questioned. @ancapailldorcha is correct to question the claim that reducing the national herd will be worse for climate change!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 565 ✭✭✭ Esho


    I've voted Green all my life , but I can't help feeling this is true



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    I didn't make the claim. The OP did so it's on them to back it up.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,814 ✭✭✭ WesternZulu


    Intensively raised livestock actually have a lower carbon footprint than those that are outdoors.

    It's more efficient, they get to slaughter weight quicker and therefore produce less methane. Your typical American feedlot system more than likely has a lower carbon footprint per kg of produce than your extensive Irish grassland equivalent. But of course there is the animal welfare issues with that too and other pollution type hotspots generated by intensive systems.

    With respect to the OP and the damage of the Brazilian rainforest. It doesn't matter where the meat/milk is produced - if it consumes feed in the form of soya from Brazil then it's contributing indirectly to Amazon deforestation.

    While permanent grasslands do store carbon they are not an infinite carbon sink - rather it stops storing carbon after a certain period of time.

    The whole issue with climate change and livestock production isn't black and white. The food system is complex and all aspects of it need to be evaluated before policy decisions are made. Globally demand for meat is increasing this should be taken into account too.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 35,047 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    The OP posted the following: "why reduce the national herd when it will mean an overall worse impact on climate change?"



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    They didn't. They made an unsubstantiated claim which other people are apparently supposed to research for them. We know that meat farming is partly driving climate change so the idea that more cows is better for the climate is patently ridiculous.

    I am of course more than happy to change my mind once I see evidence.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,795 ✭✭✭ timmyntc


    Correction, the OP posted the following:

    Is it not better for beef to belch away in Ireland to feed demand, rather than to belch on cleared rainforest or in air-conditioned warehouses?

    Think globally , act locally - why reduce the national herd when it will mean an overall worse impact on climate change?

    Its right in front of you yet you insist in selective quoting. Again, very disingenuous of you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,795 ✭✭✭ timmyntc


    Do you think that growing more beef in Brazil and less in Ireland, for a near net-zero change in global herd numbers, will be better or worse for the environment?



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,504 ✭✭✭✭ Danzy




  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    No, you made a snide dig when I asked for evidence. My instincts were that this would be standard denialist claptrap and so far, they're on the money.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    Why the snide comment?

    I've no idea. Depends on what the evidence says.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 35,047 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    I copied and pasted the question directly from the OP. How is that disingenuous?

    The OP is making that assumption that if Irish beef is removed that it will be completely filled with imports from Brazil but there is no evidence to support this - just a big assumption. I could make an equal assumption that there could be massive levies for imports of unsustainably sourced beef.

    The OP is free to make claims but we can equally ask them to back up their claim or somehow question it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,795 ✭✭✭ timmyntc


    So in the absence of evidence you have no opinion on the matter.

    But earlier you said it was all denialist claptrap to you. How could it be denialist if you have no evidence to the contrary?



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 33,371 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    The premise is absurd. More cows does not benefit the climate.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,504 ✭✭✭✭ Danzy




Advertisement