Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Cowgate: Animal Agriculture Not a Major Contributor to Global Warming. Any Comments?

From the Washington Post.

 

Forget all that indecorous talk of animal flatulence, cow burps, vegetarianism and global warming. Welcome to Cowgate.

Lower consumption of meat and dairy products will not have a major impact in combating global warming — despite persistent claims that link such diets to more greenhouse gases. So says a report presented Monday before the American Chemical Society.

It is the bovine version of Climategate, complete with faulty science and noisy activists with big agendas.

Cows and pigs have gotten a "bum rap," said Frank Mitloehner, an air quality expert at the University of California at Davis who authored the report. He is plenty critical of scientists and vegetarian activists such as Paul McCartney who insist that livestock account for about a fifth of all greenhouse-gas emissions.

He also is critical of highly-publicized campaigns that call for "meatless Mondays" or push the motto "Less Meat = Less Heat," a European campaign launched in December during the Copenhagen climate summit. Talk of pricey air pollution permits of a "cow tax" for already cash-strapped farmers has surfaced in the U.S. and abroad.

 

Click here to read the whole story on the Washington Post website...

Views: 307

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It just proves once again, that the populace are being herded like a school of fish with an aquarium mind-set.

The UN clearly is focused on shifting the global wealth and has patently found the argument of "climate change" as an easily accepted vehicle that most people can readily buy into. The global warming debate lends a level of empowerment to the average citizen. We are now demanding lifestyle changes without the benefit of global "truths" such as "Producing less meat and milk will only mean more hunger in poor countries." .

How can government turn down demands from their majority of citizens?

Another good article can be found at (24 March 2010)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8583308.stm
"Dr Mitloehner contends that in developed societies such as the US - where transport emissions account for about 26% of the national total, compared with 3% for pig- and cattle-rearing - meat is the wrong target in efforts to reduce carbon emissions."
From London's Science Museum:
" The scientific community has, with some exceptions, concluded that climate change is real, largely driven by humans and requires a response," said the museum's director Professor Chris Rapley. "Our objective is to minimise the shrill tone and emotion that bedevils discussion of this subject."

with that being said... Let's get on with life and enjoy the upcoming BBQ season.
Just a note that emissions from animal agriculture are not just about bodily emissions from the animals themselves, more important is the energy and water expended in growing and transporting grain for those animals. So while the criticism of the UN in report is sound, it is not at all the point of that report. The point of the report still stands, in that reducing the consumption of grain-fed meat overall leads to significantly lower emmissions. Carbon is actually sequestered in grass-fed methods so it is the grain that matters.

It's also important to note that you can just focus on any one sector, like transportation or agriculture, as we have consider the environment in all major aspects of our lives in order to do what it takes to reduce the serious impact of climate change. Finally, to take the UN's mistake and speculate about what either global food policy or individual choices should be as Mr. Mitloehner does in the longer versio of the article, is not his role and is beyond his expertise and his work, as various commentors have stated since this 'sensational' story broke.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Ag Priorities Pile Up in Congress

Congress has multiple priorities to help farmers — year-round E15, a full farm bill, and $15 billion in direct aid — but lawmakers still lack a clear path to pass any of it despite bipartisan support and backing from key leaders. Members of the North American Agricultural Journalists (NAAJ) organization met on Tuesday with the chair and ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, along with two senior members of the House Agriculture Committee. The four lawmakers’ comments reflected strong bipartisan support for aiding farmers but little consensus on how to move key legislative priorities forward. The lion’s share of the commodity title, funding for conservation and crop insurance were cleared in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last summer. At the same time, the credit title, rural development and other USDA programs are operating on the latest extension passed by Congress. Credit, in particular, is seen as an area ripe for expansion to help farmers manage financial stress,

Operating farm equipment in Nova Scotia

14-year-olds can operate equipment with a Class 8 license

Province moves to exempt farmland from stormwater fees, addressing long-standing concern for farmers

 Ontario’s farmers are welcoming a regulatory change by the provincial government that will limit how municipalities apply stormwater fees, ensuring farms are not charged for services they do not use.

Ag included in new Canada-U.S. economic committee

Multiple members have ties to Canadian ag

Operating farm equipment in Quebec

If the equipment travels on public roads, a license is required

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service