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: 286

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joann on April 8, 2010 at 2:24am
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."
Permalink Reply by Wayne Black on April 8, 2010 at 3:09pm
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.
Permalink Reply by Arik Theijsmeijer on April 9, 2010 at 2:21am
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

Tariffs In Key Markets Underscore Urgent Need For Action

Today, Pulse Canada released the following statement in response to India’s decision to impose a 30% tariff on pea imports. “While Canada’s pea export program to India got off to a good start this fall, the recently announced tariff will challenge future sales, and the impact will be felt across the industry. “Canada’s pulse industry needs progress from the federal government on removing tariffs that threaten our competitiveness and damage our global reputation. While the government may not be able to influence domestic policies in other markets, we do expect it to resolve issues within its control. “The Government of China has been clear that its 100% tariff on Canadian peas is a retaliatory measure and will require a negotiated solution. We are hopeful that meetings this week will mark a timely and important step toward a resolution that allows Canadian peas back into the Chinese market. “Canadian growers and exporters have worked for decades to build trusted relationships with c

SARM’s Huber wants Western concerns heard in Ottawa

The head of the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities is wanting to see Western concerns addressed by the federal government. “We've been neglected for 10-plus years in western Canada, and Saskatchewan is in western Canada,” said Bill Huber, SARM president, to reporters following his morning address at the mid-term meetings in Regina. “And we've got an agriculture industry here that's struggling right now with tariffs and trade, and our farmers are really suffering because of the non-movement of grain, especially canola seed, to China. We've got one of our biggest trading partners just across the 49th parallel that we do have to do business with [the USA]. They're the closest and one of our largest trading partners. And we need to see those goods, livestock, beef, cattle, pigs, pork, those things continue to cross that border. So we need those exports.” Huber said it was also "disappointing to see that there's a $112 million decrease over the next year in agriculture spen

APAS expresses mixed feelings on Tuesday's federal budget

The President of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS) has mixed feelings about Tuesday's federal budget. Bill Prybylski, who farms in the Willowbrook area, was pleased to see that agriculture was actually mentioned in the budget. He says there were some positives in the budget, like investment in infrastructure, the reinstatement of the accelerated capital cost allowance, and red tape reduction. Prybylski was also pleased to see the permanent reversal of the Capital Gains tax increase. But he says the announced changes to AgriStability won't make a difference to most producers, dealing with canola, pea and pork tariffs. Prybylski notes budget details are still quite sparse, so there's more work to be done in studying the document. He's also worried about possible budget cuts to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, which could affect agriculture research.

Ag in the 2025 federal budget

The House is expected to vote on the budget on Nov. 17

Statement from FVGC President, Marcus Janzen

The Fruit and Vegetable Growers of Canada (FVGC) President, Marcus Janzen, wishes to announce that Massimo Bergamini will begin a transition from his role as Executive Director as he moves toward retirement. The Board is grateful for his leadership and for the organizational achievements made during his tenure.

© 2025   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service