| A picture from the IPCC report on 19:11 - Aug 13 with 1109 views | SpruceMoose |
Bees don't pollinate fish silly! |  |
|  |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 19:16 - Aug 13 with 1095 views | J2BLUE |
What about the low carb diet where they base meals on animal products? |  |
| |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 19:33 - Aug 13 with 1053 views | eireblue |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 19:11 - Aug 13 by SpruceMoose |
Bees don't pollinate fish silly! |
Hmmmm, I may have done more damage to bees that I first anticipated, but they really did look like they were waving. |  | | |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 19:44 - Aug 13 with 1031 views | eireblue |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 19:16 - Aug 13 by J2BLUE |
What about the low carb diet where they base meals on animal products? |
In the report it talks about replacing ruminant meet with other meat, whilst maintaining nutritional values.
Ruminants meat being really bad.
So either, the report was written by a vegan, and a top eight is enough typing, or since they are illustrating reducing Green House Gases, and they make the point in the report about runimants, your diet could be covered by the Climate Carnivore section.
Section 5 has the discussion diets and GHG contribution, but that is the top eight they produced. | | | |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 21:02 - Aug 13 with 958 views | Mugwump |
I don’t want to enter a food minefield argument - but if we were in a vegan world surely it would mean growing all the crops chemically as there would be no manure? |  | | |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 21:07 - Aug 13 with 935 views | Clapham_Junction |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 21:02 - Aug 13 by Mugwump |
I don’t want to enter a food minefield argument - but if we were in a vegan world surely it would mean growing all the crops chemically as there would be no manure? |
This is already the case for a large number of farms. My Dad hasn't had any manure since he went arable only.
Also, if we had a more comprehensive food and garden waste service and more compostable products, there would potentially be a decent amount of material available from that for spreading on fields. [Post edited 13 Aug 2019 21:08]
|  | | |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 21:18 - Aug 13 with 891 views | StokieBlue |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 21:07 - Aug 13 by Clapham_Junction |
This is already the case for a large number of farms. My Dad hasn't had any manure since he went arable only.
Also, if we had a more comprehensive food and garden waste service and more compostable products, there would potentially be a decent amount of material available from that for spreading on fields. [Post edited 13 Aug 2019 21:08]
|
That's interesting. What is the yield vs either chemical or manure based fertiliser (if you know off hand)?
SB |  |
| “You may not feel outstandingly robust, but if you are an average-sized adult you will contain within your modest frame no less than 7 X 10^18 joules of potential energy—enough to explode with the force of thirty very large hydrogen bombs, assuming you knew how to liberate it and really wished to make a point." |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:15 - Aug 13 with 832 views | Clapham_Junction |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 21:18 - Aug 13 by StokieBlue |
That's interesting. What is the yield vs either chemical or manure based fertiliser (if you know off hand)?
SB |
No idea, but I imagine it would be more of a long-term boost to soil productivity rather than short term as the material would take a while to break down completely, as opposed to artificial fertiliser which has an instant impact.
Artificial fertilisers will always be the best yield-wise as they can be targeted exactly where needed both in terms of being drilled with the seeds, and more being added in certain parts of fields using GPS. | | | |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:21 - Aug 13 with 814 views | StokieBlue |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:15 - Aug 13 by Clapham_Junction |
No idea, but I imagine it would be more of a long-term boost to soil productivity rather than short term as the material would take a while to break down completely, as opposed to artificial fertiliser which has an instant impact.
Artificial fertilisers will always be the best yield-wise as they can be targeted exactly where needed both in terms of being drilled with the seeds, and more being added in certain parts of fields using GPS. |
What would be your view (and eireblues) on naturally fertilised genetically engineered crops?
That would give likely higher yield combined with the long-term boost to soil productivity.
SB | |
| “You may not feel outstandingly robust, but if you are an average-sized adult you will contain within your modest frame no less than 7 X 10^18 joules of potential energy—enough to explode with the force of thirty very large hydrogen bombs, assuming you knew how to liberate it and really wished to make a point." |
| |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:32 - Aug 13 with 794 views | Dubtractor |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 21:07 - Aug 13 by Clapham_Junction |
This is already the case for a large number of farms. My Dad hasn't had any manure since he went arable only.
Also, if we had a more comprehensive food and garden waste service and more compostable products, there would potentially be a decent amount of material available from that for spreading on fields. [Post edited 13 Aug 2019 21:08]
|
Worth noting that more than 4 million tonnes of food and garden waste from households in England was collected for composting last year.
Almost all of that, post compost process (which will lose a lot of water) will have ended up spread on agricultural land. |  |
| |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:38 - Aug 13 with 788 views | Clapham_Junction |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:21 - Aug 13 by StokieBlue |
What would be your view (and eireblues) on naturally fertilised genetically engineered crops?
That would give likely higher yield combined with the long-term boost to soil productivity.
SB |
I have no objections to it from a food production basis, and I think it has significant benefits in terms of reducing chemical use (both fertiliser and herbicide/pesticides) and the amount of land needed for agriculture.
A bigger concern for me is that companies will try to create a captive market with strains of cereals that can only be grown in combination with their herbicides or pesticides, meaning farmers are forced to buy certain products and that those in poorer countries miss out. IMO it would be better if this area of research was more public sector-led (e.g. by universities or national agricultural agencies), which would mean it the new varieties could be patent-free or available at non-inflated prices. I think there is certainly a public interest argument for this, particularly in developing countries. | | | |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:54 - Aug 13 with 766 views | Clapham_Junction |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:32 - Aug 13 by Dubtractor |
Worth noting that more than 4 million tonnes of food and garden waste from households in England was collected for composting last year.
Almost all of that, post compost process (which will lose a lot of water) will have ended up spread on agricultural land. |
To put that into perspective, the amount of animal manure used on farms is in the order of 100m tonnes.
However, I guess the 4 million tonnes could be increased significantly if all households and businesses had compostable waste collections and people actually put everything they could it. | | | |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:54 - Aug 13 with 765 views | StokieBlue |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:38 - Aug 13 by Clapham_Junction |
I have no objections to it from a food production basis, and I think it has significant benefits in terms of reducing chemical use (both fertiliser and herbicide/pesticides) and the amount of land needed for agriculture.
A bigger concern for me is that companies will try to create a captive market with strains of cereals that can only be grown in combination with their herbicides or pesticides, meaning farmers are forced to buy certain products and that those in poorer countries miss out. IMO it would be better if this area of research was more public sector-led (e.g. by universities or national agricultural agencies), which would mean it the new varieties could be patent-free or available at non-inflated prices. I think there is certainly a public interest argument for this, particularly in developing countries. |
I think we are pretty much in agreement on this angle. It is unfortunate that company will seek to monopolise their engineered crops but that is the way of the commercially driven sector.
Perhaps golden rice, produced by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in a not-for-profit manner would be a good model to follow. I know it's not based around yield increases but the concept is essentially the same.
SB | |
| “You may not feel outstandingly robust, but if you are an average-sized adult you will contain within your modest frame no less than 7 X 10^18 joules of potential energy—enough to explode with the force of thirty very large hydrogen bombs, assuming you knew how to liberate it and really wished to make a point." |
| |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:59 - Aug 13 with 755 views | Dubtractor |
| A picture from the IPCC report on 22:54 - Aug 13 by Clapham_Junction |
To put that into perspective, the amount of animal manure used on farms is in the order of 100m tonnes.
However, I guess the 4 million tonnes could be increased significantly if all households and businesses had compostable waste collections and people actually put everything they could it. |
No, it probably wouldn't be increased that dramatically to be honest, not compared to the animal manure figure anyway.
Maybe by 1 or 2 million tonnes at most from garden waste anyway, even though a lot of areas now charge for garden waste, the people that have bigger gardens tend to still pay for the service, and the people opting out have smaller gardens or live in flats.
More food could be collected, but that has a REALLY high water content and wouldn't actually create much compost. Plus the right thing to do for food is to stop people wasting it! | |
| |
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads. | |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
