3 ms·

I completely agree, natural habitats with native flora and fauna tend to settle into balanced ecosystems. As far as I can tell, that's not what you're arguing f

I completely agree, natural habitats with native flora and fauna tend to settle into balanced ecosystems. As far as I can tell, that's not what you're arguing for, though, as that is not at all what modern animal agriculture is similar to. As far as crops, the majority of what we grow is fed to animals. For example, according to the USDA, approximately 70% of U.S. soy is used as animal feed. If you're interested in reducing crop farming, go vegan. (Source: https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/coexistence-soybeans-factsheet.pdf https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/coexisten...) As far as the limited abilities of carbon sequestering, "Grazing management could potentially, and under very generous assumptions, offset between 20-60% of annual average emissions from the grass-fed only sector," meaning that even all grass fed beef is still going to involve horrifying amounts of GHG emissions, completely ignoring the cost/land use that would make it otherwise unfeasible. (Source: https://phys.org/news/2017-10-grazing-livestock-climate-impact.html https://phys.org/news/2017-10-grazing-livestock-climate-impa...) Bonus link for more info on ruminants and carbon sequestering: "https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/animal/article/abs/mitigating-the-greenhouse-gas-balance-of-ruminant-production-systems-through-carbon-sequestration-in-grasslands/75C37264D0DBC0B6175DFA61574E3A6D https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/animal/article/abs/m..."

msandford 5y ago
Doing regenerative ranching can be net carbon sequestering provided that you model your operation on nature a certain amount. People are doing it successfully. Another way to be responsible re food is to only buy good grass fed beef. As a bonus cows can make use of grass on land that's too poor for traditional farming.
- TollingSteady 5y ago
  The source I cite for only 20-60% of GHG emissions being sequestered includes grass-fed beef. It seems like buying grass-fed beef is still environmentally unsustainable. Your claims don't seem to match any of the evidence I've seen, but I'd be interested in discussing them further if you could provide sources. As far as poor soil, a) current animal agriculture is mostly making use of usable soil & farmed crops, so this currently seems like a moot point, and b) this gets back to the above issue of being completely unable to scale. Unless you're being careful to only eat meat about once a month, I don't understand how the use of only poor soil is supposed to produce enough meat to feed everyone who would want it.
  - msandford 5y ago
    There are several ways to approach the problem. One is to look from first principles and analyze how the great plains came to be. It should be obvious that the carbon didn't just sequester itself. Therefore if one were to mimic the roaming herds of bison closely enough (and how close is close enough is up for debate) then it should absolutely be possible to be net sequestering. I'm having trouble finding a good source for this. There's a guy named Gabe Brown from North Dakota who is consistently increasing the amount of organic matter (and thus carbon) in the soil of his farm. I don't know how you'd interpret his results as anything other than sequestering. https://www.sandyarrowranch.com/2019-fall-winter-update/ https://www.sandyarrowranch.com/2019-fall-winter-update/ Finally there are places that are trying to study this rigorously as there's huge money to be made if you can offer guilt-free beef. Might that taint their results? Yup, but they might also be right. https://www.fastcompany.com/90368127/is-it-possible-to-raise-a-carbon-neutral-cow https://www.fastcompany.com/90368127/is-it-possible-to-raise... https://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-regenerative-land-and-livestock-management-practices-can-sequester-carbon https://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-regenerative-land-and-l...
    - TollingSteady 5y ago
      I'd imagine the Great Plains had a much higher plant:animal ratio than commercial animal agriculture will be able to achieve. Plus the animals involved were native species adapted to the environment, not imported animals bred to maximize meat/milk output. I doubt we'll be able to reach a conclusion about this without more data, though. Gabe Brown definitely does seem like he's achieving carbon sequestering, which is great! I have no doubt that carbon sequestering exists and is effective — my problem is that it neither matches nor exceeds the carbon output of e.g. cattle. So even with maximally effective carbon sequestering practices, there's still on net large GHG emissions. (See 20-60% figure from above.) As far as the links you provide, here's the direct quote from the conclusion of the FastCompany site: "...better management techniques can be helpful but not as much as many think, and that the term 'regenerative' is so vague that it risks becoming greenwashing. Another study, from the Food Climate Research Network in the U.K., found that better management of livestock only sequesters carbon under some conditions and even then may be temporary and not necessarily large enough to offset the negative impact of raising the animals." The second link seems to be marketing copy from General Mills, which as you note I might tend toward being suspicious of. Their sponsored study seems to contradict both the FastCompany site and all the other studies I've read. Definitely something to look more into on my part, though: will update here after reading more thoroughly. Thank you for the interesting links, and for being willing to engage in good faith.

msandford 5y ago

Doing regenerative ranching can be net carbon sequestering provided that you model your operation on nature a certain amount. People are doing it successfully. Another way to be responsible re food is to only buy good grass fed beef. As a bonus cows can make use of grass on land that's too poor for traditional farming.

TollingSteady 5y ago
The source I cite for only 20-60% of GHG emissions being sequestered includes grass-fed beef. It seems like buying grass-fed beef is still environmentally unsustainable. Your claims don't seem to match any of the evidence I've seen, but I'd be interested in discussing them further if you could provide sources. As far as poor soil, a) current animal agriculture is mostly making use of usable soil & farmed crops, so this currently seems like a moot point, and b) this gets back to the above issue of being completely unable to scale. Unless you're being careful to only eat meat about once a month, I don't understand how the use of only poor soil is supposed to produce enough meat to feed everyone who would want it.
- msandford 5y ago
  There are several ways to approach the problem. One is to look from first principles and analyze how the great plains came to be. It should be obvious that the carbon didn't just sequester itself. Therefore if one were to mimic the roaming herds of bison closely enough (and how close is close enough is up for debate) then it should absolutely be possible to be net sequestering. I'm having trouble finding a good source for this. There's a guy named Gabe Brown from North Dakota who is consistently increasing the amount of organic matter (and thus carbon) in the soil of his farm. I don't know how you'd interpret his results as anything other than sequestering. https://www.sandyarrowranch.com/2019-fall-winter-update/ https://www.sandyarrowranch.com/2019-fall-winter-update/ Finally there are places that are trying to study this rigorously as there's huge money to be made if you can offer guilt-free beef. Might that taint their results? Yup, but they might also be right. https://www.fastcompany.com/90368127/is-it-possible-to-raise-a-carbon-neutral-cow https://www.fastcompany.com/90368127/is-it-possible-to-raise... https://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-regenerative-land-and-livestock-management-practices-can-sequester-carbon https://www.greenbiz.com/article/how-regenerative-land-and-l...
  - TollingSteady 5y ago
    I'd imagine the Great Plains had a much higher plant:animal ratio than commercial animal agriculture will be able to achieve. Plus the animals involved were native species adapted to the environment, not imported animals bred to maximize meat/milk output. I doubt we'll be able to reach a conclusion about this without more data, though. Gabe Brown definitely does seem like he's achieving carbon sequestering, which is great! I have no doubt that carbon sequestering exists and is effective — my problem is that it neither matches nor exceeds the carbon output of e.g. cattle. So even with maximally effective carbon sequestering practices, there's still on net large GHG emissions. (See 20-60% figure from above.) As far as the links you provide, here's the direct quote from the conclusion of the FastCompany site: "...better management techniques can be helpful but not as much as many think, and that the term 'regenerative' is so vague that it risks becoming greenwashing. Another study, from the Food Climate Research Network in the U.K., found that better management of livestock only sequesters carbon under some conditions and even then may be temporary and not necessarily large enough to offset the negative impact of raising the animals." The second link seems to be marketing copy from General Mills, which as you note I might tend toward being suspicious of. Their sponsored study seems to contradict both the FastCompany site and all the other studies I've read. Definitely something to look more into on my part, though: will update here after reading more thoroughly. Thank you for the interesting links, and for being willing to engage in good faith.