Some Important Reading.
Here is a very interesting research paper. You should read it. I actually first heard about this paper during milo harvest, but at the time I was unable to locate a link to the actual paper, just news articles about the paper, (which is kind of ironic considering the focus of the paper.) Any hoo, you should read it. here is a sample from the conclusion:
"Environmental impact and options must therefore be evaluated using whole-system approaches based on productivity, rather than allowing ideological principles, based either on naïve or incomplete misinformation or a lack of understanding, to direct food production practices. All attempts to mitigate environmental impact are laudable in intent. However, attention should be focused on strategies that make a long-term, positive contribution to enhancing sustainability, rather than focusing on ‘quick-win’, low impact solutions."
In case you don't feel like reading it, this paper uses things like "science" and "math" to give us an unemotional look at the environmental impact of various agricultural and consumer practices.
In a nutshell:
1. Modern, high intensity milk production practices are way more environmentally friendly than "the good old days."
2. Corn fed beef is way more environmentally friendly than grass fed beef.
3. Eggs purchased at your local supermarket are way, way more environmentally friendly than those purchased at your local farm and/or farmer's market.
As a disclaimer, I would like to point out that this article does not address one of my chief carbon cycle related pet peeves, which is the comparison of the carbon output of any kind of animal (which is releasing carbon back into the atmosphere that was in the atmosphere no more than 5-10 years ago) to any kind of machine (which is releasing carbon back into the atmosphere which had been sequestered underground for a million or more years.)
As a disclaimer to my disclaimer, (just in case Dr.Chuck Rice is reading this,) I am aware that a whole lot of the carbon floating around amongst the current animal and human populations was sequestered for many tens of thousands of years in the vast prairies of North America prior to massive Agricultural expansion in the mid to late nineteenth century.
But the point is, READ THIS PAPER!
1. Modern, high intensity milk production practices are way more environmentally friendly than "the good old days."
2. Corn fed beef is way more environmentally friendly than grass fed beef.
3. Eggs purchased at your local supermarket are way, way more environmentally friendly than those purchased at your local farm and/or farmer's market.
As a disclaimer, I would like to point out that this article does not address one of my chief carbon cycle related pet peeves, which is the comparison of the carbon output of any kind of animal (which is releasing carbon back into the atmosphere that was in the atmosphere no more than 5-10 years ago) to any kind of machine (which is releasing carbon back into the atmosphere which had been sequestered underground for a million or more years.)
As a disclaimer to my disclaimer, (just in case Dr.Chuck Rice is reading this,) I am aware that a whole lot of the carbon floating around amongst the current animal and human populations was sequestered for many tens of thousands of years in the vast prairies of North America prior to massive Agricultural expansion in the mid to late nineteenth century.
Labels: 'Cats, Farmin', I Wonder What the Neighbors are Doing, Math is Fun, name dropping, Plagarism, Shocking and Offensive Political Statements., too much information, Wilderness Survival, worlds colliding
1 Comments:
Isn't Soylent Green a way to sequester carbon AND provide food for people?
6:19 PM, January 12, 2010
Post a Comment
<< Home