Plan A , PlanB and Big-Agri | Brussels Blog

Plan A , PlanB and Big-Agri

posted by on 6th Nov 2011
6th,Nov

Posted on ClimateProgress.

The current Plan A for addressing climate change relies on reducing the emissions of long lived greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide. It emphasises keeping the level of long lived greenhouse gasses below a peak level at which dangerous climate change becomes probable.

Plan B delays global temperature rises by means that have an immediate effect. It places emphasis on the reduction of short term climate forcing agents such as methane and black carbon. It also advocates geo-engineering schemes to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface and to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere – with the hope they will become available.

Plan B emphasises reducing short term forcing. If we take this seriously, our impact on climate should be measured differently, especially by changing how to account for methane. Methane’s rating increases by a factor of about four for the short term – and this means that animal husbandry has a much higher rating. There is a report by world bank people that animal husbandry is over 50% of global warming. Cattle and sheep are particularly bad.

My version of Plan B would include drastically reduced meat consumption, particularly beef and lamb. This would bring a huge cut in climate forcing and make the growing capacity that we have go much, much further because meat is so resource intensive.

But, as we have seen on Climate Progress, the threat of drought is terrifying. This will be particularly damaging to the monoculture pushed by agribusiness funded scientists and, sad to say, by most government funded ones too. The gardeners, permaculturalists or whatever you want to call them, have a different approach. A good exposition of this approach is a country specific one which can in Low Input Food and Nutrition by the World Food Programme Malawi.

I fell into this “scientists vs amateurs” conflict when I attended a meeting in the UK Parliament where a “monoculture” professor was giving his talk. He was asked by someone from the Transitions Towns movement, “What about gardening?”. The professor seemed to say that it had been proved that this approach would not work. To cut a longish story short. The professor had no “proof” but the gardeners do not seem to have much in the way of “scientific numbers”

However, in Ireland before the famine, potatoes, with some milk and pigs could support a population density approaching 10 people per hectare. The world now has about 0.5 people per hectare. That’s about 5% of the population density of pre-famine Ireland.

So what’s the problem?

Clearly it’s not “the problem” but lots of problems. One of the problems is information – not so much the lack of it – OK, there are big gaps – but the spin that’s put on it.

Climate Progress highlights the role of “Big Oil”. What about “Big Agri”?

For references see: Plan A might fail … so we need Plan B
and: Food: Scientists vs amateurs

Geoff Beacon

comment

‘the threat of drought is terrifying’ er, Water Aid have been banging this drum for nigh on 15 years. Have you just woken from some deep slumber?

@JohnFGoodfellow ( November 20, 2011 at 9:23 am )

The article in today’s (18th Dec 2012) Sunday Times concerning the detrimental effects of low frequency hum from wind turbines to nearby home-owners is slightly disingenuous (to say the very least). The graphic purports to show that LF hum from the blades of turbines impact (via the windows and other flat surfaces) the occupants of dwellings within a 1 mile radius of the turbine (or collectively, wind farm). To this end, the wonks in charge of climate disinformation, this time the Renewables Foundation (sounds eco-friendly, right? Wrong.) have grossly exaggerated the scale of the Bernoulli distortion to the laminar flow of air over the blade, which occurs at the back of the ‘foil’. Imagine a 737 taking off in cold, wet air. The actual eddies occuring at the back of the wing (there are youtube clips of this if you haven’t seen it yourself) correspond to the laminar flow distortion on a wind tubine. If the ST exaggerated graphic were true, wind turbines would make a ‘thwock’ ‘thwock’ sound like an immense helicopter, and would drive all the sheep down into the valley below, never to return. 1mile is REALLY close in. If your farm cottage is that close, the extra subsidy would have paid for your triple glazing and extra acoustic shielding (which is what it is for, NOT to provide farmers with extra EU cash).

John F Goodfellow
BEng Environmental Energy Engineering, University Of Leeds

John F Goodfellow ( December 19, 2011 at 1:21 am )

Thank you for including the Low Input Food and Nutrition manual as a way to design a balanced diet for planet-people-profits! There is an updated version that goes deeper into permaculture:

*Sustainable Nutrition Manual (SNM): Food, Water, Agriculture & Environment* Free manual, flyers, drawings, and posters https://www.neverendingfood.org/Sustainable-Nutrition-Manual/

That link takes you to all sorts of files, including Flyers I
have been creating based on hot topics people are interested in, or where knowledge is growing quickly:

This flyer is continually updated with Malawi foods (from the sustainable nutrition manual) highlighting indigenous, native species: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1a1fammA7nuts7vlC69IK-6S7UouY266S&authuser=nordinmalawi%40gmail.com&usp=drive_fs

Stacia Nordin ( July 30, 2022 at 12:03 pm )

TrackBack URL :

pagetop