Whats your strategy for year 2030 / ban of ICE vehicles?

[Bellow]

View attachment 123404
Whether they have a lower carbon footprint than batteries I cant say, but I guess it depends how much you use over the lifetime of both. I would love there to be an easy answer, but there isn't.

Proper development would include minimising the distance transported. Maybe it is not so much bio-fuels that need to be pursued but synthetic fuels. My (admittedly loose) understanding of synthetic fuels is that they can be made from pretty much anything that grew in or from the ground. Given the huge amount of waste generated from agriculture (leaves, stalks, etc) that end up rotting and producing CO2 it wouldn't surprise me if synthetic fuel become necessary as a method of benign disposal.

Note the bit about food demand increasing. Land might not be the problem but water will be. I can provide figures on that as well if you want, but its all out there if you look.

Generally accepted that four times as much needs to be grown in the ground for meat production than when food is directly made from plants. Reason enough to curb meat consumption when there is going to be a greater demand for food. Water consumption falls accordingly.

 

[Dryce]

Generally accepted that four times as much needs to be grown in the ground for meat production than when food is directly made from plants. Reason enough to curb meat consumption when there is going to be a greater demand for food. Water consumption falls accordingly.

I've heard this sort of generally accepted fact before.

I'm not so sure it is actually true. I know I'm pretty ancient and my school days are long long past. But I do remember in Geography lessons that we did cover some stuff about farming and land usage. And my vague recollection is that framers tend to grow high value crops whereevr they can and the animals get fed off land that isn't so optimal for crops.

So my deep suspicion is that while you can no doubt find that there wll be areas of farmland that are being used ineffeciently as pasture or for growng animal feed - he reality is that farming is a usiness and that in the main animals are raised and fed by utilising farmland and grwoing resources that wouldn't be so effective at grwong food for humans.

So that makes me suspect taht a headline ratio like 'four times as much' needs a lot of qualification. The problem is tahat as a simpel statement made authoratitvely then it's very easy for it be generally accepted - regardless of how right it actually is .... or is not.

(Apologies - Dryce the Sceptic pronounces yet again)

 

[markjay]

...Generally accepted that four times as much needs to be grown in the ground for meat production than when food is directly made from plants...

It is indeed:

If the world adopted a plant-based diet, we would reduce global agricultural land use from 4 to 1 billion hectares

We could reduce the amount of land used for grazing and croplands used to grow animal feed.

ourworldindata.org

 

[markjay]

...my vague recollection is that framers tend to grow high value crops whereevr they can and the animals get fed off land that isn't so optimal for crops...

Is there any research to support the claim that grazing land is largely unsuitable for raising crops for human consumption?

 

[whitenemesis]

Is there any research to support the claim that grazing land is largely unsuitable for raising crops for human consumption?

History would show it?

 

[markjay]

History would show it?

I don't know... any farmers in the audience? Has anyone tried to raise crops on grazing land? Would be interesting to hear their experience.

 

[del320]

I don't know... any farmers in the audience? Has anyone tried to raise crops on grazing land? Would be interesting to hear their experience.

Don't know when you last visited the countryside - but think about it - modern arable land is generally flat to accommodate the giant ploughing, sowing, and harvesting machinery. Several members of my wife's family run vast acreages of land in the western Scottish Borders. They are all hill farmers with large flocks of sheep with a small sideline in free-range poultry.

The Eastern Borders down the Tweed valley towards Berwick is flat as a board. Rapeseed for oil and animal feed is the predominate crop along with barley and green vegetables.

Flat land around Dundee (Carse of Gowrie) is a major area of fruit growing.

 

[markjay]

Don't know when you last visited the countryside - but think about it - modern arable land is generally flat to accommodate the giant ploughing, sowing, and harvesting machinery. Several members of my wife's family run vast acreages of land in the western Scottish Borders. They are all hill farmers with large flocks of sheep with a small sideline in free-range poultry.

The Eastern Borders down the Tweed valley towards Berwick is flat as a board. Rapeseed for oil and animal feed is the predominate crop along with barley and green vegetables.

Flat land around Dundee (Carse of Gowrie) is a major area of fruit growing.

This reminds me how they griw grapes in Switzerland. The vines grow in narrow terraces on the steep mountainside, with a 'crop dusting' helicopter spreading pesticide because the terraces are not accessible to motor vehicles.

 

[markjay]

Aimed at the US market, no doubt, where plugging a cable into a socket is just too much work......:

Continental is Jointly Developing Fully Automatic Charging Robots for Electric Vehicles with Volterio

www.continental.com

 

[Alfie]

More scientists supporting vegan way of life 21,000 Scientists Want You to Ditch Meat for the Planet which to a point I can see, interested to see what other think. It is one way to reduce CO2 levels, but can we grow enough to replace meat and all of its other benefits such as milk. eggs etc

Vegetarianism maybe but veganism - no way.

 

[del320]

This reminds me how they griw grapes in Switzerland. The vines grow in narrow terraces on the steep mountainside, with a 'crop dusting' helicopter spreading pesticide because the terraces are not accessible to motor vehicles.

Absolutely, and typical of many vineyards around Europe. In France, the ideal terroir is a south-facing slope with very stony ground - good for growing nothing else - thank goodness!

BTW, a rose bush is often planted at the end of each row of vines. They give an early indication of the onset of frost.

 

[Bellow]

I don't know... any farmers in the audience? Has anyone tried to raise crops on grazing land? Would be interesting to hear their experience.

Not a farmer - but did live on a worked farm (arable and livestock) for 20 years....
Crop and grazing land are one and the same. Good farming rotates crops over a seven year cycle. Land put to grass will support any other crop (that the soil can) at other times.
Different soils differ in what can be grown in them. Typically sandy soils such as feature closer to the coast are better suited to root vegetables (eg, carrots, beets, etc) but that has a lot to do with the difficulty of retaining seeds (eg barley, grass, etc) before they establish growth when the wind blows and displaces the layers of top soil. Heavy soils with clay are much better for seeded crops. Typically, crops such as grass require a lot of manufactured fertilisers for their nitrogen content.

 

[del320]

Not a farmer - but did live on a worked farm (arable and livestock) for 20 years....
Crop and grazing land are one and the same. Good farming rotates crops over a seven year cycle. Land put to grass will support any other crop (that the soil can) at other times.
Different soils differ in what can be grown in them. Typically sandy soils such as feature closer to the coast are better suited to root vegetables (eg, carrots, beets, etc) but that has a lot to do with the difficulty of retaining seeds (eg barley, grass, etc) before they establish growth when the wind blows and displaces the layers of top soil. Heavy soils with clay are much better for seeded crops. Typically, crops such as grass require a lot of manufactured fertilisers for their nitrogen content.

All true, but your neck of the woods is also flat as a board! Of course, you can graze stock on arable land, but you can't grow crops on hills - of which there are many in Scotland, as well as Wales, Northumberland, and the Lake District.

Ah yes! Great carrots grown round Roseisle! And the shifting sands of Culbin further west...

 

[Tonye]

So what's the excuse in Cheshire, acres and acres of grass, Bentleys and Rangers.

 

[Bellow]

All true, but your neck of the woods is also flat as a board!

Which is why if I'm not climbing or descending a hill I'm skirting around it....

Of course, you can graze stock on arable land, but you can't grow crops on hills - of which there are many in Scotland, as well as Wales, Northumberland, and the Lake District.

Grazing on hills is limited. In the farmhouse where I lived one of the neighbouring farms was classed as a hill farm and where the tractors could work the land was as productive as access to the sun would permit. Where the tractors couldn't go, true, no arable use. But that also means that all livestock have to graze on is the same old grass year in year out. Serious livestock production requires serious commitment to crop growth - hence this debate.

 

[Dryce]

Serious livestock production requires serious commitment to crop growth - hence this debate.

Good point.

And I think that's where I wonder about the numbers. If you claim that say farming cattle replaces the equivalent of 4 times as much food that good be grown then I can see how that would be the case in some circumstances. But I'm concerned that in the villages where I have been brought up and lived in Yorkshire, Moray, and East Lothian it seemed to be the case that there was clear partitioning in land use between arable and say cattle in some areas. In others there was rotation (I see a lot more pigs in fields that were previously arable - but they seem to get moved about so I suspect that there is some rotation going on)..

I've also noticed less fruit being grown openly in some areas (cereals and oil seed rape seem to win out) which I suspect is down to labour costs - and then there is the spread of polytunnels - and fields of solar panels.

My assumption is that if livestock is such a universally bad thing then the economics would drive farmers to finding more ways to grow stuff.

A significant change in scale of the equipment and fields in arable areas. Travelling on side roads in arable areas I notice that the fields are massive and it's telling that the fields are more often accessed by large double gates instead of the old single gates. (It's notable in areas where there is pasture that the gates are still typically single).

 

[Bellow]

The market (as it is currently) is for meat - which dictates the economics.

Large double gates facilitate large trailers carting silage (for wintering cattle). Large trailers as they frequently cover significant road miles between farms as many farms have relinquished traditional ownership patterns and are owned by one company which centralises certain activities. 'Grubbing up' - as in removing dry stone dividing walls, hedges and trees turns several small fields into fewer larger ones, again facilitating larger equipment and shorter labour times. Farming here isn't as 'quaint' as it used to be. But nothing compared to the industrialised scale as in say, the USA. Penned cattle with food brought to them from rapacious agricultural practices that in some cases are unsustainable due to depletion of the water table faster than it can replenish. It will only change if/when diets shift away from meat and the economics follow suit.

 

[del320]

We are venturing into the arcane world of agriculture which, unless you have real knowledge, is best avoided.

Since the fifties, commercial farmers have suffered meddling from governments and the EEC. Encouragement to produce this or that has been a carrot and stick procedure aided and abetted by subsidies and grants.

Only one example: In the 70s into the 80s, farmers were paid to grub up hedgerows creating the huge fields seen in East Lothian and East Anglia. By the 90s, surpluses and guaranteed prices of CAP brought the introduction of setaside - subsidies for leaving a proportion of land out of production. This policy was compulsory but was abandoned 15 years ago although strips are still to be seen round fields for "bio-diversity" - and it looks nice.

Nowadays, farmers are paid sweetly to reinstate hedgerows. Of course, a few wind turbines on your land is very lucrative. My wife still owns land and the wayleaves are a nice little earner!

Whatever - you've never seen a poor farmer...

 

[Bellow]

I saw two farming brothers retire and sell two farms (£ seven figure sum) and the first thing they did with the money was buy land some 60 miles from where they'd farmed precisely to obtain the setaside subsidies. Old habits die hard...

The farms' new owner also ran a business where it would cost him to dispose of (non agricultural) waste. What a convenience to have farm land to bury it in.

 

[ChrisHGTV]

All true, but your neck of the woods is also flat as a board! Of course, you can graze stock on arable land, but you can't grow crops on hills - of which there are many in Scotland, as well as Wales, Northumberland, and the Lake District.

Ah yes! Great carrots grown round Roseisle! And the shifting sands of Culbin further west...

Hmm that's interesting. Our garden soil is quite sandy but my carrots come out all deformed. To the extent they're not really useful other than as weird curios.