The Emperor Has No Clothes A Practical Guide for Environmental and Social Transformation (22 page)

Agriculture
is another area where
significant reductions in excessive resource consumption could be
easily achieved, as well as producing improvement of the
environment. At the present time 9% of the United States greenhouse
gas emissions originate from agricultural activities. The sources
of these emissions are: 8% from carbon dioxide mostly from fossil
fuel usage, 60 % from nitrous oxide, and the remaining 32 % from
methane. The older conventional methods of vigorously tilling soil
turns it over exposing it to the air. When soil is exposed to the
air it produces carbon dioxide as a result of the oxidation of the
buried organic components of the soil. These older methods also
produce conditions favorable to soil erosion and depletion.
According to Montgomery, soil oxidation from conventional plowing
has contributed 1/3 of the excess carbon dioxide build up in the
atmosphere since the 18th century.[90] In recent times new methods
of tillage such as no till and conservation till have been
developed that minimize or eliminate these problems. No till is the
most effective of these techniques and is currently being used to
cultivate 23% of the land in the United States. No till does have
some limitations as to where it can be applied, being useful only
in well drained soils. As a result of these improved tillage
practices the soil in the United States now removes carbon dioxide
from the air. The amount that is sequestered is small .4% but can
be increased. Starting in the late 19th century the role of
individual plant nutrients (fertilizers) were identified. These
discoveries resulted in large scale applications of these
substances to restore and maintain soil fertility. In the 20th
century the use of these nutrients as well as pesticides and
herbicides have been heavily promoted by the chemical industry as a
panacea for every type of agricultural deficiency. This style of
agriculture does have some drawbacks though, the application of
nitrogen fertilizers particularly in excessive amounts causes the
production of nitrous oxide in the soil. After this gas is produced
in the soil it is then released into the atmosphere. Nitrous oxide
is the largest source of agricultural greenhouse gas and persists
for 120 years.xlix The other significant source of agricultural
nitrous oxide is from the deposition of manure and urine on fields.
These deposits go through the same processes in the soil that
convert nitrogen fertilizers into nitrous oxide. Methane which
persists in the atmosphere for 12 years is the next highest
agricultural greenhouse gas (32%). It originates primarily from
livestock, rotting vegetation (7.2%), and burning crop residues
(1%).

Bio-char a new/old technology offers a
practical method of climatic remediation. Bio-char is a type of
conditioned charcoal that is produced from agricultural and
forestry waste. It has been estimated that it can permanently
sequester 12% of the annual excess carbon from the atmosphere by
incorporating it in the soil. It also reduces nitrous oxide
emissions by 80% as well as all the methane, while improving
agricultural productivity. Productivity is increased as a result of
reduction of leaching of plant nutrients from the soil and
improvement of water retention. In Brazil the Indians used bio-char
as a soil amendment to enhance productivity of the low nutrient
tropical soils that are typical of the amazon basin. The Indians
utilized bio-char agriculture from 450 BC - 950AD. At the present
time the bio-char treated areas of soil which are referred to as
Terra Preta in the amazon basin is still productive and sought
after by the local farmers for crop production or sale as compost.
The estimated amount of Terra Preta in the Amazon is around 1% of
it's area or around twice the area of Great Britain. It has also
been used in Ecuador, Peru, and Guyana in South America as well as
in a few West African locations. At the present time it is being
very actively researched since it is not known how it will perform
in all types of soil. It can, however, be safely deployed in the
many types soils that have already been identified as
appropriate.

In 2009, 13 Billion bushels of corn were
grown requiring 35.1 million hectares (86.7 million acres), only 5
% of this crop is used for direct human consumption. Approximately
35.5 million head of cattle are slaughtered in the United States
each year. Almost all of these animals are “finished” in cow CAFOs
where they are fed mostly corn because it causes a very rapid gain
in weight. On average 1273 kg (2800 lb) of corn is fed.[91] In
order to produce the average CAFO cow it requires 284 gallons of
oil (6.76 barrels), since cows normally graze on grass and not on
corn we have managed to convert a source of food that is produced
by solar energy to one that uses large quantities of oil (240
million barrels of oil per year). The amount of unnecessary carbon
dioxide produced by the oil that is consumed using this method of
agriculture is 76.1 million tonnes.

90. An input of atmospheric carbon dioxide
requires up to 200 years to be removed from the air by natural
processes.

91. The amount of corn fed ranges from 1000
– 3500 lb per cow depending on its initial condition.

The amount of land that is required to
produce all this corn for cattle feed is 4.8 million hectares (11.8
million acres). If the industrial CAFO style of beef production
were abandoned and a return to grazing were used instead, it would
free up 3 ½ % of the arable crop land. In order to obtain the
maximum benefit from a return to grazing the expanded pasture land
would need to be preconditioned with bio-char to reduce the
greenhouse gas emissions that are produced by animal droppings and
urine. Because the nutritional value per hectare of grazing lands
have a significant amount of variation, I can't provide a realistic
estimate of the amount of animals that could be produced on the
land changed from crops to pasture. So what I shall do is to fudge
here by substituting types of livestock that utilize feed more
efficiently than cattle such as poultry.[92] Since what is being
suggested is a reestablishment of native prairie grasses no further
nitrogen would be added through the use of mineral fertilizers or
legumes that also produce nitrous oxide in managed pastures. The
growth of the prairie plants would also directly sequester about
2.6 million tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere per year.l By
instituting grazing and eliminating CAFO type of live stock
production and its associated cattle manure storage impoundments, a
further reduction of around 22 million tonnes of methane and 9
million tonnes of nitrous oxide per year could be achieved.
Moreover, if the marginal agricultural lands that are currently
being used to produce live stock feed crops through the use of
irrigation were converted to grasslands dramatic reductions of
water usage could be achieved.[93]

The second largest source of live stock
greenhouse gasses originates from swine CAFOs which produce around
19 ½ million tonnes of methane and about 2 million tonnes of
nitrous oxide. These emissions could also be mitigated by
implementation of the same types of managed live stock waste as
described above. By eliminating swine CAFOs the waste production
becomes dispersed enough so that a daily spread of the waste on
fields can be used. A daily manure spread greatly reduces
greenhouse gas production since only tiny amounts of methane and no
nitrous oxide are produced. The remaining types of livestock;
horses, poultry, sheep, and goats produce trivial amounts of
greenhouse gasses and will not be given further consideration. If
the remaining old style type of soil tilling were eliminated, a
further 2.1 % reduction of carbon emissions could be obtained by
replacement with no-till and conservation tillage.

92. The amount of feed needed for to produce
one kilogram of animal weight gain is as follows: cattle 7– 10 kg
feed; swine 3- 4 kg feed; poultry 2 kg feed.

93. Water shortages in
California and the south western states that are highly dependent
on irrigation is becoming a big problem. 5.4 cubic kilometers of
water is diverted from the Colorado river to California each year.
By building enough 4
^th
generation base load nuclear plants to fulfill
the intermittent high consumption periods, the excess power they
produce during times of low demand could be used to operate
desalination plants. The fresh water from these plants would
greatly diminish the water demands placed on the Colorado river,
and also provide greater water security for California. By having
greater amounts of Colorado river water available for use by the
south western states, the amount of well water usage could be
diminished. At the present time the Ogallala aquifer where much of
this well water originates has fallen as much as 300 feet since
1940. Some estimates indicate that this aquifer could be
essentially exhausted by 2028. A 2013 study by Leonard F. Konikou
of the USGS indicated that the amount of water drained from this
aquifer between 2001-2008 was as great as 32% of the entire water
withdrawal of the 20
^th
century!

Before proceeding further lets total up the
amount of the agricultural greenhouse gas emissions that have been
averted and sequestered. Since some uncertainty exists about the
amount of land that can be treated with bio-char, I will make the
assumption that 80% can be treated (10% carbon sequestration
instead of 12%)

~~~~~~~~~~

Origin..........................Amount.................................%
Reduction

Bio-char.......................652.6 billion
tonnes..................10

Cattle & Swine............126.4 million
tonnes.................001
94

Improved Tillage..........137 million
tonnes...................0021

Total.............................656.4
billion tonnes................10.04

~~~~~~~~~~

So far all of these agricultural carbon
reductions and offsets have been accomplished simply by
implementing improved methods, existing new technologies,
rearrangement of land usage practices.

Another possible source of greenhouse gas
reduction could be achieved by minor dietary changes from one meat
source to another. If a shift away from the least feed efficient
livestock sources of meat ( cattle and swine) to the most efficient
source poultry, some further reductions in crop land usage and
greenhouse gas production could be achieved. Lets consider what a
10% shift from inefficient cattle and swine to poultry would
accomplish (since we have performed the same types of calculations
above I will skip the arithmetic and just provide the values).

~~~~~~~~~~

Net Tonnage of CO2 equivalence (From enteric
fermentation)

Cattle...............13.37 million tonnes
.

Swine.................5.87 million
tonnes.

Percentage of greenhouse gas reduction,
.4%

Note: the above figures assume that the
suggested implementation of Bio-char amendments and that improved
agricultural practices have taken place.

~~~~~~~~~~

Let's consider what the effects a 10%
reduction of meat consumption would be. In this case CAFO oil cows
will be used for the example (note: swine would produce about ½ of
the reductions from cattle and poultry about ¼). We would eat
3,550,000 fewer cows per year and reduce our oil consumption by
24,000,000 barrels. This would produce 7.61 billion tonnes of
carbon dioxide reduction per year, and take 478,871 ha (1.2 million
acres) of crop land out of production. If this land were reforested
the trees would sequester an additional 325,720 tonnes of carbon
dioxide each year. An additional 13.8 million tonnes of carbon
dioxide equivalents would be averted that originate from emissions
caused by enteric fermentation, managed livestock waste, and
pasture. The total for a 10% reduction of beef consumption is:

~~~~~0~~~~~

Total : 7.624 Billion tonnes of carbon
dioxide reduction.

A 1.2% reduction in the annual US greenhouse
gas output.

~~~~~0~~~~~

The actual value just presented is low since
the early part of the life of CAFO oil cattle takes place on
pasture some of which is improved by tilling and the addition of
fertilizers that produce greenhouse gas emissions. By taking this
land out of production and being reforested, additional carbon
offsets would accrue which hasn't been added in.

One of my friends Roc is a recently retired
professor who taught classes in nutrition. For robust health he
recommends a low meat diet and considers poultry to be the best
type of meat to consume.li If we look at the recommendations of
several religions, meat isn't considered to be a preferred source
of food. For example some Christian sects refrain from eating meat
one day a week. If one looks in the Christian Bible Adam and Eve
did not consume meat. Meat only arises as a topic much later in the
8th chapter, Romans, where God doesn't view meat consumption
favorably but allows it because people are weak. The Benedictine
monks eat only slight amounts of meat and St Francis of Assisi
never ate meat at all. The Buddhists go further and recommend a
vegetarian diet. Obviously high consumption of meat isn't necessary
to maintain good health and one needn’t be concerned about reducing
this part of the diet out of fear of acquiring a nutrient
deficiency. Small dietary changes however, can have large impacts
and I would urge you to consider your food choices in light of the
above discussion.

Forestry
: According to the EPA in 2012
forests were providing a 15% carbon offset (absorbing 15% of our
carbon dioxide emissions). Looking at the table on page 68 of the
2008 U.S. Agriculture and Forestry Greenhouse Gas Inventory we can
derive the average amount of carbon sequestered per hectare as .628
tonnes each year. Forests are an effective means of sequestering
greenhouse gasses. Thus, by increasing the amount of forest cover
proportional reductions could be accrued. Some places where
significant forest expansion could be accomplished are; replanting
areas that have been cut for timber, planting alongside roads and
streams, and expansion of the shelter belt [
94]
which currently occupies only 22 million ha.