From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
Northern Ireland will need to lose more than 1 million sheep and cattle to meet its new legally binding climate emissions targets, according to an industry-commissioned analysis seen by the Guardian.
The large-scale reduction in farm animals comes after the passing of the jurisdiction’s first ever climate act, requiring the farming sector to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and reduce methane emissions by almost 50% over the same period.
About a third of human-caused methane emissions come from livestock, mostly from the burps and manure of beef and dairy cattle. Analysis by KPMG, commissioned by industry representatives including the Ulster Farmers’ Union (UFU), estimates more than 500,000 cattle and about 700,000 sheep would need to be lost in order for Northern Ireland to meet the new climate targets.
Separate analysis by the UK government’s climate advisers suggests chicken numbers would also need to be cut by 5 million by 2035. Both the pig and poultry sectors in Nothern Ireland have seen rapid growth in the past decade.
Agriculture accounts for about 27% of Northern Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions, with the vast majority coming from livestock. Its heavily export-driven meat industry principally supplies Great Britain, but it also exports to China and North America.
Chris Stark, CCC chief executive, told the Guardian that a switch to arable farming would probably be necessary if food production levels are to remain the same in Northern Ireland. “A condition in our modelling is that we produce the same amount of food per head in 2050,” he said. “But it’s very difficult to do this unless you see a change in farming practice, and especially unless you see a shift in arable farming versus livestock.
Not only does agriculture account for a large slice of NI’s emissions (and Ireland’s too), it also accounts for a lot of its GDP, directly and indirectly.
There is a reason why Ireland is dominated by pastoral rather than arable farming. It is because most of the land is unsuitable for growing of crops, certainly to a profitable extent. Much of the land is rocky and the climate is far too wet. That was why Ireland was so reliant on potatoes at the time of the Great Famine.
Currently only 4% of N Ireland’s farmland is arable.
https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/landing-pages/statistics
Although farm labour only accounts for 7% of the country’s labour force, many more depend on the rural economy. Altogether the rural population makes up about 40% of the total in N Ireland. Destroying a large part of farming sector there would be catastrophic for the rural sector. Replacing the meat and dairy sector with, for instance, potatoes would decimate incomes and lead to mass migration out of the countryside.
Perhaps the most shocking part of the Guardian’s report is the reaction of Chris Stark, who is more interested in his modelling than in people’s lives. It also raises the question of just how all of this will be enforced. Farmers certainly are not going to give up willingly.
Shades of the infamous Soviet Land Reforms?
The Emerald Isle owns the colour green.
Why not cover/disfigure the entire island with wind turbines and send almost all of the electricity to the UK and France?
Ireland and the Irish will be Kelly green, plus make lots of money on exports, without having to slave away to produce goods and services, like the Saudis; green/approved wind gold, instead dirty/disapproved black gold.
ALL THE NUT JOBS IN BRUSSELS WOULD BE DELIGHTED AND SEND LOTS OF SUBSIDIES TO IRELAND TO MAKE IT HAPPEN
Sounds like a good enough reason for the 26 and 6 to reunite
“human-caused methane emissions come from livestock”
Northern Ireland has climate form for lunacy with their heating scandal
“Renewable Heat Incentive scandal”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38301428
Why do I see shades of “Soylent Green‘ (1973) in the coming climate-proof future?
All breathing of all animals will need to severely restricted to meet zero carbon targets so that by 2030 only inhaling will be allowed. Technology will need to be developed so that devises can be fitted to any animal, from a mouse to a Blue Whale, to enable only inhalation and block exhalation. For humans only re-education is required as breathing is a white toxic male (old) social construct. This will cut out a large source of CO2.
In addition, all vegetation will need to removed and launched into space using perpetual motion sling shots. This will remove and even larger source of CO2 from the planet.
Next, and more challenging are the oceans. Because of the legacy of the Industrial Revolution (and colonialism), oceans have been spewing CO2 into the atmosphere for billions of years. Innovative ways (yet to be realised) will need to be found to drain all the oceans so as to reach net zero, although this target may not be possible until 2050. By removing the oceans racist sea level rise will be stopped and reversed, thus preserving indigenous fishing communities (and languages).
Overall, all the above will help save the Earth and avoid mass extinction.
The sling shots will be made from responsibly sourced recycled rare earths straight from the mines, using children so as to teach them how about the environment and how bad old white people are.
Net zero is just an accounting trick.
These people are going to look pretty stupid around 2050, if not before.
I think they already look incredibly stupid.
Yep, too late – they already look incredible stupid. Have for a long time now….and they just keep right on doubling down on stupid.
They don’t just look stupid, they are stupid
I see where someone has invented a mask a cow can wear supposedly to cut down on methane emissions.
This CO2 crisis stuff with regard to cows and sheep would be funny if it wasn’t so ridiculous. Leave the livestock alone!
What the article didn’t mention was how much CO2 would be created in the life-cycle of manufacturing and disposing of the mask?
On a lighter note, “Who was that masked cow?” “The Lone Range Cow!”
Designer masks for cows and sheep, and for the cowed sheepl
Yup, this news item was reported the designer winning the “prestigious Prince Charles prize” to reduce climate change!! One is tempted to say “enough said”. However, the claim is that most of the methane emitted by the cow comes out of its mouth whereas I always thought it was from its rear end……
If a cow spends most of its time munching on grass, how will it eat with this contraption round its mouth?
https://news.yahoo.com/burp-catching-mask-gassy-cows-090411942.html
Thanks for that link. Now, people won’t think I’m crazy. 🙂
Hey! Alarmists, leave us cows alone….
Are there still people who don’t realize how ridiculous this is getting? How is that possible?
There are people who cheer it on, Sommer.
Like all masks the wearing is allowed to take it off while they are eating.
Or ruminating.
But at ALL other times the cows must be fully masked.
Fool proof.
I can’t figure out how the hell the cow gonna eat with a mask on
Obviosly, the cow will have to take the mask off in order to eat. 🙂
This stuff is a month late!!!
Utter, utter insanity.
In this case, it would be udder, udder insanity.
Your milking it now.
Don’t have a cow man! (c) Bart Simpson
It is all bovine excrement.
The insanity of pure ignorants.
Carbon captured from the atmosphere by photosynthetic organsims will return to the atmosphere, mostly as CO2, one way or another: either by respiration (the reverse process of photosynthesis, roughly) or by burps of polygastric animals, farts from termites (yes! worldwide, in the order of magnitude, or higher, of cow burps!) or burp/farts of bacteria that in the soil live by decomposing the undigested cellulose defecated by herbivores (greens would be surprised if they knew the proportion of carbon released by soil bateria…).
The idiotic greens try “cancelling” one or other of the carbon pathways: they only achieve a diversion to other pathways the fixed carbon in its way to return to the atmosphere…
New Zealan has the same problem. And globally another third of methane emissions come from rice growing which is often the subsistence crop.
It seems the problem is life itself?
Which is exactly what the warmunists want to eliminate….except their own of course.
Darkseid and Thanos may have been onto something.
There is a study out of AUT in Auckland that suggests farming in NZ is already at net zero (ot even better). I imagine it’s much the same for other countries.
It never seems to get a mention on MSM.
https://news.aut.ac.nz/news/sheep-and-beef-farms-near-carbon-neutral
Replacing the meat and dairy sector with, for instance, potatoes would decimate incomes and lead to mass migration out of the countryside.
Given Ireland’s history with potatoes not the most sensitive suggestion as a replacement crop.
I have just sent the UK climate change committee the following message at their contact page
I gather from this article:
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2022/04/30/northern-ireland-faces-loss-of-1-million-sheep-and-cattle-to-meet-climate-targets/
that you have advised farmers in Northern Ireland that they need to get rid of livestock and switch to arable farming. You people are seriously deluded. Plants grow by absorbing CO2 from the air by a process known as photosynthesis. So, the plant absorbs CO2, it’s transferred to the animal when it eats the plant. Every cell in your body is built from carbon compounds that were once in the air as CO2, and will be again when you are gone. Therefore it makes no difference if we eat the plant or eat the animal that eats the plant, the CO2 ends up back in the atmosphere and the cycle starts again. Left alone, a plant will live out it’s life and when it dies bacteria will turn it back into CO2 and methane. It doesn’t matter if this process takes place in an animal’s stomach or in the open air. No animal can turn a plant into more carbon than it absorbed from the atmosphere to start with. Methane has zero “greenhouse gas” potential, there is 200 times less methane as CO2 in the atmosphere, as it’s emissivity spectrum is entirely covered by that of water vapour so it makes no difference how much is emitted by animals or anything else. Methane quickly oxidises into CO2 and water vapour. Living trees emit methane! If some people don’t like meat or think it’s morally wrong to eat animals, fine. I don’t care, and neither does the planet. But please, don’t tell me that we are “going to save the world” by turning vegan. It’s just not true. Take away the animals, and the carbon compounds that every cell of their bodies are made from will still be in the air as CO2. You clearly have no knowledge of nature or anything to do with the environment, so perhaps you should keep your “advice” to yourselves.
I invite you to send your own messages:
https://www.theccc.org.uk/contact-us/
Nice letter, too bad you said, “ Methane has zero “greenhouse gas” potential, ” because as you should know, the IPCC says the Global Warming Potential of methane makes it 86 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat. That alone will guide your letter straight away into the trash.
But thanks for the “uk/contact-us” link, I think I’ll have a go at it.
Trapping heat? Really?
You are correct to question that one. In the IPCC’s AR4 report Chapter 2 you won’t find any mention of “trapping” in paragraph 2.10.1 Definition of … the Global Warming Potential (Page 210) But on page (186) paragraph 2.6.2 you will find this statement:
Contrails are thin cirrus clouds, which reflect solar radiation and trap outgoing longwave radiation.
It’s our wonderful so-called mainstream media that loves to say that greenhouse gas traps heat.
In any case policy makers have no idea how much or should I say how little effect methane has as a greenhouse gas. They don’t know because they never ask the question, and climate science never volunteers the answer.
As far as they are concerned you’ve had your say, perhaps even your rant.
Do you really think anything will change as a result?
That’s why Parliament instituted the petitions system – as a release valve.
No, I don’t even expect a reply. But I would rather have my objections be known than let them make claims like “the public support our climate ambitions” because nobody objects. If enough people let their views be known rather than just accept defeat they might reconsider.
The NI Minister of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs, one Edwin Poots*, apparently is a farmer and attended agricultural college, is the one pushing this agenda. And he doesn’t understand the carbon cycle?
I don’t live in NI so I have no right to challenge him, but if you do or if he’s your MP, please email him directly.
*poot is slang for fart in some parts of the country.. you couldn’t make it up..
“Methane has zero “greenhouse gas” potential, there is 200 times less methane as CO2 in the atmosphere, as it’s emissivity spectrum is entirely covered by that of water vapour so it makes no difference how much is emitted by animals or anything else.”
Which is the reason these alarmist idiots should leave the livestock alone.
There is not enough arable land for everyone on Earth to become vegan. That’s why the leftists are trying to create food and energy shortages to lessen the population. Then they will force the plebeians to eat bugs for additional protein.
Of course there’s enough arable land for everyone to become vegan. The problem is that the vegan diet is not ideal for everyone, especially pregnant women and young children. Certain vitamin and mineral deficiencies can be a problem on a purely vegan diet, such as a lack of vitamin B12, vitamin D, Omega 3 fatty acids, zinc and iron.
Yes, you cover all the points. But reasoning with a madman gets you nowhere. For ages I puzzled about this methane being 86 times warming. The explanation is in the webpage titled Slugometer in the Modtran website.
About a third of human-caused methane emissions come from livestock,…
______________________________________________________
This story is missing the “Methane is so many times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat” bullshit, but that’s what’s driving this insanity.
Hollywood is good at illustrating what’s going on. In the mayor’s office scene from Ghost Busters you should identify with Walter Peck. In the real world, there are way too many policy makers taken in by by the likes of Dr. Peter Venkman. Too bad the writers didn’t have Venkman say “The existential crisis of our time.” instead of, “…dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria!” Perhaps they thought that would have been too much over the top.
but in the movie, the ghosts are real. Walter Peck is simply a (dickless) power hungry bureaucrat who wants control of something he doesn’t understand, and in the end causes harm because of his single mindedness.
If they get their way, we will only be allowed to eat bugs for protein. Nobody will own personal transportation. The elite climate warriors will fly to conferences in their private jets and eat steak. The rest of us will live like our prehistoric ancestors.
well that IS the World Economic Forum model. They’ve been saying this for years. If Northern Ireland wants to do this to themselves, screw ’em.
You will own nothing and be happy!
Some of our prehistoric ancestors were cannibals. Perhaps some of our immiserated descendants will develop a fondness for barbecued elites.
The high fat diet would not be good for their cholesterol levels.
Well, they are Plato’s guardians, after alll…
I see no real problem for Ireland’s farmers having to meet the 2050 target. All they have to do is to commit to closing all the farms on 31 Dec 2049. They can carry on farming normally until then. They also get nearly 30 years to work on getting a change of government and a change of legislation. If they can’t get a change of government, I reckon they will get a change of legislation on 30 Dec 2049.
I’ve always thought that taking this approach would work for any entity, e.g. car makers, oil refiners, etc., burdened by the arbitrary deadlines promulgated by our alarmist masters. Unfortunately, the latter have realized this as well, which is why they usually include a series of intermediate points in their regulations.
I lived in Ireland, Waterford, in the late 70’s and early 80’s. It was a depressing time although we did have wood, peat and coal to burn which made the very wet months more bearable. Can only get worse from now on.
The Northern Ireland Assembly has far exceeded the stupidity of even the dumbest of sheep.
They’re well on their way to winning the Darwin Award. UN#@%$^@!#BELIEVABLE!!!
There is a wealth of Irish jokes…
There are no words on paper that can force people to starve. Period. Full stop.
Can I refer you to Mao’s little red book?
I have read that piece of shyte, and no, not a single word in it can force people to starve themselves to death. That takes men with guns, and they can be killed.
But the men with guns liked the book. And with the power the book gave them, sent millions to their death. If you don’t like Mao, there’s always Lysenko. With only words, and those men with guns, millions starved.
Which is why you must stand against them.
Stalin comes to mind.
In the U.S., however, we have the 2nd Amendment and there are more guns than people. Just replace yellow vests with body armor and handmade signs with modern semiautomatic sporting rifles and you will get the picture of freedom-loving American’s response to forced lifestyle changes. The cogs in the cities can starve while real Americans in the hinterlands take care of the budding autocrats.
The left keeps pushing and it is going to get fugly.
I watched that movie “The Death Of Stalin” recently.
Great satire. P!ssed myself laughing.
But what is easier, to forego the benefits of meat in our diets -OR- re-educate the 2legged sheep to do their own maths & critical thinking?
Not my words but useful perspective –
“Methane is not “a powerful greenhouse gas” as you state. Happer and Wijngaarten have clearly established that in the earth’s atmosphere as it exists, doubling the amount of methane in it will at best cause a tiny and undetectably small increase in the earth’s temperature. Only in a hypothetical atmosphere containing no greenhouse gasses at all (no water vapor – no carbon dioxide) would adding methane cause a notable increase in temperature. This is because the frequency bands where methane can function as a greenhouse gas are at or very close to saturation because of water vapor and carbon dioxide and adding methane can have no effect.”
Interesting …. I grew up in Northern California many many years ago, family had a several year escapade with vineyards, learned to drive on a farm tractor, and the only water concern was not getting enough rain. Never occurred to me that you could have too much water to grow certain crops.
Could someone shed a little enlightenment my way? What does happen if you try to grow wheat or corn or other grains in a too-wet climate? How about orchards and vegetables? Maybe they’d suffer some kind of root rot, or be too hard to harvest with modern mechanized equipment that is designed for lots of flat land?
The biggest problem that I am aware of with the area is the amount of arable land. The land is very rocky. The climate and soil quality in Ireland favor the growth of grass over arable crops. That is one reason to have grazing animals rather than traditional crops.
As far as it being too wet, most crops require solid ground for farming equipment to plant and harvest and root rot is a concern. Farmlands have plots designed for drainage.
Ireland’s as pastoral as farming gets & yet the loons aren’t still satisfied which tells you
they’ll never be. They’re totally oblivious to the moronic nastiness of their demented minds!
🙁
I think in the totalitarian mindset, it goes something like, yes, but if you got rid of the cows and all the sheep from hilly areas, you could grow 97% more soy & lentils.
The compatibility of a combine harvester & a 1:3 rocky outcrop does not even occur to them. Or doesn’t happen because it doesn’t fit The Model.
I think in the leftist mindset it goes like this:
If it works well it must be changed.
More is less.
Joy is pain.
Prosperity is poverty.
I think you’re pointing in the right direction. I grew up on a dairy farm in central MN where we also
raised oats. corn & wheat besides alfalfa. Our biggest problems were weeds & too much/little rain-
mostly at the wrong time- & sometimes the whole growing season. Frost limited our growing season
so it was quite common to have to wait for the corn to dry down before we’d harvest. .
From what I’ve read, heat, humidity & a lot of green plants in the South usually means a lot of pests
& fungi we never had to deal with. Wheat is grown from TX well into Canada & east into OH. Winter
wheat is grown northward into SD & east into OH. In OH, they wait until the threat of Hessian flies
in fall is over. Spring wheat is grown from SD northward into Canada, where the summers aren’t
as hot as further south. Durum wheat- used to make pasta- is grown from N ND into Canada
because it thrives in dryer climate. So each variety of wheat is grown where it’s best suited to grow
it. One thing Dad made sure of was whatever was harvested- hay,corn, or grain- it was always
stored dry enough so it wouldn’t spoil. So wetter climes possibly means more grain drying.
As for equipment, tractors & combines use tracks vs tires as you get better flotation. Like the rice
grown in CA, they have to drain the fields in LA before harvesting. Before they went to tracks, some
northern farmers used extra wide flotation “rice” tires developed by rice farmers.
I’m sure all the other produce have similar problems. Do a search like “apples fungus pests too wet
dry” you’ll get a lot of info. If they mention a geographical area, research its climate. That will tell
you what you need to know (Brazil would definitely be an overly wet area with some
droughts caused by La Ninas).
FWIW- corn is a tropical C4 plant.
I should’ve included this US map where the blue line is where precipitation = evaporation.
N Ireland is probably the closest to New England’s weather except not nearly as extreme
vis a vis temperature. They wear a lot of wool sweaters & woolen tweed jackets which repel
moisture well. The rawer the wool, the better! (They would ~ work well along
the PNW coast)
Thank you for mentioning the Soviet land ‘reforms’ of the 1930’s – that caused widespread famine in the Ukraine breadbasket.
I was trying to find a suitable comparison in history to the current green mass hysteria/government sponsored screw up and that is perfect, even better than any examples from Nazi Germany.
A good way to drive the rural population out and for the rich to pick up the land on the cheap to do with as they please. And to drive the population in to submission with starvation and dependence. It’s a communist tradition.
Shades of the soviet era famines, whereby governments meddling in the affairs of citizens caused the death of millions.
https://www.history.com/news/ukrainian-famine-stalin
“unlike other famines in history caused by blight or drought, this was caused when a dictator wanted both to replace Ukraine’s small farms with state-run collectives and punish independence-minded Ukrainians who posed a threat to his totalitarian authority.”
“The Ukrainian famine was a clear case of a man-made famine, explains Alex de Waal, executive director of the World Peace Foundation at Tufts University and author of the 2018 book, Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine. He describes it as a hybrid…of a famine caused by calamitous social-economic policies and one aimed at a particular population for repression or punishment.”
“Resistant Farmers Labeled as ‘Kulaks’In response, the Soviet regime derided the resisters as kulaks—well-to-do peasants, who in Soviet ideology were considered enemies of the state.”
“Although farm labour only accounts for 7% of the country’s labour force, many more depend on the rural economy. Altogether the rural population makes up about 40% of the total in N Ireland. Destroying a large part of farming sector there would be catastrophic for the rural sector. Replacing the meat and dairy sector with, for instance, potatoes would decimate incomes and lead to mass migration out of the countryside.”
These people will then become climate policy refugees.
“These people will then become climate policy refugees.”
I think the best way farmers everywhere can push back on the Green’s drive to exterminate them
is to try to connect people- especially young kids- to farms. Kids love baby animals & Hall Hill farm
in N England (SW Newcastle, W of Durham) does tours around lambing & other times as they have
the usual farm animals as well as exotics. They have daily podcasts to make connections & keep
them alive. City people do podcasts on Facebook involving pets & other birds & animals.
Here in the States, apple orchards & Halloween maize mazes are big hits. Fifty years ago, two of my
sisters stayed @ B & Bs in Ireland, something that was rare in the States. Use those times to share
some of the nonsensical BeeEss they’re facing caused by bureaucratic nut jobs. Real people can be
touched by other peoples’ plights as bureaucracies & big stores treat people badly everywhere.
Farming organizations & smaller towns would definitely have to hire marketing firms to get the
personal connection between city people & them. Tourist boards are in most areas & may have
funds available to get things started. A group of farmers in an area could adopt a “Sister City”.
Right now, the Wuhan flu has put a damper on tourism but I’m sensing people are at the point of
ignoring the BeeEss & have a pent up desire to do whatever they want to in spite of regulations. If
they run ads against bad policies, include little fluffy lambs that the evil politicians want to hurt.
People with fond memories of seeing them as kids are emotionally attached to them & all the verbal
rhetoric can be trumped. The emotional appeal can work both ways!
In general, farmers & others who run businesses are always busy doing the work, Most aren’t
outgoing marketing types. Right now, they’re enjoying good prices vs the usually much lower prices
as most of their produce is commoditized & profits are quite low. Having value-added income can
help ride out the rough times.
I realize these will be a very hard slog as most kids’ minds have already been programmed to
respond to Green verbiage. The key is to get there first with an emotional appeal. Teachers’
unions will oppose this as it infringes on their turf. Pareto analysis says 80% of the farm produce is
done on 20% of the farms so large corporate farms may be indifferent/opposed to this whole plan.
Trying to set up events open to the public always involve more regulation & expensive insurance.
Most “deniers” are also probably more thinkers than doers or marketers so having to do things we
normally don’t do is a big transition we’d rather avoid.
Since podcasts are a way to provide information, maybe one’s done on climate- like Jim Steele’s
lecture series- can include a series involving real farmers, fishermen, etc.- those whose liveli-
hoods depend on the climate- can include dialogue discussing facts while footage showing them
working plays in the background. This may have more appeal than graphs & charts as most people
aren’t good at math. (Graphs & charts are more interesting than a verbal lecture alone.) I’m sure
there are people who are much better at this who can come up with better ways & better ideas.
I think this is something to consider where it has a better chance for success.
https://www.hallhillfarm.co.uk/
What will happen to the price of wool and leather in Ireland? And, will people be able to afford the traditional foods based on mutton? What will happen to the livelihoods of people whose work involves not only the raising of the animals, but the spinning and weaving of the wool, tanning of hides and processing into goods, and the local butchers? What will happen to the ecosystem as the animals no longer graze the grass on the hillsides? Will wildfires become a part of their future?
Bonkers is too kind of a word.
do they even use the wool anymore?
Children fart too.
grandads too, but you have to pull their finger 🙂
Animals properly grazed build soil and help plants sequester carbon in the soil. Poop can also be added to a methane digester and used for power, but really nature decomposes it just fine. These idiots in charge are doing everything they can to destroy the food supply and climate.
This is simply an arbitrary demonstration of power by people too stupid for the positions in which they were ensconced.
I’m happy they’re not trying to regulate how many livestock there can be, because the pain this entails means people waking up and questioning the BS climate line.
Yes , the whole world is now full up with very stupid people.
More than half* of all adults have below-average IQs. Many of them find they have no real skills that anyone is willing to pay for, so they go into politics.
*This is accounting for traumatic brain injuries in vehicle crashes and war, brain cells destroyed by alcohol poisoning and habitual recreational drug use, and senile dementia.
Below-median, I believe.
It’s a slightly left-skewed Poisson distribution anyway – there are more idiots than psychopaths. They tend to chop off the bottom part of the Bell curve on graphs so it shows as a normal distribution.
Unfortunately, we still clearly have too many psychopaths in places of influence.
Its worse than we thought: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/466262/sea-levels-rising-twice-as-fast-as-thought-in-new-zealand
So the fake crisis of Global Warming alarmism will create a real food crisis. #ClimateScientology at its finest.
The UK gov signed a bloody methane pledge! They didnt ask anyone, they just cowered at the feet of the Vegan lobby! Disgusting, methane is a NONT event as a GH gas, saturated, short life time, and Wiens law states the earth doesnt even produce much energy at the frequency methane absorbs at! I am SICK AND TIRED of the UK govts cowtowing to these MINORITY, extremist, lying, unscientific groups!
The grass that grazing animals eat breaks down into CO2 and into methane (which in turn breaks down into CO2) just the same when the grass dies of old age as when grazing animals eat it and leave it as cow pies. Being digested by livestock makes no significant difference whatsoever in the return of plant-borne CO2 to the atmosphere.
“But the grass would not have been grown in the first place if it weren’t for the livestock industry,” an eco-moron might say. True, in which case something else would grow, and if nothing else grew, if they salted the earth, then the CO2 would never be removed from the atmosphere in the first place. Even eco-morons know this don’t they? Everyone who went to high school knows about the carbon cycle.
Thinking that the lifecycle of animals adds CO2 to the atmosphere is the same as thinking that plant life adds CO2 to the atmosphere. It’s beyond stupid. ALL life on earth is carbon-based. Yet the eco-lunatics are actually trying to get rid of the animals to keep them from returning their carbon to the atmosphere!
personally i’ve never eaten mutton. sounds gross
Slow spit roasted leg of hogget is mmmmmmm.
It’s just like lamb, but tastier.
This will give a major boost to the Reform party – formerly UKIP. The next big agenda will be trashing net-Zero. And after that trying to avoid being invaded by the USA, who under their Irish president hate Britain even more than the EU do.
Just make all the Ulster folk refugees and repopulate the place. Problem solved!
Depopulate…
A water vapor (WV) molecule is more effective as a greenhouse gas than a CO2 molecule. Measurements of both show WV molecules have been increasing 7 times faster than CO2 molecules. NASA/RSS reported WV (TPW) monthly since Jan 1988 but stopped reporting after Dec 2021
A simple analysis
Grass, barley etc eaten by the animals requires C02 to grow. Animals expunge CO2 and methane. Methane breaks down into CO2 in 5-8 yrs Grass etc absorb CO2
Cycle repeats (ok the methane is stronger green house gas but if it remains constant cumulative amount does not increase)
But # people increase and there is the root of the “greenies” problem they won’t address
The Irish people may soon wake up to the fact that the government is taking away their cars, and their electricity and now their food in an effort to fight climate change. Maybe they will come to realize the proposed solutions to climate change are far worse than climate change.
Carbon Credits: Irish Farmers Being Paid to Destroy Their Fields
WattsUpWithThat November 2020
The people of Northern Island are well-armed. Just a thought.
I tend to think of Irish folk as a very intelligent and highly literate population. How on earth did they have enough people willing to vote for this idiocy? If their aim is to reduce the herds of sheep, they may want to focus on the two legged type, or at least try to convert them from sheep to critical thinkers.
I have long suspected the push to Green targets is in part driven by Russian and Chinese interests. The target is to destroy the Western economy. It has been a phenomenally successful program.
The is the ridiculous situation of Europe eliminating fossil fuel production, and importing coal oil and gas from Russia.
Try and buy stuff not made in China. To meet Green targets, manufacturing is shut down, and transferred to China. China has done very well out of this.
Now food production is the enemy. Will we import our food from Russia and China as well?
The idea that livestock (sheep and cattle) contribute to increases in methane (greenhouse gases) is utter nonsense. The non effect of these gases is clearly outlined in a rough web site at http://www.climatebynicol.com. However, beyond that, even if GHGs were a problem methane in particular is created by these animals from plant matter which the year before it is eaten, had sequestered all of the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and breaks down into carbon dioxide and water to half the quantity in about 7 years time. Thus after a period of from 30 to 50 years, the methane produced by a given number of ruminants will only replace the same amount of methane that has decayed in that year, providing NO INCREASE in GHGs. Claims that Australia’s herds provide 14% of our GHG emissions are absolute nonsense.
There are now several reports on the internet which confirm this fairly obvious fact. Calls for people to eat less meat only contributes to rises in meat prices and also damages one of Australia’s most important industries. It is quite ridiculosus to suggest that Ireland will need to reduce its . . , stock numbers to meet its obligations. Jihn Nicol (Physicist)
Peasants eating meat? The outrage!