28 Jul How much do you know about food production and climate change?
Section 1: Farmed Animals
‘From all the greenhouse gas emissions produced by man, 16 % of this is methane while around a third of that comes from ruminant livestock’
Prof. John Wallace, University of Aberdeen, UK
Farmed animals give off a lot of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (breathing) and methane, which is x20 as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide, by burping and flatulence. The majority of the methane comes from burping cows. The cows generate methane in their stomachs as bacteria digest the carbohydrates. The bacterial process inside a cow’s stomachs is called enteric fermentation.
Read more here from a 2015 EU report from the EU research and Innovation magazine.
Instructions: Read the question on the dropdown box. Decide if true or false. Click on the box to reveal your answer
Not that I know of at the time of writing this quiz but they probably will do!
Not yet but that would be a great idea in order to stop whale hunts.
False. This was thought to be true in the 1970's but it has now been proved that Kangas do fart, although less then cattle, so it would help to mitigate climate change a bit if you switched.
False - as far as I know there is no Chimera jumping kanga cows. If there were you would get instant cream when you milked them!
This doesn't have a simple answer because the methane given off by a cow is dependant on so many different variables and therefore you can't easily compare dairy versus beef.
NZ research has investigated giving cows a vaccine to stop certain gut microbes inside a cow's stomach which are responsible for producing methane. Click here for more detail.
Probably help with indigestion but no research so far on the effect of this inside a cow's stomach with the production of methane. Chalk, marble and limestone rock (calcium carbonate) is a very common way that the natural processes lock up carbon dioxide on Earth.
Adding calcium nitrate interferes with the gut microbes ability to make methane and reacting with the hydrogens in the process of fermentation in the stomach to reduce the availability of this element to make methane
Another statement that is controversial depending on the stakeholders and you will find opposing answers to this in the science community. An example of the problem in calculating such a figure would be if you take into account the clearing of virgin rainforest to make your cattle ranch versus a pre existing ranch. This is a particularly good article which is Collaboration between University of Oxford, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), the supermarket group Sainsbury’s and The Nature Conservancy .
I can just image the ice-cream cow. Pull a teat on the udder and get a large cone of soft whip warm ice cream!
It is not something that has been genetically engineered. The closest meaty mushrooms are shiitake, and a red mushroom called beefsteak. There are many types of fungus based faux meats on the market.
I suspect if you asked a Michelin starred chef to have a blind tasting test they wouldn't have a problem distinguishing the real steak from the mushroom.
True. It is genetically identical - it is real animal cells.
However, the US cattle ranchers association are petitioning the US department of agriculture to stop this. They want the US government to legislate that only meat from an animal grown for real can be called meat - lab grown meat would have to be called cultured meat, slaughter free meat, in vitro meat, cell based meat, lab grown meat, clean meat, synthetic meat, artificial meat...... all of which have not quite got that Michelin star restaurant appeal.
For more information click here
But real meal also contains things such as fat which adds flavour, so scientists have to add in stuff to make the lab grown muscle cells have the texture and flavour of real meat. This explains why some of the first lab grown meat products were burgers and nuggets.
Last count it was over 70 and still rising.
If everybody in the EU became a ‘demitarian’ by halving the amount of meat and dairy they eat, it would reduce nitrogen and greenhouse gases from agriculture by between 25 – 40 %.
Statement from the EU funded ECLAIRE project 2015
And finally the increased rate of destruction of the rainforests for logging, cattle ranches, palm oil, and soya beans means that if you are in your 20's, what we call GenZ (generation X) the rainforest will be consigned to history books and photos for your grandchildren. As citizens of the UK, I really don't know what we can do to stop this. It is probably a mute point though because long before the rainforests are completely gone, this planet will not be a green and pleasant land - it will be uninhabitable, full of climate refugees and probably climate, land and water wars. In fact barren Mars will probably be a more pleasant place to live even though you can't breathe outside.
For the bitter cherry on top of the sour cream, the Democratic republic of Congo are now auctioning off bits of their rainforest so that organisations can drill for oil, ripping into shreds the treaties that were signed at COP26 to protect the rainforests.
The Congo basin is the only major rainforest that sucks in more carbon than it emits and experts have described it as the worst place in the world to explore for fossil fuels.
"Our priority is not to save the planet, " stated the misguided leader of the DRC.
The people of Congo are some of the poorest people in the world and the money from oil exploration will improve the economy is the illogic behind the sales.
I wonder what the government will do with all the money in the floods, the droughts, the hurricanes, the food shortages, the intense heat, the disease......... on an inhabitable planet. Maybe they think that they can build a paper house with it for shelter, eat it, drink it, and make a raft to escape the floods. Good luck with that then.