It's not just the number of cod in the Baltic, that was just one example of how chemical fertilisers are destroying the planet. If you haven't seen Breaking Boundaries it's worth watching and quite thought provoking when you actually get to see the damage we're doing.
I prefer keeping an eye on the Arctic methane, the melting permafrost, and the zombie fires of siberia. That's quite enough damage for anyone to watch. The pollution of waterways by fertilisers or flea poison Pet flea treatments poisoning rivers across England, scientists find I'll leave to other people
That's also covered in the documentary. It covers 9 tipping points that (he says) will see the end of us. I think the only one we've breached is chemical fertilisers.
You used to be able to get sterilised shit from sewage works. You should be able to get loads of shit from humans.
Average UK dairy farm is C150 cows. This farm is bigger than that.
Pasture is also pretty good at sequestering carbon.If it's ok to keep methane-machines to save a butterfly, surely it's ok to keep them to feed humans?
How cattle are helping rare butterflies to thrive at Mabie Forest
Pearl-bordered fritillary numbers are rising at one site - with some unusual assistance.www.bbc.co.uk
"but bacon tho, hurhur"Since im not driving, flying or travelling at all really.... Im eating more meat at the moment, and it's delicious.
It's a good feeling knowing my ecological footprint is way smaller.
If a living thing has to have it's life ended for your tastebuds when it doesn't have to die, then that is cruel fact
I'm no pro, but I presume that the farming industry uses those chemicals to maximise profits. And are those crops that are treated most often used for cattle feed? I don't know, hence my asking. If there was less of a drive to feed animals to kill and eat them, less land would be required for crops. My thought is that there would be less pressure to rinse everything out of the land, considering how well documented it is that feeding animals to eat as food requires more land. I'm probably not explaining myself very well, but with a cessation of growing so much crop feed, the land can be used with a view to accept a level of wastage currently unacceptable. With the usual subsidies, remaining land can be used for wildflower/pollinator promotion. Targeted grazing would improve biodiversity. I think we're close to big changes.
I remember reading stuff along these lines in New Scientist nearly twenty years ago. Where your planting and as we've seen elsewhere what trees you're planting makes a massive difference. A one size fits all strategy surprise surprise is unlikely to have the kind of impact needed .
There are creatures that need to eat meat eg lions. You don't. You choose to eat a diet based on cruelty.
No, the food is grown for humans. The waste is fed to animals. The nonsense that this food is grown to feed animals is just that, nonsense. It wouldn't and couldn't be economically viable to grow crops specifically to feed animals. 86% of livestock feed cannot be eaten by humans. It consists of parts of the plant that humans can't digest.
Any sort of animal cruelty devalues us all as human beings if we let it go unchallenged
It's shit theyre stuck in cages etc and im against that and it does bother me... sure. But not much compared to 1 billion people without food. Sorry chicken and cow.
I'm missing something here. Crop is routinely grown for animal feed. It's part of why the Amazon is being fucked over (Madagascar and other places too obviously). In the UK too we see crop grown for animal feed, even if as simple as haylage. And we know that it takes a hell of a lot more crop to feed an animal and eat it than it does just to feed humans grain or veg. Ergo less land required if not feeding animals to feed humans, even with a natural amount of wastage as a result of ditching the most harmful pesticides, biocides, fertilisers, etc. I didn't think that was even in dispute.
Not sure if you're just trolling, but OK, plenty of crops are grown specifically as livestock feed.
Pity that undigestable food is being wasted on animals and mixed with all those harmful chemicals inside the animals instead of being used to help solve the chemical fertiliser issue.
There was a documentary on the BBC, an Horizon possibly, about all the wonderful things sewage works can do with it now. They can store it for long periods removing pathogens and making it ideal for growing.
No need to store it for long periods, it used to be heat treated. You could use the methane given off heat it.
They use that as well.
Which crops are being grown purely as animal feed?
Crop residue incorporation results in a massive increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the soil.
