Recent news have painted cattle production as bad to the environment given its methane and carbon production. But cattle is part of nature, just look at the bison population of the American prairies in the past, and the Indian cattle population of today, for starters. It is a part of the natural environment and it is needed as food for us.
Given that, there are ways to lower the carbon and methane footprint of cattle production in order to compensate for other of man’s non-natural activities.
Forage trees to absorb carbon
While cattle production produces carbon, forage trees can not only provide feedstuff for the cattle but also absorb the carbon produced by cattle. In denuded mountainous areas, it can also help reduce erosion but also fertilize it with leave droppings and fixed nitrogen when it is leguminous. Forage trees produce oxygen and absorb carbon dioxide, and are less threatened by drought that are said to be caused by global warming. The challenge now is to identify forage trees that have high carbon absorption, high nutritious plant parts output, hardy, deep rooted for erosion control, high nitrogen fixing, easy propagation and other beneficial characteristics. A number of trees need to be identified so there will be no monoculture systems that also have its dangers. Candidate trees are ipil-ipil, kakwate, malunggay, etc.
Manure to Energy to reduce methane
Manure left on its own will eventually release its methane content to the atmosphere. Putting the manure into biodigesters will convert it to useful energy and safer combustion gases. The gas produced can be used for cooking, electric generation, mechanical energy, etc. This will lead to reduction of oil imports, however small, that will also reduce energy use in oil logistics thus lowering carbon production further.
Manure to Energy have high start-up costs that can be funded by the Carbon Fund from the developed countries using local technologies and production.
Forage based to preserve food for human production
Forage plants also absorb carbon dioxide while producing feedstuff for the cattle. It will also reduce the use of human consumed feedstuff like corn and soya that are imported from highly mechanized production systems. Freeing local corn and soya production solely for human consumption has the effect of lowering carbon due to the removal of logistics that consume oil, and shifting production to less oil-consuming production areas.
It has been said that forage-based diets produce high methane output. Research must be made in the identification of less carbon producing forage species and feeding systems.
Mountain-based to reforest denuded areas
It has been my observation, at least in the lowlands, that when an area bereft of trees is settled by people, after a few years one can find already more trees planted by the new settlers. One good example is the University of the Philippines campus in Diliman, Quezon City. Pictures of the campus at the start of its construction in the 1950’s show an almost treeless cogonal area but if you go there now, it’s a haven of tall cooling trees. Also a good example is the nearby campus of the Philippine Science High School that was also treeless in the early 1970’s.
Cattle production in denuded mountains will be a challenge to start but I am confident landless smallhold farmers has the sagacity to do it, given tenure to the land and a modicum of government and civil society support. However, settling the mountain areas should be well regulated and farmers indoctrinated on proper management for their own long term interests. This is specially important on the intensity of production, waste reduction and recycling, erosion control, etc.
The choice of cattle breed is also important with hardy European dual purpose mountain cattle breeds like the Grauvieh, Tarentaise, Braunvieh, etc. be used to cross with Philippine Zebu crosses. This combination will provide hardiness and productivity needed in the mountains.
Cattle production in the mountains have the advantage of cooler temperatures in the tropics leading to better production specially of milk.
Overall, cattle production is part of nature and should not be carbon-demonized by ‘green’ writers. It’s the conspicuous individual consumption of the developed countries based on a solely profit-minded economic system that has produced the most carbon in the past, at present, and more in the future.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The rising human population, desire to perpetuate distinctly different social, cultural and economic differences between states and peoples within states have directly led a disproportionately high green house gases emission as compared to natural sources such as from livestock production. A balance sheet for emission of greenhouse gasses from artificial sources (direct human activities) and naturally, for some 50, 100, 200, and 500 years ago could held us better understand the complex issue towards a search for appropriate solutions to reduce methane and carbon gas emissions rather than blame the cattle. The behaviour of the current cow is even largely due to the direct action of man to genetically modify it to produce high meat and milk for human consumption.
ReplyDelete