the movie is titled: Six Inches of Soil

  • usernamesAreTricky
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    This is all missing the point. People are claiming it’s carbon free or low emission when it is still substantially higher than other things. The beef industry loves to promote this as if it solves beef emissions. It does not. The emissions are still very much there. If it was touted as a small reduction that would be one thing

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      You really, really need to read up more on the world of regenerative ag. It’s not typically touted as being “zero emissions” or anything like that outside of this op-ed writer’s strawman argument.

      It’s almost entirely sold as a way to avoid having to buy expensive feed and fertilizers through better land management. Do you really think the average farmer gives a fuck about the climate? They have bills to pay. They like that there’s sustainability benefits to the practices, don’t get me wrong, and and being able to advertise the better practices that went into producing the beef is part the pitch, but this is all about cost-savings and improving product quality almost entirely through thoughtful field rotation and reduced/eliminated tilling.

      And it does work. Small farmers who have enough land and patience to adopt these practices can almost entirely eliminate their needs for buying fertilizers and feed. Which I’ll remind you, outside of transportation, is the main source of carbon emissions for most farms. Methane from cellulose digestion is another battle that is being waged separately.

      Moreover, the more farmers prove that it CAN be done in a financially sustainable way, the easier it becomes to get rid of the worse environmental practices, both on friendly soil and abroad.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      People are claiming it’s carbon free or low emission when it is still substantially higher than other things.

      Who? The person I responded to was not making that claim…

      The beef industry loves to promote this as if it solves beef emissions. It does not. The emissions are still very much there.

      No one here is agreeing with the beef industry, they were just specifying that a few countries abstaining from the beef industry would not inherently limit the demand for the beef industry. Meaning that the production of beef would just move to regions with less environmental protections.

      My comment was just extrapolating on a personal opinion about modern leftism and how we typically deal with conflicting rationality from within.