I study permaculture and regenerative agriculture since early 2000s. Ten years ago I restored an old farm building with some land and now I grow all the fruits and vegetables needed for three families in less than 500 square metres (1/8 of an acre) recycling house waste, woodchip, vegetable residues. I know it's not the solution, but it helps mitigate the problem. As Paul Hawken says, growing your food is the single most useful thing anybody can do to mitigate climate change. We cannot wait for our leaders, we need action from below.
Question for you: Is it feasible to supply this amount of land with soil nutrients solely from the bio waste from those three families that it supports? Or is that not sustainable.
@@xKreakenx Yes, it is possible. You need some smart design, for example planting edges and trees strategically, useful plants as comfrey and some imagination. The most difficult part is to state your goal and plan accordingly. Then finding organic material to start is dead easy... there's a lot of tree surgeons out there willing to dump their woodchip or lawn clippings in your backyard for free, for example. Once the soil is alive, you just have to top it once a year with a couple of centimetres of good homemade compost.
I agree with you as a 4th generation tree fruit farmer who has had to leave the farm for work and sell for several blocks in the past few years to survive my question is how do we change anything if we are ruled by sociopaths?? The CEOs of these world monopolies have gutted any morality from governments they commoditized us we only exist to serve them and their greed. 😢😢😢.
The beautiful thing about this situation though, is that We the People and those that came before us, empowered them to do so. This is the world we have chosen for ourselves.
I don't know how this decision is made elsewhere in the world, but here on the Canadian prairies, nobody raises cattle, sheep, etc. on land with soil that's good enough to grow grain. Ranching is what you do if you CAN'T farm plants.
@@Praisethesunson A simplistic prediction ignores the fact that hotter atmosphere = more energetic atmosphere and less predictability. Because crops take time to grow and mature, they need predictable weather or the crop fails. Australia faces a huge problem because its wheat and barley production is already at risk from any weather irregularities. Canada and other grain producers probably share the same risk. On a more optimistic (?) note, barley is a more 'fragile' grain than wheat in Australia, easily damaged by wind and rain at the ripening stage. There have been some regions in recent years where there was almost no production of malting-grade barley. When it gets to the stage that the price of beer will increase dramatically, that's when the average Joe will realise that climate is changing, and not for the better.
@davidinkster1296 Australia is adding new colors to the temperature spectrum because of the heat. Canada is becoming more hospitable to agricultural production. Canada is poised to become a superpower. Australia is going to burn and dry.
@@davidinkster1296 Yes. where I live it always gets really hot. I use seed adapted to my climate. It's the unpredictability and the increased winds of rapidly changing systems that I didn't count on.
@@Praisethesunson That’s the technique: first getting rich from oil, after having ruined the Southern farmers getting richer from own crops, and eventually building walls if someone tries to reach your potentially rescuing borders. Who invented that business model?
I farm in the Sacramento Valley of California. My main crop is olives, which I process for olive oil. The biggest energy requirement on the farm is pumping irrigation water. Formerly I would buy electricity from the grid, but now my electricity is from on-farm photovoltaics. Once photovoltaic power became cheaper than the grid or propane-powered pumps (diesel pumps are illegal because of air quality) farmers started switching over. Even very conservative farmers can do the math--solar power in this sunny climate is the least expensive option for pumping water. It is gratifying to see arrays of solar panels installed all through this part of the valley.
@@az55544 If you're doing agrosolar to reduce evapotranspiration, then your pumping may be reduced significantly. If you use biochar soil amendment from stover (or in the case of tree crops, deadfall and rejected wood fiber), then your soil hydrology changes may make your farm a net source of groundwater, as well as filter impurities through the biochar, and generate nitrates in the soil microbes sufficient to cease synthetic nitrate fertilizer use. Optimistically.
Whenever farming topics are brought up, there is never any discussion of the Lawn Care Industry. More acres of lawn grass are 'farmed' by residential consumers than food farms. Data: a million workers are in lawn care services among 600,000 companies (basically small farms), 40% of homeowners hire lawn care, $25-$100 Billion/yr is consumed in equipment/supplies/chemicals; chemicals to keep a monoculture like lawn grass weed and pest free is no different than food supply crops with all associated run off problems. I've canoed in a river that was weed free until passing a subdivision and then it was nearly impossible to paddle from there further down stream. So we really need to "rewild" the concept of lawns with native plants that are not mowed every six days.... Maybe that would save the bees, which pollinate 80% of the food people eat.
I live in Las Vegas Nevada where the local government has outlawed ornamental grass for all new homes and businesses. Las Vegas should be a model for all cities especially where water is at a premium like here in the Southwest of the United States. Currently a huge amount of our dwindling water from Lake Mead and the Colorado River is being used to irrigate alfalfa in the Southwest to feed cows. We need to also change what we eat. Switching to a plant-based diet will save hundreds of thousands of gallons of water a year for each person who does so.
Ask the question why there's more than enough food produced to feed over 10 billion people but almost 800 million people are malnourished/starved. Where according to WWF up to 40% of food is estimated to be wasted at the farming-retail level. Food distributors/supermarkets and wealthy farmers are not in the business of feeding the hungry who cannot afford the price of food. The 1840s Irish famine established that fact enough
And if we didn't waste all those calories on garbage "food" (read animal products and ultra-processed crap that gives you cancer) we could easily feed 40-50 billion people. Or just reduce land use several times over, letting less good land regenerate and solve climate change on its own (at least for a couple hundred years).
For some much stranger reason those with food problems are completely not in the business of NOT INCREASING their population. Because more people will not affect the food problem, of course. Until that changes, I do not feel sorry for them. Except for our CO2 emissions, of course, but we (again: only us) are working on that, too.
A lot of propaganda buried in stuff like that with huge assumptions made, many of which are false. How much food does it actually take to feed ten billion people? What type of food specifically? The questions that you would need to answer to get an actual honest answer are almost impossible to get real answers for and we have to result to using averages and statistics that assume that every person is the mean or median of everyone else, that every food is the mean or median of all other foods and many other completely false hidden assumptions. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. There isn't more than enough food to feed 10 billion people, otherwise there wouldn't be 800 million people starving.
As E.O. Wilson pointed out, global ecological diversity is critical to support the systems that support human life. Real wilderness and lots of it. Our farms must become more sustainable while *half* the world must be restored or left wild. Farmers will be heros (once they accept climate change is real)
Humans change the environment to suit human needs. So goes biodiversity. Flora/fauna will be altered per human needs. Unless you want to starve 40% of global humans.
We know ideas, do we have plans? There is so much people could be doing and we need educcation. People come here and want to do permaculture and can't even grow a radish.
regenerative agriculture using cover crops and intensive rotational grazing is proven to store carbon and a carbon credit market has developed. Also red seaweed macroalgae is now sold out of Australia - proven to neutralize methane emissions from ungulates.
My great grandparents actually practiced regenerative agriculture 150 years ago. Attempts by the US corporate agriculture industry to falsely co-opt the term to mislead us is disgusting. I grew up eating organic, pasture raised beef, organic rabbit, organic chicken and organic produce. I can’t afford to eat that way today so I grow what I can hydroponically, preserve what I can before it goes to waste, reduce my consumption of processed food, avoid dairy/corn/soy, and never eat fast food. 3-4 times a year I will treat myself to an organic, locally produced, pasture raised steak. I don’t feel deprived and I’m generally healthier than many people my age. We need to make lifestyle changes if we want to leave a livable world to future generations.
But will regenerative agriculture be able to meet the needs of a growing population?? I doubt it About half of the nitrogen in our body comes from chemical synthesis in the Haber process. And it is save the world from starvation. If you want to avoid chemical fertilizers, a lot of us will have to die rather quickly. So it’s really too late to change.
You can't afford to eat that way anymore. There is the real problem. It is never about production. It is about equitable distribution. Also about resources retained by the wealthy. Forces of democracy unite!
This got me viewing parts twice whilst I wasn't concentrating. Excellent episode. Just Have A Think when Dave isn't in demand elsewhere. Thank you to the funders
This is 'why' people should be converting their pretty ornamental borders and manicured lawns into a mixture of permaculture/rewilding gardens. No lawn - no mow, no chemicals, no monoculture area, and daving yourself a good deal of money not haing to fuel that mower. No annual flowers - you don't but limited lifespan plants that cost way more in terms of carbon emissions than they would ever make in terms of oxygen. I've worked in plant nurseries. I love that kind of work more than anything else - but it is wasteful and resource intensive. If you are a novice gardener who is a little nervous of starting out with food plants - Start with berry bushes first. They are the best elementary introduction into food production you can try. In the UK, the best berries are: blackcurrants, redcurrants (if you have a taste for them), whitecurrants, Autumn and Summer raspberries (be aware they spread. Dig up in Autumn excess numbers of canes. Avoid yellow raspberries, high production but insipid taste). Thornless blackberries (again, they spread, but the harvest size is excellent. Great if you want to keep bees). Tayberries and loganberries are productive, vigorous, and can be trained against fences and walls to save space. Aronias (sold in Morrisons very cheaply. Slow to get to a fruiting stage and not the biggest harvest, but a reliable and tolerant plant). Blueberries (acid soils only, or grow in large pots). Honeyberries are an acquired taste, very sour. Gooseberries (a reliable cropper in areas unaffected by gooseberry sawfly). And that's a lot of fruit you can get just from the very easiest plants. If you can plant a geranium, you can plant one of these. All you might need is a bit if very fine netting or fleece when it gets near harvest time to stop birds from nicking everything (as Wood Pigeons and Blackbirds can just eat more when there's more food around). When it comes to veggies, if I was a novice starting again, I would buy in a few easy edible leafy/tuberous perennials and self-sowing annuals. Claytonia - a small salad leafy annual with small pink flowers that seed everywhere. Great for shady gardens, whether damp or normal. Red-veined Sorrel - an easy perennial, attractive leaf, creeping plant, astringent leaves. Avoid if you suffer from kidney stones. Alchemilla mollis - highly tolerant native cliff-dwelling plant that survives any conditions. The leaves have a very slight down, but they're edible chopped up in salads. Perennial celery - it's really a short-lived perennial of about 3 years, but flowers in last year, sets lots of seed which you can sow again. Easy from seed. Sunchoke/Jerusalem Artichoke - all too easy, a few tubers yields better than potatoes. Very tall with small sunflower like flowers. Fat Hen - easy from seed, a sort of biennial/short lived perennial (collect seeds. for sowing next crop). Makes a good spinach alternative. Protein, iron, vit C. I wouldn't be without this plant. Ransomes/wild Garlic - great for damp, shady gardens. Tolerates regular flooding. Spreads well and needs less care than regular garlic. For those traditional annuals - the pea is the very easiest for a novice. Just follow the instructions, keep out of reach of mice in pots to begin with. (You have time to sow a couple more crops this dummer). Courgettes are another easy plant. 3 plants is enough for my family of 3. They need a lot of feeding, but this doesn't have to mean buying chemical feed (look on Robbie And Gary's gardening channel for the kitchen scrap method of squash/zucchini feeding. It has multiplied my yields). Lettuce - I grow these in a plant tower on a sheet of galvanised steel (slugs and snails really don't like galvanised surfaces, but they ignore copper bands where I live). Lamb's lettuce - treat as above. Radishes - I grow mine under dappled shade to avoid bolting, but they are prone to attack from mice. So I might grow these in a tower next year. Kale - gets hit a bit by slugs, but not enough to totally destroy them. The good thing is, you can carefully harvest leaves eithout killing the whole plant, keeping them alive for years. My ones are just setting seed so I can raise a new stock for next year. I am changing the game a little in my rewilded/permaculture garden and going a little into regenerative practices - by adding ducks (eggs in the incubator) and, later on, chickens. By getting together in neighbourhoods, creating a local strategy, learning techniques 'now' in your own garden (while your neighbours still think you're mad), you can make your locality more self-sufficient. Get into propagating those berry bushes as soon as they are old enough to bear it. Encourage assiciates to take and care for new plants you raise from cuttings. Become expert in those propagating techniques, and you become a supplier of food security in your neighbourhod. Knowledge is gold. The beauty of the plants in this list is that some of them can be grown 'under' larger fruit trees (such as apples, pears, plums and cherries). I grow my currants and gooseberries this way, and it's a good way to save space and help shelter the roots of your trees. Currants, gooseberries are very easy to propagate by hardwood cuttings. Rasps, blackberries, tays and logans propagate themselves.
If you have a small plot you can swap or share small seeds such as lettuce. You don't need hundreds of plants and if you grow the loose head varieties you just cut some leaves of several plants and leave them to grow again. I love to grow runner beans using 7ft canes. 16 plants will give you loads of beans which should be picked before they get huge.
Oh yes... sure beats mowing the lawn... front to back and along the side of where l reside here in Canada.. is full of fruits and vegetables.. big raspberry and black berry bushes.. a long strawberry patch ,grapes and always a variety of vegetables.... ..l converted all that lawn to farm land ...no need for green bins fr me ... l compost my own ...
My late Father-in-law was a PhD Soils Physicist - yes that is a real thing. Periodically when we were talking about agriculture, he would stop, shake his head and say "We never should have broken the sod." What he was referring to is possibly the greatest agricultural mistake ever made. The American settlers plowed EVERYTHING they could see without any thought or plan or strategy. That plowing was permanently destroying the vast grassland ecosystem which could have efficiently supported millions and millions of cows, sheep, goats etc. indefinitely if it had been carfully utilized instead of being plowed under. The tall grass prairie would have allowed us to avoid feeding cows human food and changed that ratio you described for the better.
I agree with your FIL. Natural grazing without tilling, plowing and over intensive grazing land a destroying our soils and the quality of our food, not to mention the industrialisation of agriculture. Mimicing migrating herds on grazing lands increases soil fertility and diversity. Well, I guess I am preaching to the converted.
Hardly any crop farms plow. They direct drill and use cover crops. Usually one that bring nitrogen back into the soil. So they use less fertilizer than ever befor. The soil is monitored and mapped and only fertilized where necessary . Also plant base diets lead to diabetes because they mostly eating carbohydrates. Which increases sugars. Potatoes, Grains, Bread Pasta etc. It wasn't that long ago they pushed us into eating more carbohydrates anyone remember the 1980's food Pyramids. That lead too today's health crisis brought by the same people. Trying to convince everyone the world is going to end cause of overpopulation when it's actually the complete opposite of what's actually happening.😂 And personally I don't know anyone who believes anything coming from that lot especially after the pandemic. Human population is heading for complete collapse because people don't get married or have children anymore. After the boomers die off its all downhill for western countries. China's population is decreasing like Japan's and Europe is heading the same way. USA would be the same as many other countries. But they rely on immigration to keep a working workforce cause of the aging population. Let's face it if it was really a problem you wouldn't be building mansions on beach fronts. You wouldn't be still building housing or infrastructure on low lands. Or being able to get insurance. Property values would plummet. Or letting people in to use more resources or developing other countries. Alot of cheery picking data to suit pushing an agenda. Of depopulation and genocide is obvious.
@@suzannepottsshorts Actually, the trees will "produce" the rain. ^ ^ Vast forests, not only rainforests, are conveyor belts for moisture to go inland. It rains over them, and then they evaporate the moisture again for it to be carried further inland.
Thank you for repeating the well known(?) facts in your well sorted and precisely argued way. As a non native english speaker it's always a pleasure to listen, read between the lines and understand the perspective you try to figure out of all the numbers presented.
I'm a student in an organic farming program and regenerative agriculture is a really cool concept. It's going to look different in every environment but that's the fun part.
All you have to do is go back to the 1800s and see how they did it. Notice no round up chemicals and no pesticides to kill the soil. Notice manure to fertilize the earth by animals. Pigs to break up the earth with their snouts. All types of animals that eat all types of plants. The earth is a giant self healing garden. Just stop using all the chemical to kill them, bugs and ants are important.
Have you heard of Miles Anderson? He's a rancher using cattle ranching to restore grasslands, restore endangered species and yes, provide nutrient dense food - this is definitely the way to go.
Mike Berners-Lee's book, "There is no Planet B" is an absolute diamond of a book. Everybody ought to have access to copy to dip into. I bought several copies when it first came out (the one Dave is holding) and gave them away to friends and family, including my own original. I then bought the updated book a few years later. It's a great read.
There is a new Earth scheduled at the end of this world. Those who call on JESUS CHRIST to save them and admit they sinned can live in a better version of the world. More beautiful and the lion lies down with the lamb and all animals eat grass. See bible for more.
@@donaldduck830 "Better yet: Read Bjorn Lomborg's (Greenpeace Denmark Activist!!!) "Apocalypse No". That has been widely de-bunked, and as a university researcher studying ecological breakdown for more than a decade, Lomborg's claims are as full of holes as swiss cheese. Agricultural productions and GDP are ALREADY lower than they would have been without AGW, and we're on track for 38 TRILLION a year in climate-related damages by 2050... which works out to a 19% cut in global income. I suggest reading scientists instead of Lomborg: Our current trajectory leads straight toward catastrophic ecological and societal breakdown. Take care.
@ramblerandy2397 Mike Berners-Lee really isn’t half as clever as he thinks he is. He refuses point blank to get to grips with GWP* because he knows that it will render everything he believes and has written about to be questioned. I was involved in a group that was communicating with him a few years ago when GWP* arrived and he refused to engage properly. I was in an audience last year listening to him speak and when questioned about it again he’s still in denial.
The United States has between 40 and 65 million acres of lawn. Some municipalities or Home Owners Associations do not allow vegetable gardens to be planted! I think that state governments should step in and make it illegal to forbid gardening. Go vegan! There are so many great vegan cooking shows on RUclips. Yummy recipes!
you will find that many of these organizations are controlled by the food industry and the last thing they want is for people to grow their own food, if they do the big four loose some control of pricing and power.
Feed Iowa First has an urban farming program for churches and businesses to use parts of their lawns for gardens. Produce goes to food pantries and low income neighborhoods.
Sorry but vegetarian didn't even work for me. Decades of 'belief' shattered by health realities. Now Keto/carnivore and feel decades younger. Medication no longer needed. Happy for you.
@@rovert1284 Keto diets can have amazing affects. Just cutting out sugar and processed carbs is helpful. The carnivore part hasn't shown such great results in clinical trials. Be well!
in the UK, Hodmedod grows regeneratively and supports other locals who do the same. support them and others like them to carry forth all that you're learning here. the cool things with their products are that, 1. they are shelf stable, 2. climate adapted to the UK, and 3. you can grow out their food as seed in your own garden
I had a think 50 years ago as a starving student at University. I didn't actually starve because I grew quite a bit of food in my shared apartment and on the balcony. I always liked to cook on the cheap and could get away with rice, beans, lentils, chickpeas, eggs, sardines, mushrooms, nuts, berries, green onions, herbs, celery, garlic, peppers, spinach, kale, collard greens, tomatoes, sweet potatoes, radishes, turnips, beets, and even carrots in deep pots. I also ate all the "weird" cuisines of the world, as my roommates liked to call it. The cuisines that traditionally made use of every scrap of food while making it healthy and delicious. Curries, and tacos, and stir fries, and such. I only spent $10 a month at local stores to lay in supplies of rice, legumes, eggs, and sardines. Could people learn to grow at least a little bit of their own food before it's too late? Will people do it now? The amount of energy required to grow, refrigerate, transport, and sell produce could be better used to keep the lights on in the coming dark ages. Instead of "a chicken in every pot" the new anti-hunger slogan might be "a pot of greens in every kitchen".
This is such a refreshing channel. Excellent research, no sensationalism, and a balanced presentation of ideas with competing perspectives. Your calm demeanor also adds to the presentation. Great work.
thank you for just making this video, fully aware of the flak it might receive because the majority of folks cant comprehend the situation they are part and creator of.
@PlaCerHooD I strongly disagree. This “problem” was looked at how a child looks at problems! I’ve been a management accountant, farmer and also small business owner. I like this channel but here on this one the analysis is very poor. Dream world versus reality.
I'm vegetarian, but you don't need to go that far, just have one meat free day a week. Try some new recipes and you will soon look forward to it. Then try two or three days a week if you like. Reducing a little bit will really help.
@@lorissupportguides This attitude will "convert" no one and will actually more likely repel people from the idea of at least reducing meat consumption. As many have stated before, we need (quickly) millions of people eating less meat rather than having a few people not eating meat at all (or animal products in general). Sami's attitude is much better in this sense. And I am saying this as someone who isn't eating animal products.
Every step counts, but maybe we're expecting too little. If people are environmentally conscious maybe it's ok to ask a bit more from them. Idk what's the best approach to be honest
@@edgbarra I think once people find a meat free meal that they enjoy, then they'll look for more. They'll save a bit of money, help save the environment, feel good about themselves. They may even have some health benefits, especially if they eat cheap meat regularly!
A very good episode, thanks. One thing that I mull over is the 'obsession' of planting trees. Planting trees is only part of the solution and it occurred to me when noticing a hazel tree that had a huge pile of nuts around the base that we could plant more food trees, which would help to mitigate the food crisis as well. When I asked the occupant of the house right behind the hazel if she ate the nuts, she complained that it was the council's responsibility and the tree always "leaves a mess"! Just imagine if councils planted more nut trees, cherry, damson, apple, pear trees. Free food for those who need it, soil stability, good to help the battle against climate change, fresh and local produce which means fewer food miles and no doubt more vitamins. What's not to like?
I love the enthusiasm. The rest of the story is the care, the pruning, the harvest, the life expectancy of the tree and its root habits. Also, our wildlife friends and their domesticated cousins that love to eat trees, their nuts, their fruit, and add all the poop that they leave behind. Over the years I have watched this story -- done it myself -- many times. It takes a small group of dedicated and reliable people who can keep it going. Cultivate that first.
Totally agree! I live in a neighborhood where every house comes with about roughly one acre of land. I know of only two plots (including mine) that have a real vegetable garden; all the other ones have mainly a lawn. This year alone, I was able to harvest about 60 lbs of potatoes, bunches of radishes, 20 kohlrabi and turnips each, lots of kale and lettuce, about 100 onions, 40 garlic heads, pull carrots as needed, 8 heads of broccoli, about 10 lbs of strawberries, a large bowl of gooseberries, blackberries, raspberries, and currants each, enough cucumbers to can 10 quarts of pickles, 10 heads of fennel, squash, beans, tomatoes, peppers, and eggplants are starting to explode to where I'm struggling to harvest, prepare and preserve, I incorporate sweet potato and pumpkin leaves in my meals till I can harvest the main crop. In addition, I have an asparagus and sunchoke bed, different melons, and about 50 corn plants. Haven't had to buy any produce in the last three months. Also grow my own herbs and dry enough to last me to the next season or longer and have multiple fruit and nut trees. My garden itself is roughly 1/10 acre. Have a rain water catchment system, use my chicken and rabbit manure so I won't have to bring in any fertilizer, don't use any herbicide or pesticides, and practice mulching. Don't need a fitness studio!
In my region (south of Bahia) we plant cocoa within the forest (cabruca method), which keeps over 90% of the original animal biodiversity. There is virtually no additional income for the farmers (from mostly Europeans and US companies which control the processing) because of that.
No, I won't. I can barely afford to buy fruits and vegetables from the supermarket, and even there I usually wait for a sale and buy seasonal stuff. Buying in alternative stores is simply not an option, and unlike with meat, which I almost don't buy anymore, it's not really an option not to eat them at all, even if I thought that's so morally important, because I need some fruits and vegetables. It's not just me, there are tens of millions of people even in Europe, let alone the rest of the world, barely scraping by. I wish I could buy the "ugly" vegetables on a discount tho.
@@pyroman2918frozen is a good way to afford more fruit and veg. I make a game of saving money, so I would almost never eat berries if it weren’t for the frozen option
I'm pretty sure the "ugly" ones are probably being sold to the companies that make ultra-processed food products for fast food/ frozen/ canned goods companies & not actually being thrown right in the trash.
There is also more to animal agriculture than calories alone though. We also get very useful materials like wool, leather, bone meal (for replenishing soil nutrients), etc. We should, however, definitely change the methods commonly used and focus on more effecient species in terms of feed ratios. We also need to make shifts in the plants we farm too. Many places are going to be too hot or too dry or just too unpredictable for our current preferred crops. There are hardier choices available such as millet or amaranth that westerners ought to become more familiar with.
I watched an interesting documentary recently that mentioned there was an estimated 30 million bison/buffalo in the great plains of America pre Columbus. There are around the same amount of cows in the whole of the USA today and cows are a lot smaller than bison. From my simple logic the USA should easily be able to support the current cow herd with certainly no more ecological impact than 30 million farting and burping bison. My opinion is that the problem lies with farming methods being tailored to profit making rather than sustainable healthy human food production.
A bison produces 30 kilograms of methane every year, A cow produces 100 kilograms of methane every year. The USA alone apparently has 92 million cows. Brazil has 215 million.
I'm glad that agriculture is getting attention. Given likelihood of decimation of crop yields given climate change, I think the general population will be forced into having plant-based diets (almost all calories/protein consumed) in the coming years.
More carbon in the air and the slight warming trend both lead to more plant growth and larger areas of green space available for grazing animals, which could wind up sequestering more carbon (if managed in a regenerative fashion) thereby maintaining a healthy balance.
2 to 3 c up will prove to not be "slight", even more so that the land temps will rise far higher as to balance for cooler oceans - 70% of Earth surface. We're only just post starting phase, what's on extreme we see today, will double three times over once we reach 3C. Look back in Earth's history if you don't believe it, we're already over the carbon concentration of Pliocene, when we had 2C up, ice sheets less than half of today's and sea level 50m up. Nope, we're not there, and not within 20 years as some doomists claim. But heavy emissions been only 50 years, while Pliocene alone lasted 2.8 million yrs, 50 Thousands times as long. Changing climate may come by total surprise, like AMOC break down, could play out within a half century, shifting climate zones over half continents in a matter of decades. No one can predict when , but is it a risk anyone wants to take ? Seems so, but they don't read the Science
@@luddityThis is a fallacy seen frequently in these comment sections. There is a lot more to fertile growing areas than temperature and CO2. Each crop is adapted to certain types of soil, humidity and moisture, rainfall patterns, etc. As dozens or hundreds of growing areas become less productive due to climate change -- and this includes rising temperatures, longer droughts, hotter heat waves, bigger floods and storm surges, and inundation from rising sea levels -- finding and then acquiring and cultivating new areas suitable for those crops could take decades. Meanwhile, prices are through the roof and people are hungry. Your fossil fuel burning utopia is in reality a terrible nightmare. The fact is that we need to stop burning fossil fuels and make some adjustments to how we eat and farm, because these are the solutions that will actually work to solve the climate crisis.
@@davidmenasco5743the amount of droughts and extreme weather events will actually decrease as the temperature increases to the optimum level and balances out like it has done thousands of times before. Extreme weather is actually more common in a colder climate or during climate shifts, look this data up for yourself I'd argue with you about it to the moon and back but RUclips deletes or hides comments that argue this point of view.
Thank you for this balanced presentation. I am one step closer to completely removing the little meat and poultry I still eat. I still eat fish and eggs. Neither of them are problem-free, either.
after watching just 5 mins, I understand the message and the warnings of how devastating animal agricultural practices are to our existence. If we are totally honest with each other and are openly prepared to have deep, interlectualy debates and sincere discussions about these issues, we can only come to one reasonable logic conclusion. Cease raising animals for food. Then you read the comments, and I just hold my head in my hands and die from within...slow and painfully
My husband and I have been vegetarian for 53 years. We do drink milk and eat eggs. We are waiting for the precision fermentation of milk/cheese which is in the works. We have a worm bin. The vegetable cuttings go in that bin. I wonder if it created CO2 or prevents it somewhat.
Composting releases methane, which for a few of us is bigger concerns than CO2 and if your landfill is best practices harvesting methane for power then better to toss scraps. Few are. 🪱 at first glance would convert to CO2, a comparative good thing imo Same as if landfill flares 🔥 it but no healthy soil amendment
@@DrSmooth2000 Found this: Dr. Clive Edwards finishes the article beautifully by referring to multiple studies that have suggested that worms either do not affect N20 emissions at all, or in fact seem to bring about a decrease in emissions of this greenhouse gas!
We need more green spaces and less monoculture. Farms need more diversity and less chemicals. Cities um just reduce land use and have more green spaces with available soil so you stop or greatly reduce your flooding.
I live in Dorset UK. A proportion of our land is unsuited to crops but it does suit sheep and cattle farming. Crop and grazing rotation is routine on flatter more suitable land. Farms have existed this way for millennia. I often worry that we lose sight of the problem that needs to be fixed. Some types of farming are less in harmony with the environment, others work and are sustainable. One size does not fit all and governments are making poor decisions e.g. EVs are part of the solution but should never be the only solution.
crop/grazing never got rotated where I lived in rural Herefordshire. The sheep fields remained the sheep fields. The prairie field remained the crop field. The hop and fruit and asparagus fields all were never rotated. Same goes for all the fields around where I live now.
Very true! In parts of Portugal, for example, you have a very old "cultured landscape" consisting of small scale farms, orchards, pastures, etc. This diverse landscape has attracted a certain set of diverse species, but now that a lot of people give up that kind of small scale farming, the landscape changes and can even become less diverse in species. Many parts of Europe have been shaped by humans for such a long time that we and our activities have become part of the ecosystem. Certain species of animals, plants and insects would not live here if humans did not keep parts of the landscape open through farming. But this balance only works when farming does not become industrialized and destroys all living things.
The first edition of "Diet for a small planet" was published over thirty years ago - and should have informed every child's education since its publication
How? Almost the whole of Europe keeps their animals locked inside for at least 4 months of the year, it’s just not possible in Europe to have animals outside in Winter.
Here in Sweden, we are NOT Allowed to feed our farm animals antibiotics unless a veterinarian has seen that it is necessary for the animals health and well-being. That means in must be sick from an infection that will kill it or harm it. Until the antibiotics has left the animal. It is not allowed to be used for food. I have a little farm up in northern Sweden where farmlands are very young and manure is highly sought-after and very much needed to build new farmlands to grow crops on. So we need our farm animals to be able to grow for example vegetables and grains. We have sheep cows and hens, as of today with pigs coming along sometime in the future to help dig around. We grow all the crops we can and we are trying to show with good example how we can live in the future. Small scale, energy efficient, green energy no waste locally sourced et cetera et cetera, but we do not only focus on regenerating our landscape and giving safe haven to insects frogs and such but also a safe haven for all us broken souls who try to live in the modern world we have created for ourselves. Now don’t get me wrong and think that we are backwards we love what progress has given us but we have side effects of the progress that need to be addressed because, people are not doing well emotionally. Thank you for all your good work! whenever I feel I need to be with kindred spirits I come to this chat.❤ Oh, and I should add that our cows have quite low methane production due to not eating anything but our own grass. And they roam free on large areas of land. On our farm we only have five cows and calves right now, during winter time we only have two. They give us milk mainly and they wash me every day even though sometimes the buttons on my shirt go missing… And I scratch them behind the ears and fix their hairdos 😂 same goes for the sheep we have three during winter and between five and seven during summer months. They give us wool and a family we know get the meat, we barter for honey et cetera. It really is a very different world to those awful Brazilian -I will not mention them because I get, angry and disgusted 🤮 I would . Rather think of my hens . They give our countryside eggs and I get to talk to them every day. They help me in the garden even though it’s not always the help I need. 😂
I'm not having kids. So there will be no starving grandchildren. I will be free from the burden of parenthood. It's a blessing but also a curse. I might regret it when I'm 50 but I'm 24 and chilling
The comentator seems to be missing the fact that in many countries we dont "feed" the cattle. They harvest grass from steep slopes that are not suitables for machines to grow and harvest plants. Animals are essential automatic harvesting machines
Using Precision fermentation to create most animal proteins will ultimately make up the bulk of what we will eat. In the same way, the pancreas of 10,000 cows was needed to make 1 kg of Insulin. It will first happen with milk and then with meat.... In time we will learn to replicate the natural process perfectly and on a molecular level, both proteins will be identical.
Price is the thing that will make precision fermentation widespread, once it becomes cheaper there will be no going back. Can you imagine how much demand will go up when companies like McDonald figure out that they can save millions or billions of $/yr by changing? (I'm not saying McDonalds is good or bad, just that they have huge market influence).
Wild fish and fungus foods provide a lot of food. Growing some of your own food at home will help. Plant fruit and nut trees in your garden, then fruit bushes , then salads and vegetables. Large gardens can have fish farming pools.
"Wild" anything basically means you're making food "somebody else's problem". Witness the fishing industry, which has repeatedly crashed whole ecosystems by overfishing and dredging. The Grand Banks, for example, used to have so many fish that you could catch as much as you could hold anywhere. It's been a long time since that was true. If you do rely on home grown smallholding food (nearly) exclusively I understand you need something like 1 acre of land in production (as well as a lot of work and somewhere to store for winter, etc). If that land is not smallholding but wild, the land use will rise probably by a factor of 50 (guess). There isn't enough land in the world for everyone to have that much...
@@rivimey many hundreds of millions (billions ?) of people rely upon wild fresh fish , salt water fish and farmed fish. Yes , irresponsible industrial factory fishing by the Russian , Chinese and other fleets have wrought havoc around the world. The Somali pirates of East Africa were fishermen that were displaced due to Russian fishing fleets and lost their supply of food. The UK and Holland have less than 1 acre per head of population for all uses , but still produce a lot of food for export. Most of the population in the middle latitudes of the world do not have the equivalent of a Winter and have a multi cropping system ( see Kerala , India and Holland for intensive growing methods. I use a 1/4 acre plot to grow a lot of my food , and , yes it can be hard work!
The insane thing is that regenerative farming actually STORES carbon. So food production COULD save our climate if it was done that way... which i hope more and more farmers will do
There is an upper limit to the amount of carbon stored in topsoil.You can raise the organic matter content to maybe 10%, (maybe even 12%). But that amount will be happily consumed by the living organisms (bacteria, funghi, insects, worms) in the soil. After a while you will reach an equilibrium where plants put carbon into the soil and the organisms will eat the organic matter and breathe out CO2. 😉
It's not "insane": it's what indigenous societies have been doing for millennia, in one form or another. Don't use idiot clickbait terms: it cheapens your argument (which I agree with completely, BTW).
@@chahahc Topsoil depth can vary significantly depending on various factors, but generally ranges from a few inches to several feet deep. Here are the key points about topsoil depth: 1. Average depth: The typical depth of topsoil is around 6-12 inches (15-30 cm)[1][2]. 2. Range: Topsoil depth can vary from as little as 2-4 inches (5-10 cm) in some areas to up to 3 feet (90 cm) or more in others[1][2][4]. 3. Factors affecting depth: - Climate: Areas with more precipitation tend to have thicker topsoil layers[1]. - Vegetation: Different plant types affect topsoil depth and distribution[1]. - Human activities: Farming and construction can alter topsoil depth and quality[1]. - Geographical location: Some regions naturally have deeper topsoil than others[4]. 4. Recommended depths for different purposes: - Lawns: 4-6 inches (10-15 cm)[5] - General planting: 6-9 inches (15-23 cm)[5] - Vegetable gardens: 6-18 inches (15-45 cm), depending on the type of vegetables[5] 5. Variation within landscapes: Topsoil depth can differ significantly even within short distances. For example, high ground may have 6-12 inches of topsoil, while low-lying areas can have several feet[4]. 6. Conservation concerns: Topsoil is considered an endangered resource in some areas, as it can take 200-1000 years to form an inch of topsoil naturally, but it's being depleted at a much faster rate[3]. It's important to note that the quality of topsoil is just as crucial as its depth for supporting plant growth and maintaining healthy ecosystems. Citations: [1] www.a-garden-diary.com/how-deep-is-topsoil-what-affects-its-thickness-nutrients/ [2] www.mbwilkes.com/news/how-much-topsoil-do-i-need-.html [3] www.bstopsoil.co.uk/about-topsoil/topsoil-facts-british-sugar-topsoil [4] talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?DisplayType=flat&tid=348392 [5] www.hillcrestsod.com/top-soil-calculator/
after reading "Animals, vegetables, Junk", by Mark Bittman, I have a new understanding of just how our agricultural practices are destroying the land and our food. good read.
I have read this book . What it fails to mention that today Most deforestation especially in the Amazon is for making pasture land for Farm Animals(Mostly Cows) It take a Cow in a CAFO 1 year to go from Birth to slaughter weight and a Pasture raised cow more then 3 years. So you need 3 times as many cows to meet current demands. There isn't enough Pasture land to maintain the demands for Meat dairy and eggs that the world(Mostly the Global North) market demands. Rewilding/Regenerative agriculture can not produce enough Meat Dairy and eggs to meet current demands. It take 330 gallons of water to produce a 1/4 pound hamburger and only 45 gal to produce 1 plant base burger. By eating 1 plant based Burger you save enough water to shower everyday for about a month. Under current systems of Agriculture it takes 3 acres of land to feed the average meat eater for 1 year. 1/4 of an acre for a vegetarian and 1/8 of an acre for a Vegan. Based on the statistics of a UN report Called "Livestocks long shadow" A vegan who drives an SUV has a lower over all impact on the environment(More then just GHGs) then a meat eater who drives a bicycle everywhere. The head f the UN states that moving towards a MORE (not 100%but that would be better for the environment, you and the Animals) plant based diet would be need in addition in reducing Fossil Fuels to truly mitigate the worse affects of Climate Change. Current estimates indicate 1 person would have to cut out over 80%of the animal products they consume(This includes leather and wool). This doesn't apply to people in the many developing countries of the Global south. Here is the 300 page report from the UN I mentioned >>> www.fao.org/4/a0701e/a0701e00.htm . It has been revised several times sense it was published and nothing really has changed for the good. Every statistic I mentioned is in there but in a more long winded format . There is a lot more info I can add but I am trying to keep this short and also avoid redundancy from what is in the video. There are some slight variation of what the Book he points to as to what the UN report said but they are only minor discrepancies.
I think the question of the hour should not be how do we get to our GHG goals, but rather what is the most likely, all things considered, out come, in defined repeating periods, of the state of our natural and anthropogenic systems, so that we can choose an optimal, though essentially pragmatic, pathway through time within the constraints of individuals, all the way up to our global, footprint.
@@davidkottman3440 But not unregulated capitalism? We are ran by junkies, "profit junkies" 25 mai 2022 - Eight men own the same wealth as the 3.6 billion people who make up the poorest half of humanity, according to a new report published by Oxfam
@@a.randomjack6661 socio economic includes all that... The question is, if you take wealth away from the 10 (or thousand) richest does it improve life for the poorest?? I don't think it automatically works like that, although there may be ways to help some of the inequality. The problem is wealth tends to evaporate if attacked, rather than flow to the poor.
As a rancher I wonder if the type of ground is considered. Much of our land would be near impossible to grow plant based food. It is rocky and hard to irrigate. Ruminants can convert the grasses into food without disturbing the ground. You are not wrong in what you are saying, there are just so many variables to consider. I also wonder if it is feeding grain instead of grasses to animals which is responsible much of the methane released. I am not contradicting you just looking for answers to some questions I have. Thanks.
I've heard about seaweed to help reduce methane but I don't know much about that in cows/cattle as supplement. I would be kind of curious what that would do to a cow/cattle from a nutritional standpoint. And thus to humans in return.
@@KCH55 The problem is getting the seaweed into the cow. This is easy enough to do in a feedlot, but not so easy 'on the range'. Also some back of the envelope calculations suggest that we will need an awful lot of seaweed -- so we need to find good places to grow it, and then harvest, process, transport, etc.
Glad I’m Vegan. Best decision of my life. Did it for ethical reasons and it turned out to be much MUCH better for the Planet & the environment. Also NEVER throwing away food. Eating everything I buy.
Until you start getting ill. Eat fish or get dairy from a small farmer that looks after his animals. It will cost a fortune like £7 for 6 eggs but you can’t put a price on your health.
Good for you, but we can eat meat and save the planet at the same time, if we treat meat as the luxury that it is. I feel that 'low meat' is a way easier selling point than 'no meat', and we can't afford religious wars over preferences at this point. By all means live out your squeamishness, but don't assume it is universal, logical superior or even necessary. Unless you want us all to go to hell in a hand basket fast.
@@madshorn5826 so caring about animal suffering is SQUEAMISHNESS? Oh so you’re a tough guy I reckon. Super badass. Fck the animals right? Fck their suffering right? So badass. So manly.
True regenerative agriculture with animals including cows actually do succeed in sequestering carbon emissions. Maybe instead of banning cows we should actually do some of everything that helps. Change current farming practices and reduce meat consumption, both. Do all of the things that help a little and stop looking for a silver bullet. If we all did the little things that helped we won't need a miracle to save us.
It is increasingly more difficult to live like you suggest although I wish we could. Our societies are so regulated these days. Illegal in some places to collect rainwater, to process rabbits on your property without a registered abbatoir, need a licensed to fish and if you barter your produce you still have to pay goods and services taxes. It keeps us all pointed towards supermarkets.
I grew up on a family dairy farm in California, USA. My family still raises grass fed beef. Having spent my life around family agriculture, I have to say that CAFOs are an abomination. They are a concentration camp model for livestock.
My nephew owns and operates cattle ranch but I still advocate for people to switch to a plant-based diet. Grass-fed beef actually releases more methane than grass fed beef because the cows take longer to get to slaughter weight. And of course the amount of land needed for pasture-raised cattle is more than what is needed for c a f o cattle
Great episode! About regenerative farming, a lot of people seem to think that just calling something that, and perhaps the intent, makes any made up idea good or bad, a way, or even the way to save the world. Maybe that's part of the reason why some people aren't completely convinced it's all great. Agriculture is often extremely detrimental, often more than it has to be. One of the biggest causes is that there's an ongoing price war on agricultural products. Most, if not all countries that can afford it has massive incentives and other control mechanisms to protect national production against the global market. And of course, where applicable, to keep farmers content enough to get reelected, and other aspects. These incentives and other measures to protect local production against the global market generates a massive overproduction, which is hidden by incentives for animal production and biofuels, and in other ways. We are all essentially destroying future agriculture potential in some misguided effort to preserve local production potential. Collectively, not every individual. We're also not doing as nearly much as we should to make seafood sustainable, as in sustainable it self, and in sustainable in general. And mostly for similarly short sighted stupid reasons as in agriculture.
One thing to considered on this issue is that red meat encompass a lot of animals and their impact on the issue varies wildly. A cow, a pig and a rabbit have different needs so the calories analysis might not be as bad. On the other hand this report left out all other animals products beside meat, that would be mainly milk but also things like leather, the alternatives for that may have a greater impact on alter resources or climate change, but from a calories perspective are way too wasteful.
Based on my previous reading: Beef has by far the highest environmental cost Lamb is next highest, though about 3/5 of beef Pig is next, somewhat lower than lamb (perhaps 1/2 beef) Chicken is next, noticeably lower than Pig (say 1/5 beef) Fish and "others" are very cheap (environmentally). The reportI read didn't mention rabbit or any deer. For me, Chicken and Pig are in the acceptable zone, with occasional lamb. Based on that info large scale Beef farming should probably be phased out entirely.
When I became aware of the impact of industrial fishing and animal agriculture I cut those things out of my diet. To know what was happening and do nothing would be deriliction of my principles as an environmentallist. Likewise I try not to buy stuff I don't need, drive an EV when it's too far to cycle, go by train instead of plane, etc, etc. OK I'm a relatively wealthy westener and can aford to, but as I see it because I can afford to I should. I am however part of a small minority who take this path, it's my experience that many people are indifferent to this approach or outright hostile. Politicians won't enforce what needs to be done because they need votes every few years. The Chinese who are a 1 party state can enforce difficult decisions. It's my opinion that when it all falls apart, as it will the Chinese will be the last country standing.
Ok, that's cool. Did you know that a long train ride has a larger carbon footprint than a jet flight of the same length? "Long" in this case means maybe 2000 miles.
@@incognitotorpedo42 How many 2000 mile train rides are there? Right share your reference because as far as I am aware electrified high speed rail has the lowest carbon footprint of almost every kind of transport except possibly a vegan on an E-Bike.
I think the main privilege in choosing this is not the price of the food. It's mostly that it requires change, it requires to analyze you're life choices. People with a lot of immediate problems, like how to get money to pay your kids tuition or the rent, don't have time and energy to think about it. But i totally agree that because we can do it, we should
I am already cutting back on red meat (American here). I have been aiming for 3 ounces twice a week. The rest of the week I aim for vegie protein. However, I do seem to be struggling with the dairy aspect, especially with cheese, which seems to really be equivalent to the wasteful red meat industry. Maybe you could bring this into a video at some point. It seems that dairy might be as hard to quit as the beef.
Yeah that is actually harder to reduce for me and my friends. What helps is cooking yourself. There's a lot of good milk/cream alternatives now in the developed world with which you can cook the same dishes without sacrificing taste. Cheese is too hard to replace.
It's worth asking what is the carbon footprint of whatever amount of dairy you consume versus a diet that's high in red meat (in addition to dairy). Maybe dairy is not so bad, particularly if the dairy is grass fed. ($$$)
There’s no point in cutting back on dairy when instead of cows the biggest source of methane emissions are the crystals from underneath the permafrost that are now turning into gas.
You are not the only one. We don't eat very much meat at all any more (reduced over last 10-15 years), but no milk or cheese would be a much more difficult step.
I straight up stopped buying beef altogether. Last time I decided to get some meat, I actually went with lamb, because it was the only thing that was actually reasonably priced. Even though inflation isn't as bad here as it is other places & is starting to even out to something manageable, the frigging beef is somehow getting worse- it's up to like $17+ for a pack of ground meat, right now.
Although I sympathize with your struggle, nutritionally you're not missing out on anything. Nobody in my family eats anything from animals for almost 20 years, we save lots of money and we are all healthier and looking younger than anyone else who eats animal products in our social circle. We eat plant based whole foods and the occasional processed substitute for fun and taste. Rice, beans and vegetables make up a fully nutritious meal for pennies. And we can also get fancy and cook more elaborate dishes when we have the time, but in general we keep it simple.
4:40 - Efficiency is not the only virtue. According to ecologist Allan Savory - (see his tedtalk) ruminant animals have a role in nature; trampling down grasses, and spreading digestive bacteria that return nutrients to the soil, promoting plant life, that then retains water in the soil - preventing desertification. Agricultural GHG emissions would be part of the naturally evolved carbon/climate cycle, and not problematic but for fossil fuels. Were humankind to ditch fossil fuels for say - abundant clean electrical power and hydrogen fuel produced from Magma Energy, we'd deslainate water to irrigate arid land - rather than burn forests, we'd produce our own fresh water, irrigate arid land, and cattle would turn scrub into arable land!
AVERAGE family in Europe: food 20% of income; housing 70%. In Indonesia: the other way round. Solve that puzzle first. (I made the nrs up but you know what I mean). With regenerative/organic/biological farming product prices will have to increase for the farmer to earn a decent income. The consumer however cannot pay for it in both cases.
Pet food is composed of animal "byproducts" that would have otherwise gone to waste, and a relatively small amount of plant products. Compared to human food, and particularly considering the way that pets enhance our lives, it's a drop in the bucket.
In some areas, buying "reject" meat directly from local farmers (male goat kids, horse meat) can be a resource-effective way to feed predatory pets. These animals would be thrown out otherwise. In future, insect protein could be a good base for kibble when/if animal byproducts become less accessible.
Glad I decided (or actually it was never a decision) to not have children. I can sleep very well knowing that when I die, I die. Thank you and good night.
If 2 people reduce their beef and lamb consumption by 50%, it is the same as one person entirely stopping their consumption of beef and lamb. I never suggest any person needs to stop eating a specific food. Instead, reducing consumption of these foods to what is a personally sustainable practice is dramatically better than making no change. Nature does not innately care about some hard distinction between omnivore vs vegetarian vs vegan. Instead, consider one meal changed from beef to chicken to be a win, and even better if it becomes a pattern for more meals (and it need never be the pattern for every meal).
A note to make is that many regenerative techniques aren't new but have actually been carried out and developed by many indigenous communities around the world
Thanx for encouraging people to eat less animals. Sadly the trend is too move away from red meat to eating chickens which apart from being horrendous for the individual chickens causes massive biodiversity issues in itself. Precision fermentation and lab grown meat are two different things as well...
I train with a vegan body builder and his wife both 49 years old. She runs a few marathons a year and he is ripped. They've both been vegan for 15+ years. They seem to be getting everything they need from plants!
@@incognitotorpedo42 It is true. Just like protein (!) animals are unable to synthesise B12 and are entirely dependent on obtaining it through their diet. B12 is only synthesised by said blue green algae and other micro organisms. Pasture fed animals may be able to get enough through the dirt they inevitably ingest but feed lot animals are completely dependent on receiving it as a supplement in their feed. Cut out the middleman, I say.
Diet for a Small Planet explained it all years ago. It should be required reading during adolescence. We don't need animal protein. A little is OK, but much healthier to leave it out.
And, of course, everything you said is pretty spot on, as the human population continues to grow, we've traded quality of life, for quantity of life, not my choice, but majority rules... 😞
I visited Mato Grosso do Sul, it was a famous state for livestock here in Brazil. It’s terrible to see how was devastated. You have mentioned JBS , is a Brazilian company and I don’t know how this company grows so fast.
Such a beautiful place. Visited over 10 years ago and you could already see only patches of jungle with the very contrasting pasture and those funny looking white cows. Can't imagine how worse it is now :/
One has to be so careful when evaluating this information. Proponents of moving away from meat never tell you that crops fed to animals are mostly byproducts of the stuff fed to humans. Nor do they tell you about the huge chemical burden and loss of soil carbon in industrial plant farming. Nor do they talk about the health system effects of eating garbage plant based food. It ain't the meat that is making people obese and diabetic. While we talk about the methane production from cows (efficient users of what is inedible to people), we never talk about the affect of diet on the methane production from people (inefficient plant digesters of even edible plants). Personally, my system has settled tremendously since moving away from grains, rice, pasta, and starchy veggies. And we need to talk about water use. Actually we don't use water but borrow it. We must not pollute it. There should be no need widespread chemical use that pollutes water with animal husbandry. In my area, cattle are kept in smaller spaces during the winter and fed hay, giving the rangeland the rest it needs. Nothing wrong with the practice. Manure is an asset. No such thing as too much, just poor management. I see much more hope in regenerative agriculture. Lots of great stories of restoring grasslands (remember, grasslands are a huge part of our ecology. Its not just forests) and reversing desertification. I think there should be more cows and sheep done this way and less plant crops. As a beekeeper, I avoid industrial plant production. Its a chemical laden monoculture desert. I go near hay and pasture land. Where I keep bees I have just started to give them trees to diversify landscapes, and provide nectar/pollen for a range of pollinators. There is no question that range land, properly managed, is far superior to industrial plant production in terms of soil health, biodiversity, water retention, erosion etc. Our family essential boycotts, as much as possible, industrial agriculture. We buy local grass fed beef, get our pork from Mennonites in the north of our province, raise our own meat chickens, produce our own eggs, catch salmon from the river. We actually rotate our chickens around our orchard and berry crops, and their manure is an important part of our plant health. As they move about, I plant things like clover and borage to improve the nutritional content of their forage and provide nectar sources for bees and other pollinators. They also recycle the waste from our garden and table. Others parts of our property we are maximizing flowering trees to benefit bees, and are trying to get native stuff reestablished along our stretch of river to improve wildlife and salmon habitat.
Dude, nice. Thanks for spending the time to reply in such detail. It shows that you are aware of the breadth and depth of this hotly debated issue. I appreciate that you are passionate without showing simplistic ideological hate speech to go with it. If only there were more people that could grasp the bigger picture. I get the feeling most skipped reading your comment, since, apart from its length, you don't align to any of the reductionist opinions that trigger an emotional response.
@@nickbringolf1181 Many want to make things better, but do not have a good grasp of the broader issues. I happen to have a degree in plant and insect ecology which is helpful in evaluating information. Both the right and left of the political spectrum make sweeping broad statements that do not stand up to scrutiny. Here in Canada, the left tend to be in cities and I find them often quite ignorant of agriculture and land use issues. It results in bad policy related to rural folk and there is a huge divide. If science wants to maintain credibility, it better get things right. Ideologues are not welcome.
@@leroyharder4491 I couldn't agree more about public policy on the environment and agriculture. I hope that small land holders like ourselves with an understanding, awareness and real connection with nature's cycles can hold out against the misguided city voters and industrial agriculture. All the best to you and your family.
Statistically most of the people with access to a RUclips video are not starving. And as sad as it is, it's easier for people to care about their imaginary future descendants than hungry strangers.
@@kdub6593 We were easily feeding 7 billion, but as the climate crisis affects food production more and more EVERYWHERE, expect your family to struggle to find food in a decade or less!
@@gamingtonight1526 Increased CO2 levels will increase crop outputs and the world will become greener. Furthermore, an increase in global temperatures will make available millions of more acreage for farming. Also, increased temperatures will lead to more rainfall. Plants love CO2, warm weather and rain. You're wrong, climate change is a positive for feeding the world.
Even as an environmental scientist that likes to stay updated, i learned quite a few things. Thank you. The amount of food waste was absolutely staggering though.
When I saw your title I thought you were going to talk about soils. It is estimated that there are only 60 years of usable soil left based on current land management practices. Soil is the 2nd largest store of carbon after the oceans and degraded soils have transferred some or all (desertification) of their carbon to the atmosphere. Soil can be rebuilt but at a much slower pace than what is lost through erosion (wind and water). Presenting soil would be a good idea as it is very fundamental to agriculture and has impacts on the water, carbon and nitrogen cycles. Nature uses chemistry and biology to grow plants as does regenerative agricultural practices unlike the chemistry only approach of fertilizer, insecticide, pesticide which all kill the biology.
exactly! Things are getting worse and the rate at which things are getting worse keeps accelerating, such that the chit will hit the fan a lot sooner than people think
My five adult kids told me that they're not having kids because of what I told them. I've been researching climate disaster since 1977 when two top government scientists told me about it
@@bzick405 odd things my adult kids when they talk to their friends the friends say why do you use such big words and they are ridiculed for it. If you're smart and use a wide vocabulary has now become a bad thing 🤫
“What can you and I do to help..?” Um…guessing that we could increase our consumption of fast food burgers&fries calories so as to terminate our lives from heart disease and diabetes…sooner rather than later.
@Just have a think. Before anything. Hello from Trujillo Perú. I really enjoyed watching your informative videos. But today I feel you have been very one sided. Petrochemical fertilisers are the most common and cheapest fertilisers like ammonium nitrate, super phosphate and potassium sulfate. Five antibiotics are most regularly reported to be used in plant agriculture: streptomycin (the most used antibiotic worldwide), oxytetracycline, kasugamycin, oxolinic acid (OA) and gentamicin (McManus, 2014; Sundin and Wang, 2018; Miller et al., 2022). Pesticides can cause short-term adverse health effects, called acute effects, as well as chronic adverse effects that can occur months or years after exposure. Examples of acute health effects include stinging eyes, rashes, blisters, blindness, nausea, dizziness, diarrhea and death. Many studies showed positive associations between pesticide exposure and solid tumours. The most consistent associations were found for brain and prostate cancer. An association was also found between kidney cancer in children and their parents' exposure to pesticides at work.
Excellent overview. The necessary facts are on the table. Quickly and substantially/massively reducing meat and dairy consumption in industrialised countries remains a top priority.
Greed and Inequality at the heart of Food allocation as well as other resources! Some small number of humans are hoarding vast quantities of resources and food. Getting this shared more equally is the real solution to Human Sustainability! That is why I am Voting for The Green Party to get levers of power at least working in the direction of healing rather than destruction!!!
@@NomadAlly When I say the "Natural order of things", I mean the natural order of literally everything. Stars, biomass, language, etc. And yes, it aligns precisely with even what we do. Case in point: Here you are complaining about it.
If been Canvassing Green Party all week. We need a kinder working attitude to each other and the world. As an aging hippie (85) I remember food rationing (UK) but don’t remember being hungry. I cook from scratch, grow my own veg and bottle (can) what is in glut. I don’t do waste but plastic packaging still gets in my house and I hate it. One of my daughters is overseeing a Tofu plant and my niece and family run an organic farm. Sheep are the animals there. It’s been a hard year with all the rain Climate in the north means animals grazing is the most efficient way of getting goodness from grass. We only need about a tenth of all the livestock to keep people healthy Culling deer annually in Scotland would probably gives Scots all the high density protein they need.
Depends on the country you live in, but if you're in the US, voting for the Green Party (or any third party) is like a vote for fascism and drill baby drill.
Please add: temperature impact on crop yields. Higher temperatures will reduce photosynthesis and reduce crop growth. Even if theres no draught or flood.
What a fantastic video. I'll be sharing this around. I went vegan 3 years ago, prompted by environmental concerns but then solidified after exploring the 'animal ethics' aspect. I'm genuinely so happy I did and have no intention of going back. I've improved my cooking and use of flavours. For anyone who is interested, honestly it's not as hard as you might think. You can do it!
If you fed cow's hemp instead of grain and corn, they would have much better digestion, health and not produce as much methane. And you don't need a metric fuckton of fertilizer and water to grow it.🤷
@@eyewonder6448 The seeds, not the whole plant! 33% protein and a source of Omega 3. You can also eat the buds baked in muffins for example, or so I’m told, but not for the nutritional value……..
I've noticed that mangoes from my parent's country keep getting more and more expensive, year on year That's with the currency devaluing too. I can see a future where they'll restrict exports. If mango crops were "normal", the price wouldn't be so high when exported. The mangoes you get in the supermarkets are relatively cheap. The honey mangoes from India and Pakistan tend to be pricier, and require even more ideal conditions than the chunky chewy ones in the supermarkets
Stopped eating animals when I turned 60 - 8 years ago - not only does this dramatically reduce your footprint on this planet, it also dramatically improves your health - it’s the least we can do for our kids and their kids
There is a counter argument about including livestock in agriculture - not to the current level - raising livestock on appropriately managed grassland has a significant benefit in soil health and the sequestration of carbon within the soil. Look at the work of Alan Savory and others. Just saying get rid of livestock is far to simplistic an approach. It can be argued that it is the livestock sectors that should be very carefully evaluated is not grazed cattle and sheep, but pigs and poultry. I would agree that intensive feedlot beef is very questionable, particularly when the feed is produced using unsustainable water extraction to irrigate crops or at the cost on virgin rainforest.
I study permaculture and regenerative agriculture since early 2000s. Ten years ago I restored an old farm building with some land and now I grow all the fruits and vegetables needed for three families in less than 500 square metres (1/8 of an acre) recycling house waste, woodchip, vegetable residues. I know it's not the solution, but it helps mitigate the problem. As Paul Hawken says, growing your food is the single most useful thing anybody can do to mitigate climate change. We cannot wait for our leaders, we need action from below.
Nice going fellow permie
Go Vegan
@@SoulVision1111 I am already
Question for you: Is it feasible to supply this amount of land with soil nutrients solely from the bio waste from those three families that it supports? Or is that not sustainable.
@@xKreakenx Yes, it is possible. You need some smart design, for example planting edges and trees strategically, useful plants as comfrey and some imagination. The most difficult part is to state your goal and plan accordingly. Then finding organic material to start is dead easy... there's a lot of tree surgeons out there willing to dump their woodchip or lawn clippings in your backyard for free, for example. Once the soil is alive, you just have to top it once a year with a couple of centimetres of good homemade compost.
I agree with you as a 4th generation tree fruit farmer who has had to leave the farm for work and sell for several blocks in the past few years to survive my question is how do we change anything if we are ruled by sociopaths?? The CEOs of these world monopolies have gutted any morality from governments they commoditized us we only exist to serve them and their greed. 😢😢😢.
Harsh but true. It's class warfare, and the upper class are winning.
The beautiful thing about this situation though, is that We the People and those that came before us, empowered them to do so. This is the world we have chosen for ourselves.
@@JanjayTrollfaceSpeak for yourself.
@@davidmenasco5743 Don't worry, I do.
We can start by voting...
Among all the candidates, there are some that do propose changes (at least in Europe).
I don't know how this decision is made elsewhere in the world, but here on the Canadian prairies, nobody raises cattle, sheep, etc. on land with soil that's good enough to grow grain. Ranching is what you do if you CAN'T farm plants.
Depending on how hot the world gets Canada is going to become a new bread basket of North America
@@Praisethesunson A simplistic prediction ignores the fact that hotter atmosphere = more energetic atmosphere and less predictability. Because crops take time to grow and mature, they need predictable weather or the crop fails. Australia faces a huge problem because its wheat and barley production is already at risk from any weather irregularities. Canada and other grain producers probably share the same risk.
On a more optimistic (?) note, barley is a more 'fragile' grain than wheat in Australia, easily damaged by wind and rain at the ripening stage. There have been some regions in recent years where there was almost no production of malting-grade barley. When it gets to the stage that the price of beer will increase dramatically, that's when the average Joe will realise that climate is changing, and not for the better.
@davidinkster1296 Australia is adding new colors to the temperature spectrum because of the heat. Canada is becoming more hospitable to agricultural production.
Canada is poised to become a superpower. Australia is going to burn and dry.
@@davidinkster1296 Yes. where I live it always gets really hot. I use seed adapted to my climate. It's the unpredictability and the increased winds of rapidly changing systems that I didn't count on.
@@Praisethesunson That’s the technique: first getting rich from oil, after having ruined the Southern farmers getting richer from own crops, and eventually building walls if someone tries to reach your potentially rescuing borders. Who invented that business model?
I farm in the Sacramento Valley of California. My main crop is olives, which I process for olive oil. The biggest energy requirement on the farm is pumping irrigation water. Formerly I would buy electricity from the grid, but now my electricity is from on-farm photovoltaics. Once photovoltaic power became cheaper than the grid or propane-powered pumps (diesel pumps are illegal because of air quality) farmers started switching over. Even very conservative farmers can do the math--solar power in this sunny climate is the least expensive option for pumping water. It is gratifying to see arrays of solar panels installed all through this part of the valley.
Solar will also make your cost of electricity more stable, so you can estimate future capital requirements more accurately.
pumping water out of the aquifer that isn't allowed to regenerate. you're creating one problem by solving one problem. that's not regenerative.
Solar is going to do the same thing for transportation in the next few years in most states west of the Mississippi.
It only makes sense.
@@az55544 Any farmer that is pumping water for irrigation knows that.
@@az55544 If you're doing agrosolar to reduce evapotranspiration, then your pumping may be reduced significantly.
If you use biochar soil amendment from stover (or in the case of tree crops, deadfall and rejected wood fiber), then your soil hydrology changes may make your farm a net source of groundwater, as well as filter impurities through the biochar, and generate nitrates in the soil microbes sufficient to cease synthetic nitrate fertilizer use. Optimistically.
Whenever farming topics are brought up, there is never any discussion of the Lawn Care Industry. More acres of lawn grass are 'farmed' by residential consumers than food farms. Data: a million workers are in lawn care services among 600,000 companies (basically small farms), 40% of homeowners hire lawn care, $25-$100 Billion/yr is consumed in equipment/supplies/chemicals; chemicals to keep a monoculture like lawn grass weed and pest free is no different than food supply crops with all associated run off problems. I've canoed in a river that was weed free until passing a subdivision and then it was nearly impossible to paddle from there further down stream. So we really need to "rewild" the concept of lawns with native plants that are not mowed every six days.... Maybe that would save the bees, which pollinate 80% of the food people eat.
Golf courses should be illegal.
I live in Las Vegas Nevada where the local government has outlawed ornamental grass for all new homes and businesses. Las Vegas should be a model for all cities especially where water is at a premium like here in the Southwest of the United States. Currently a huge amount of our dwindling water from Lake Mead and the Colorado River is being used to irrigate alfalfa in the Southwest to feed cows. We need to also change what we eat. Switching to a plant-based diet will save hundreds of thousands of gallons of water a year for each person who does so.
@@buttercuptaylor7135boycotting animal products would have a much bigger impact than boycotting golf courses
@@someguy2135the best way to boycott animal products is for people to grow their own food instead of growing grass.
Why fight something that helps?
You’re so right! What a waste of green space 🤨
A terrific video covering a hugely complicated and important subject in 20 minutes. First class.
Could not say it any better ❤
Thanks for the excellent content you provide on your channel.
Thanks for your support :-)
Ask the question why there's more than enough food produced to feed over 10 billion people but almost 800 million people are malnourished/starved. Where according to WWF up to 40% of food is estimated to be wasted at the farming-retail level.
Food distributors/supermarkets and wealthy farmers are not in the business of feeding the hungry who cannot afford the price of food.
The 1840s Irish famine established that fact enough
And if we didn't waste all those calories on garbage "food" (read animal products and ultra-processed crap that gives you cancer) we could easily feed 40-50 billion people.
Or just reduce land use several times over, letting less good land regenerate and solve climate change on its own (at least for a couple hundred years).
People in general aren't in the business of giving to those who can't, or won't, repay them.
@@JohnLark2024 then our food production will rise proportionately
For some much stranger reason those with food problems are completely not in the business of NOT INCREASING their population. Because more people will not affect the food problem, of course.
Until that changes, I do not feel sorry for them. Except for our CO2 emissions, of course, but we (again: only us) are working on that, too.
A lot of propaganda buried in stuff like that with huge assumptions made, many of which are false. How much food does it actually take to feed ten billion people? What type of food specifically? The questions that you would need to answer to get an actual honest answer are almost impossible to get real answers for and we have to result to using averages and statistics that assume that every person is the mean or median of everyone else, that every food is the mean or median of all other foods and many other completely false hidden assumptions. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
There isn't more than enough food to feed 10 billion people, otherwise there wouldn't be 800 million people starving.
How do I just have a think, without wanting to just have a drink?
Can I join you with that drink?
See a psychologist?
@@RWBHere I was talking short term (minutes to hours), not who might help over the coming months.
Don’t look up 😂
Top comment!
As E.O. Wilson pointed out, global ecological diversity is critical to support the systems that support human life. Real wilderness and lots of it. Our farms must become more sustainable while *half* the world must be restored or left wild. Farmers will be heros (once they accept climate change is real)
Humans change the environment to suit human needs. So goes biodiversity. Flora/fauna will be altered per human needs. Unless you want to starve 40% of global humans.
We know ideas, do we have plans?
There is so much people could be doing and we need educcation. People come here and want to do permaculture and can't even grow a radish.
When you fail growing radish, you can always eat the radish flowers! A delicacy in some parts of the world!
Farmers typically understand global warming...
regenerative agriculture using cover crops and intensive rotational grazing is proven to store carbon and a carbon credit market has developed. Also red seaweed macroalgae is now sold out of Australia - proven to neutralize methane emissions from ungulates.
My great grandparents actually practiced regenerative agriculture 150 years ago. Attempts by the US corporate agriculture industry to falsely co-opt the term to mislead us is disgusting. I grew up eating organic, pasture raised beef, organic rabbit, organic chicken and organic produce. I can’t afford to eat that way today so I grow what I can hydroponically, preserve what I can before it goes to waste, reduce my consumption of processed food, avoid dairy/corn/soy, and never eat fast food. 3-4 times a year I will treat myself to an organic, locally produced, pasture raised steak. I don’t feel deprived and I’m generally healthier than many people my age. We need to make lifestyle changes if we want to leave a livable world to future generations.
But will regenerative agriculture be able to meet the needs of a growing population??
I doubt it
About half of the nitrogen in our body comes from chemical synthesis in the Haber process. And it is save the world from starvation. If you want to avoid chemical fertilizers, a lot of us will have to die rather quickly. So it’s really too late to change.
Well said.
James Brown/ *Can we get an Amen for this brutha?* /James Brown
You are a responsible and thoughtful meat eater, one of the few, i'm impressed.
You can't afford to eat that way anymore. There is the real problem. It is never about production. It is about equitable distribution. Also about resources retained by the wealthy. Forces of democracy unite!
This is the type of content I expect from this channel. Thank you.
Malthusian nonsense?
Did your political rep inform, consult warn you ecocide is being committed ? Ref @EcocideLaw Stop Ecocide International
This got me viewing parts twice whilst I wasn't concentrating. Excellent episode. Just Have A Think when Dave isn't in demand elsewhere. Thank you to the funders
This is 'why' people should be converting their pretty ornamental borders and manicured lawns into a mixture of permaculture/rewilding gardens.
No lawn - no mow, no chemicals, no monoculture area, and daving yourself a good deal of money not haing to fuel that mower.
No annual flowers - you don't but limited lifespan plants that cost way more in terms of carbon emissions than they would ever make in terms of oxygen. I've worked in plant nurseries. I love that kind of work more than anything else - but it is wasteful and resource intensive.
If you are a novice gardener who is a little nervous of starting out with food plants -
Start with berry bushes first.
They are the best elementary introduction into food production you can try.
In the UK, the best berries are:
blackcurrants,
redcurrants (if you have a taste for them),
whitecurrants,
Autumn and Summer raspberries (be aware they spread. Dig up in Autumn excess numbers of canes. Avoid yellow raspberries, high production but insipid taste).
Thornless blackberries (again, they spread, but the harvest size is excellent. Great if you want to keep bees).
Tayberries and loganberries are productive, vigorous, and can be trained against fences and walls to save space.
Aronias (sold in Morrisons very cheaply. Slow to get to a fruiting stage and not the biggest harvest, but a reliable and tolerant plant).
Blueberries (acid soils only, or grow in large pots).
Honeyberries are an acquired taste, very sour.
Gooseberries (a reliable cropper in areas unaffected by gooseberry sawfly).
And that's a lot of fruit you can get just from the very easiest plants. If you can plant a geranium, you can plant one of these.
All you might need is a bit if very fine netting or fleece when it gets near harvest time to stop birds from nicking everything (as Wood Pigeons and Blackbirds can just eat more when there's more food around).
When it comes to veggies, if I was a novice starting again, I would buy in a few easy edible leafy/tuberous perennials and self-sowing annuals.
Claytonia - a small salad leafy annual with small pink flowers that seed everywhere. Great for shady gardens, whether damp or normal.
Red-veined Sorrel - an easy perennial, attractive leaf, creeping plant, astringent leaves. Avoid if you suffer from kidney stones.
Alchemilla mollis - highly tolerant native cliff-dwelling plant that survives any conditions. The leaves have a very slight down, but they're edible chopped up in salads.
Perennial celery - it's really a short-lived perennial of about 3 years, but flowers in last year, sets lots of seed which you can sow again. Easy from seed.
Sunchoke/Jerusalem Artichoke - all too easy, a few tubers yields better than potatoes. Very tall with small sunflower like flowers.
Fat Hen - easy from seed, a sort of biennial/short lived perennial (collect seeds. for sowing next crop). Makes a good spinach alternative. Protein, iron, vit C. I wouldn't be without this plant.
Ransomes/wild Garlic - great for damp, shady gardens. Tolerates regular flooding. Spreads well and needs less care than regular garlic.
For those traditional annuals - the pea is the very easiest for a novice. Just follow the instructions, keep out of reach of mice in pots to begin with. (You have time to sow a couple more crops this dummer).
Courgettes are another easy plant. 3 plants is enough for my family of 3. They need a lot of feeding, but this doesn't have to mean buying chemical feed (look on Robbie And Gary's gardening channel for the kitchen scrap method of squash/zucchini feeding. It has multiplied my yields).
Lettuce - I grow these in a plant tower on a sheet of galvanised steel (slugs and snails really don't like galvanised surfaces, but they ignore copper bands where I live).
Lamb's lettuce - treat as above.
Radishes - I grow mine under dappled shade to avoid bolting, but they are prone to attack from mice. So I might grow these in a tower next year.
Kale - gets hit a bit by slugs, but not enough to totally destroy them. The good thing is, you can carefully harvest leaves eithout killing the whole plant, keeping them alive for years. My ones are just setting seed so I can raise a new stock for next year.
I am changing the game a little in my rewilded/permaculture garden and going a little into regenerative practices - by adding ducks (eggs in the incubator) and, later on, chickens.
By getting together in neighbourhoods, creating a local strategy, learning techniques 'now' in your own garden (while your neighbours still think you're mad), you can make your locality more self-sufficient.
Get into propagating those berry bushes as soon as they are old enough to bear it. Encourage assiciates to take and care for new plants you raise from cuttings. Become expert in those propagating techniques, and you become a supplier of food security in your neighbourhod. Knowledge is gold.
The beauty of the plants in this list is that some of them can be grown 'under' larger fruit trees (such as apples, pears, plums and cherries). I grow my currants and gooseberries this way, and it's a good way to save space and help shelter the roots of your trees.
Currants, gooseberries are very easy to propagate by hardwood cuttings.
Rasps, blackberries, tays and logans propagate themselves.
If you have a small plot you can swap or share small seeds such as lettuce. You don't need hundreds of plants and if you grow the loose head varieties you just cut some leaves of several plants and leave them to grow again.
I love to grow runner beans using 7ft canes. 16 plants will give you loads of beans which should be picked before they get huge.
The U.S could almost triple it's agricultural output if just suburban lawns were converted to growing food crops.
Oh yes... sure beats mowing the lawn... front to back and along the side of where l reside here in Canada.. is full of fruits and vegetables.. big raspberry and black berry bushes.. a long strawberry patch ,grapes and always a variety of vegetables.... ..l converted all that lawn to farm land ...no need for green bins fr me ... l compost my own ...
OUTSTANDING COMMENT, THANK YOU
Sadly people don't want high effort, ugly gardens
My late Father-in-law was a PhD Soils Physicist - yes that is a real thing. Periodically when we were talking about agriculture, he would stop, shake his head and say "We never should have broken the sod." What he was referring to is possibly the greatest agricultural mistake ever made. The American settlers plowed EVERYTHING they could see without any thought or plan or strategy. That plowing was permanently destroying the vast grassland ecosystem which could have efficiently supported millions and millions of cows, sheep, goats etc. indefinitely if it had been carfully utilized instead of being plowed under. The tall grass prairie would have allowed us to avoid feeding cows human food and changed that ratio you described for the better.
I agree with your FIL. Natural grazing without tilling, plowing and over intensive grazing land a destroying our soils and the quality of our food, not to mention the industrialisation of agriculture. Mimicing migrating herds on grazing lands increases soil fertility and diversity. Well, I guess I am preaching to the converted.
"The rain follows the plow" was the old adage that was completely wrong. The rain will follow the trees when rainforest is restored, though.
The return of the prairies can be profitable for our environment, our ranchers, and our bellies.
Hardly any crop farms plow. They direct drill and use cover crops. Usually one that bring nitrogen back into the soil. So they use less fertilizer than ever befor.
The soil is monitored and mapped and only fertilized where necessary .
Also plant base diets lead to diabetes because they mostly eating carbohydrates. Which increases sugars. Potatoes, Grains, Bread Pasta etc.
It wasn't that long ago they pushed us into eating more carbohydrates anyone remember the 1980's food Pyramids.
That lead too today's health crisis brought by the same people. Trying to convince everyone the world is going to end cause of overpopulation when it's actually the complete opposite of what's actually happening.😂
And personally I don't know anyone who believes anything coming from that lot especially after the pandemic.
Human population is heading for complete collapse because people don't get married or have children anymore.
After the boomers die off its all downhill for western countries.
China's population is decreasing like Japan's and Europe is heading the same way.
USA would be the same as many other countries. But they rely on immigration to keep a working workforce cause of the aging population. Let's face it if it was really a problem you wouldn't be building mansions on beach fronts. You wouldn't be still building housing or infrastructure on low lands. Or being able to get insurance. Property values would plummet. Or letting people in to use more resources or developing other countries.
Alot of cheery picking data to suit pushing an agenda. Of depopulation and genocide is obvious.
@@suzannepottsshorts Actually, the trees will "produce" the rain. ^ ^
Vast forests, not only rainforests, are conveyor belts for moisture to go inland. It rains over them, and then they evaporate the moisture again for it to be carried further inland.
Thank you for repeating the well known(?) facts in your well sorted and precisely argued way. As a non native english speaker it's always a pleasure to listen, read between the lines and understand the perspective you try to figure out of all the numbers presented.
I'm a student in an organic farming program and regenerative agriculture is a really cool concept. It's going to look different in every environment but that's the fun part.
All you have to do is go back to the 1800s and see how they did it. Notice no round up chemicals and no pesticides to kill the soil. Notice manure to fertilize the earth by animals. Pigs to break up the earth with their snouts. All types of animals that eat all types of plants. The earth is a giant self healing garden. Just stop using all the chemical to kill them, bugs and ants are important.
Have you heard of Miles Anderson? He's a rancher using cattle ranching to restore grasslands, restore endangered species and yes, provide nutrient dense food - this is definitely the way to go.
Excellent work as always!
Thank you
Mike Berners-Lee's book, "There is no Planet B" is an absolute diamond of a book. Everybody ought to have access to copy to dip into. I bought several copies when it first came out (the one Dave is holding) and gave them away to friends and family, including my own original. I then bought the updated book a few years later. It's a great read.
There is a new Earth scheduled at the end of this world. Those who call on JESUS CHRIST to save them and admit they sinned can live in a better version of the world. More beautiful and the lion lies down with the lamb and all animals eat grass. See bible for more.
Better yet: Read Bjorn Lomborg's (Greenpeace Denmark Activist!!!) "Apocalypse No".
As is ‘How Bad Are Bananas’. Helps prioritise what to worry about so you don’t feel quite overwhelmed by everything
@@donaldduck830 "Better yet: Read Bjorn Lomborg's (Greenpeace Denmark Activist!!!) "Apocalypse No". That has been widely de-bunked, and as a university researcher studying ecological breakdown for more than a decade, Lomborg's claims are as full of holes as swiss cheese. Agricultural productions and GDP are ALREADY lower than they would have been without AGW, and we're on track for 38 TRILLION a year in climate-related damages by 2050... which works out to a 19% cut in global income.
I suggest reading scientists instead of Lomborg: Our current trajectory leads straight toward catastrophic ecological and societal breakdown.
Take care.
@ramblerandy2397 Mike Berners-Lee really isn’t half as clever as he thinks he is. He refuses point blank to get to grips with GWP* because he knows that it will render everything he believes and has written about to be questioned. I was involved in a group that was communicating with him a few years ago when GWP* arrived and he refused to engage properly. I was in an audience last year listening to him speak and when questioned about it again he’s still in denial.
The United States has between 40 and 65 million acres of lawn. Some municipalities or Home Owners Associations do not allow vegetable gardens to be planted! I think that state governments should step in and make it illegal to forbid gardening. Go vegan! There are so many great vegan cooking shows on RUclips. Yummy recipes!
you will find that many of these organizations are controlled by the food industry and the last thing they want is for people to grow their own food, if they do the big four loose some control of pricing and power.
Feed Iowa First has an urban farming program for churches and businesses to use parts of their lawns for gardens. Produce goes to food pantries and low income neighborhoods.
Sorry but vegetarian didn't even work for me. Decades of 'belief' shattered by health realities. Now Keto/carnivore and feel decades younger. Medication no longer needed. Happy for you.
@@suzannepottsshorts That's great news!
@@rovert1284 Keto diets can have amazing affects. Just cutting out sugar and processed carbs is helpful. The carnivore part hasn't shown such great results in clinical trials. Be well!
Dave always provides food for thought. Bravo! Just have a think! 🎉😊
in the UK, Hodmedod grows regeneratively and supports other locals who do the same. support them and others like them to carry forth all that you're learning here. the cool things with their products are that, 1. they are shelf stable, 2. climate adapted to the UK, and 3. you can grow out their food as seed in your own garden
"Victory gardens" is where it's at. Do things that have a proven track record of working for a long time for our grandparents.
Thanks!
Thanks for your support
I had a think 50 years ago as a starving student at University. I didn't actually starve because I grew quite a bit of food in my shared apartment and on the balcony.
I always liked to cook on the cheap and could get away with rice, beans, lentils, chickpeas, eggs, sardines, mushrooms, nuts, berries, green onions, herbs, celery, garlic, peppers, spinach, kale, collard greens, tomatoes, sweet potatoes, radishes, turnips, beets, and even carrots in deep pots. I also ate all the "weird" cuisines of the world, as my roommates liked to call it. The cuisines that traditionally made use of every scrap of food while making it healthy and delicious. Curries, and tacos, and stir fries, and such. I only spent $10 a month at local stores to lay in supplies of rice, legumes, eggs, and sardines.
Could people learn to grow at least a little bit of their own food before it's too late? Will people do it now? The amount of energy required to grow, refrigerate, transport, and sell produce could be better used to keep the lights on in the coming dark ages. Instead of "a chicken in every pot" the new anti-hunger slogan might be "a pot of greens in every kitchen".
This is such a refreshing channel. Excellent research, no sensationalism, and a balanced presentation of ideas with competing perspectives. Your calm demeanor also adds to the presentation. Great work.
thank you for just making this video, fully aware of the flak it might receive because the majority of folks cant comprehend the situation they are part and creator of.
Thanks for your support :-)
@PlaCerHooD I strongly disagree. This “problem” was looked at how a child looks at problems! I’ve been a management accountant, farmer and also small business owner. I like this channel but here on this one the analysis is very poor. Dream world versus reality.
@@soothsayer5743 QED
@@soothsayer5743 you strongly disagree, yet you give no arguments why.
@@soothsayer5743 please do elaborate?
An inconvenient truth if there ever was one.. Thanks so much for this Dave, very clear and balanced report
The term (inconvenient truth) is so applicable in so many areas.
Cheers Mark
Balanced? from an unbalanced human .. He needs a good steak to get his brain working
@@tilapiadave3234 sounds like you indeed find the data ehm, inconvenient :) Much love
I'm vegetarian, but you don't need to go that far, just have one meat free day a week. Try some new recipes and you will soon look forward to it. Then try two or three days a week if you like. Reducing a little bit will really help.
Or don't be a baby and just stop eating animal products
@@lorissupportguides This attitude will "convert" no one and will actually more likely repel people from the idea of at least reducing meat consumption. As many have stated before, we need (quickly) millions of people eating less meat rather than having a few people not eating meat at all (or animal products in general).
Sami's attitude is much better in this sense. And I am saying this as someone who isn't eating animal products.
Every step counts, but maybe we're expecting too little. If people are environmentally conscious maybe it's ok to ask a bit more from them. Idk what's the best approach to be honest
@@edgbarra I think once people find a meat free meal that they enjoy, then they'll look for more. They'll save a bit of money, help save the environment, feel good about themselves. They may even have some health benefits, especially if they eat cheap meat regularly!
You need to go that far, i.e. become vegan, to stop exploiting and slaughtering non-human animals
Thanks! Not enough climate activist channels talk about plant based diets and it's so important
Thanks for your support. Much appreciated
A very good episode, thanks. One thing that I mull over is the 'obsession' of planting trees. Planting trees is only part of the solution and it occurred to me when noticing a hazel tree that had a huge pile of nuts around the base that we could plant more food trees, which would help to mitigate the food crisis as well. When I asked the occupant of the house right behind the hazel if she ate the nuts, she complained that it was the council's responsibility and the tree always "leaves a mess"! Just imagine if councils planted more nut trees, cherry, damson, apple, pear trees. Free food for those who need it, soil stability, good to help the battle against climate change, fresh and local produce which means fewer food miles and no doubt more vitamins. What's not to like?
I love the enthusiasm. The rest of the story is the care, the pruning, the harvest, the life expectancy of the tree and its root habits. Also, our wildlife friends and their domesticated cousins that love to eat trees, their nuts, their fruit, and add all the poop that they leave behind. Over the years I have watched this story -- done it myself -- many times. It takes a small group of dedicated and reliable people who can keep it going. Cultivate that first.
Thank You
My pleasure:-)
I love these informative videos you make; they really do give me things to think about. Thank you!
Cheers Lorrie
Everyone need to start growing their food as much as possible again
Totally agree! I live in a neighborhood where every house comes with about roughly one acre of land. I know of only two plots (including mine) that have a real vegetable garden; all the other ones have mainly a lawn. This year alone, I was able to harvest about 60 lbs of potatoes, bunches of radishes, 20 kohlrabi and turnips each, lots of kale and lettuce, about 100 onions, 40 garlic heads, pull carrots as needed, 8 heads of broccoli, about 10 lbs of strawberries, a large bowl of gooseberries, blackberries, raspberries, and currants each, enough cucumbers to can 10 quarts of pickles, 10 heads of fennel, squash, beans, tomatoes, peppers, and eggplants are starting to explode to where I'm struggling to harvest, prepare and preserve, I incorporate sweet potato and pumpkin leaves in my meals till I can harvest the main crop. In addition, I have an asparagus and sunchoke bed, different melons, and about 50 corn plants. Haven't had to buy any produce in the last three months. Also grow my own herbs and dry enough to last me to the next season or longer and have multiple fruit and nut trees. My garden itself is roughly 1/10 acre.
Have a rain water catchment system, use my chicken and rabbit manure so I won't have to bring in any fertilizer, don't use any herbicide or pesticides, and practice mulching. Don't need a fitness studio!
Some, like Bgates, think best to hyper exploit best land and rest rewilding
Case for it but I prefer your idea 🫂
In my region (south of Bahia) we plant cocoa within the forest (cabruca method), which keeps over 90% of the original animal biodiversity. There is virtually no additional income for the farmers (from mostly Europeans and US companies which control the processing) because of that.
If you look at what supermarkets pick from farmers and what is considered "waste" by them, you'll stop buying any fruits and vegs from them.
Please elaborate!
No, I won't. I can barely afford to buy fruits and vegetables from the supermarket, and even there I usually wait for a sale and buy seasonal stuff. Buying in alternative stores is simply not an option, and unlike with meat, which I almost don't buy anymore, it's not really an option not to eat them at all, even if I thought that's so morally important, because I need some fruits and vegetables. It's not just me, there are tens of millions of people even in Europe, let alone the rest of the world, barely scraping by. I wish I could buy the "ugly" vegetables on a discount tho.
Vegetables taste better in the can!
No they don't.
@@pyroman2918frozen is a good way to afford more fruit and veg.
I make a game of saving money, so I would almost never eat berries if it weren’t for the frozen option
I'm pretty sure the "ugly" ones are probably being sold to the companies that make ultra-processed food products for fast food/ frozen/ canned goods companies & not actually being thrown right in the trash.
There is also more to animal agriculture than calories alone though. We also get very useful materials like wool, leather, bone meal (for replenishing soil nutrients), etc.
We should, however, definitely change the methods commonly used and focus on more effecient species in terms of feed ratios.
We also need to make shifts in the plants we farm too. Many places are going to be too hot or too dry or just too unpredictable for our current preferred crops. There are hardier choices available such as millet or amaranth that westerners ought to become more familiar with.
I watched an interesting documentary recently that mentioned there was an estimated 30 million bison/buffalo in the great plains of America pre Columbus. There are around the same amount of cows in the whole of the USA today and cows are a lot smaller than bison. From my simple logic the USA should easily be able to support the current cow herd with certainly no more ecological impact than 30 million farting and burping bison. My opinion is that the problem lies with farming methods being tailored to profit making rather than sustainable healthy human food production.
A bison produces 30 kilograms of methane every year, A cow produces 100 kilograms of methane every year. The USA alone apparently has 92 million cows. Brazil has 215 million.
I'm glad that agriculture is getting attention.
Given likelihood of decimation of crop yields given climate change, I think the general population will be forced into having plant-based diets (almost all calories/protein consumed) in the coming years.
More carbon in the air and the slight warming trend both lead to more plant growth and larger areas of green space available for grazing animals, which could wind up sequestering more carbon (if managed in a regenerative fashion) thereby maintaining a healthy balance.
2 to 3 c up will prove to not be "slight", even more so that the land temps will rise far higher as to balance for cooler oceans - 70% of Earth surface.
We're only just post starting phase, what's on extreme we see today, will double three times over once we reach 3C.
Look back in Earth's history if you don't believe it, we're already over the carbon concentration of Pliocene, when we had 2C up, ice sheets less than half of today's and sea level 50m up.
Nope, we're not there, and not within 20 years as some doomists claim. But heavy emissions been only 50 years, while Pliocene alone lasted 2.8 million yrs, 50 Thousands times as long.
Changing climate may come by total surprise, like AMOC break down, could play out within a half century, shifting climate zones over half continents in a matter of decades. No one can predict when , but is it a risk anyone wants to take ? Seems so, but they don't read the Science
@@luddityThis is a fallacy seen frequently in these comment sections.
There is a lot more to fertile growing areas than temperature and CO2.
Each crop is adapted to certain types of soil, humidity and moisture, rainfall patterns, etc.
As dozens or hundreds of growing areas become less productive due to climate change -- and this includes rising temperatures, longer droughts, hotter heat waves, bigger floods and storm surges, and inundation from rising sea levels -- finding and then acquiring and cultivating new areas suitable for those crops could take decades.
Meanwhile, prices are through the roof and people are hungry.
Your fossil fuel burning utopia is in reality a terrible nightmare.
The fact is that we need to stop burning fossil fuels and make some adjustments to how we eat and farm, because these are the solutions that will actually work to solve the climate crisis.
unlikely.
@@davidmenasco5743the amount of droughts and extreme weather events will actually decrease as the temperature increases to the optimum level and balances out like it has done thousands of times before. Extreme weather is actually more common in a colder climate or during climate shifts, look this data up for yourself I'd argue with you about it to the moon and back but RUclips deletes or hides comments that argue this point of view.
Thanks, Dave...keep making us think.
Thank you for this balanced presentation. I am one step closer to completely removing the little meat and poultry I still eat. I still eat fish and eggs. Neither of them are problem-free, either.
after watching just 5 mins, I understand the message and the warnings of how devastating animal agricultural practices are to our existence. If we are totally honest with each other and are openly prepared to have deep, interlectualy debates and sincere discussions about these issues, we can only come to one reasonable logic conclusion. Cease raising animals for food.
Then you read the comments, and I just hold my head in my hands and die from within...slow and painfully
My husband and I have been vegetarian for 53 years. We do drink milk and eat eggs. We are waiting for the precision fermentation of milk/cheese which is in the works. We have a worm bin. The vegetable cuttings go in that bin. I wonder if it created CO2 or prevents it somewhat.
Composting releases methane, which for a few of us is bigger concerns than CO2 and if your landfill is best practices harvesting methane for power then better to toss scraps. Few are.
🪱 at first glance would convert to CO2, a comparative good thing imo
Same as if landfill flares 🔥 it but no healthy soil amendment
@@DrSmooth2000 Found this: Dr. Clive Edwards finishes the article beautifully by referring to multiple studies that have suggested that worms either do not affect N20 emissions at all, or in fact seem to bring about a decrease in emissions of this greenhouse gas!
We need more green spaces and less monoculture.
Farms need more diversity and less chemicals.
Cities um just reduce land use and have more green spaces with available soil so you stop or greatly reduce your flooding.
Thank you for the high quality content
I live in Dorset UK. A proportion of our land is unsuited to crops but it does suit sheep and cattle farming. Crop and grazing rotation is routine on flatter more suitable land. Farms have existed this way for millennia. I often worry that we lose sight of the problem that needs to be fixed. Some types of farming are less in harmony with the environment, others work and are sustainable. One size does not fit all and governments are making poor decisions e.g. EVs are part of the solution but should never be the only solution.
crop/grazing never got rotated where I lived in rural Herefordshire. The sheep fields remained the sheep fields. The prairie field remained the crop field. The hop and fruit and asparagus fields all were never rotated. Same goes for all the fields around where I live now.
Very true!
In parts of Portugal, for example, you have a very old "cultured landscape" consisting of small scale farms, orchards, pastures, etc.
This diverse landscape has attracted a certain set of diverse species, but now that a lot of people give up that kind of small scale farming, the landscape changes and can even become less diverse in species.
Many parts of Europe have been shaped by humans for such a long time that we and our activities have become part of the ecosystem. Certain species of animals, plants and insects would not live here if humans did not keep parts of the landscape open through farming. But this balance only works when farming does not become industrialized and destroys all living things.
The U.K government is the cause of most of the world's problems so that does check out.
The first edition of "Diet for a small planet" was published over thirty years ago - and should have informed every child's education since its publication
Correction: the first edition was published in 1971, more than 50 years ago. I was a keystone must read for us back to the land hippie types.
"Recipes for a Small Planet" too.
Factory farms are disgusting. Bring back family farms and biodiversity.
Small farms can be highly productive on a per hectare/acre basis BUT they are labour intensive which is why they don't work for big business.
How? Almost the whole of Europe keeps their animals locked inside for at least 4 months of the year, it’s just not possible in Europe to have animals outside in Winter.
@@danielstapler4315Or for the consumer, or for quality standards.
The American style factory farming is on such an enormous scale in comparison to Europe. If I was American I would be vegan.
@@LuciannaG123 Europe is the same really.
Here in Sweden, we are NOT Allowed to feed our farm animals antibiotics unless a veterinarian has seen that it is necessary for the animals health and well-being. That means in must be sick from an infection that will kill it or harm it. Until the antibiotics has left the animal. It is not allowed to be used for food.
I have a little farm up in northern Sweden where farmlands are very young and manure is highly sought-after and very much needed to build new farmlands to grow crops on. So we need our farm animals to be able to grow for example vegetables and grains. We have sheep cows and hens, as of today with pigs coming along sometime in the future to help dig around. We grow all the crops we can and we are trying to show with good example how we can live in the future. Small scale, energy efficient, green energy no waste locally sourced et cetera et cetera, but we do not only focus on regenerating our landscape and giving safe haven to insects frogs and such but also a safe haven for all us broken souls who try to live in the modern world we have created for ourselves. Now don’t get me wrong and think that we are backwards we love what progress has given us but we have side effects of the progress that need to be addressed because, people are not doing well emotionally.
Thank you for all your good work! whenever I feel I need to be with kindred spirits I come to this chat.❤
Oh, and I should add that our cows have quite low methane production due to not eating anything but our own grass. And they roam free on large areas of land. On our farm we only have five cows and calves right now, during winter time we only have two. They give us milk mainly and they wash me every day even though sometimes the buttons on my shirt go missing… And I scratch them behind the ears and fix their hairdos 😂 same goes for the sheep we have three during winter and between five and seven during summer months. They give us wool and a family we know get the meat, we barter for honey et cetera. It really is a very different world to those awful Brazilian -I will not mention them because I get, angry and disgusted 🤮 I would . Rather think of my hens . They give our countryside eggs and I get to talk to them every day. They help me in the garden even though it’s not always the help I need. 😂
I'm not having kids. So there will be no starving grandchildren. I will be free from the burden of parenthood. It's a blessing but also a curse. I might regret it when I'm 50 but I'm 24 and chilling
The comentator seems to be missing the fact that in many countries we dont "feed" the cattle. They harvest grass from steep slopes that are not suitables for machines to grow and harvest plants. Animals are essential automatic harvesting machines
Using Precision fermentation to create most animal proteins will ultimately make up the bulk of what we will eat. In the same way, the pancreas of 10,000 cows was needed to make 1 kg of Insulin. It will first happen with milk and then with meat.... In time we will learn to replicate the natural process perfectly and on a molecular level, both proteins will be identical.
Why bother with fake meat, why not just eat a virtually vegetarian diet with the occasional bit of meat, eggs or dairy?
Are we still getting insulin from cows? Haven't we been growing it in genetically modified bacteria for like 40 years?
Price is the thing that will make precision fermentation widespread, once it becomes cheaper there will be no going back. Can you imagine how much demand will go up when companies like McDonald figure out that they can save millions or billions of $/yr by changing? (I'm not saying McDonalds is good or bad, just that they have huge market influence).
Soylent Green?
@@incognitotorpedo42 There still is animal sourced insulin available.
Wild fish and fungus foods provide a lot of food. Growing some of your own food at home will help. Plant fruit and nut trees in your garden, then fruit bushes , then salads and vegetables. Large gardens can have fish farming pools.
Do you realise how few people are able to grow food at home?
"Wild" anything basically means you're making food "somebody else's problem". Witness the fishing industry, which has repeatedly crashed whole ecosystems by overfishing and dredging. The Grand Banks, for example, used to have so many fish that you could catch as much as you could hold anywhere. It's been a long time since that was true.
If you do rely on home grown smallholding food (nearly) exclusively I understand you need something like 1 acre of land in production (as well as a lot of work and somewhere to store for winter, etc). If that land is not smallholding but wild, the land use will rise probably by a factor of 50 (guess). There isn't enough land in the world for everyone to have that much...
@@rivimey many hundreds of millions (billions ?) of people rely upon wild fresh fish , salt water fish and farmed fish. Yes , irresponsible industrial factory fishing by the Russian , Chinese and other fleets have wrought havoc around the world. The Somali pirates of East Africa were fishermen that were displaced due to Russian fishing fleets and lost their supply of food.
The UK and Holland have less than 1 acre per head of population for all uses , but still produce a lot of food for export.
Most of the population in the middle latitudes of the world do not have the equivalent of a Winter and have a multi cropping system ( see Kerala , India and Holland for intensive growing methods. I use a 1/4 acre plot to grow a lot of my food , and , yes it can be hard work!
The insane thing is that regenerative farming actually STORES carbon. So food production COULD save our climate if it was done that way... which i hope more and more farmers will do
There is an upper limit to the amount of carbon stored in topsoil.You can raise the organic matter content to maybe 10%, (maybe even 12%). But that amount will be happily consumed by the living organisms (bacteria, funghi, insects, worms) in the soil. After a while you will reach an equilibrium where plants put carbon into the soil and the organisms will eat the organic matter and breathe out CO2. 😉
It's not "insane": it's what indigenous societies have been doing for millennia, in one form or another. Don't use idiot clickbait terms: it cheapens your argument (which I agree with completely, BTW).
@@hansverbeek822 Ever wondered how deep topsoil can get?
I hope they stop holocausting animals
@@chahahc
Topsoil depth can vary significantly depending on various factors, but generally ranges from a few inches to several feet deep. Here are the key points about topsoil depth:
1. Average depth: The typical depth of topsoil is around 6-12 inches (15-30 cm)[1][2].
2. Range: Topsoil depth can vary from as little as 2-4 inches (5-10 cm) in some areas to up to 3 feet (90 cm) or more in others[1][2][4].
3. Factors affecting depth:
- Climate: Areas with more precipitation tend to have thicker topsoil layers[1].
- Vegetation: Different plant types affect topsoil depth and distribution[1].
- Human activities: Farming and construction can alter topsoil depth and quality[1].
- Geographical location: Some regions naturally have deeper topsoil than others[4].
4. Recommended depths for different purposes:
- Lawns: 4-6 inches (10-15 cm)[5]
- General planting: 6-9 inches (15-23 cm)[5]
- Vegetable gardens: 6-18 inches (15-45 cm), depending on the type of vegetables[5]
5. Variation within landscapes: Topsoil depth can differ significantly even within short distances. For example, high ground may have 6-12 inches of topsoil, while low-lying areas can have several feet[4].
6. Conservation concerns: Topsoil is considered an endangered resource in some areas, as it can take 200-1000 years to form an inch of topsoil naturally, but it's being depleted at a much faster rate[3].
It's important to note that the quality of topsoil is just as crucial as its depth for supporting plant growth and maintaining healthy ecosystems.
Citations:
[1] www.a-garden-diary.com/how-deep-is-topsoil-what-affects-its-thickness-nutrients/
[2] www.mbwilkes.com/news/how-much-topsoil-do-i-need-.html
[3] www.bstopsoil.co.uk/about-topsoil/topsoil-facts-british-sugar-topsoil
[4] talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?DisplayType=flat&tid=348392
[5] www.hillcrestsod.com/top-soil-calculator/
after reading "Animals, vegetables, Junk", by Mark Bittman, I have a new understanding of just how our agricultural practices are destroying the land and our food. good read.
I have read this book . What it fails to mention that today Most deforestation especially in the Amazon is for making pasture land for Farm Animals(Mostly Cows) It take a Cow in a CAFO 1 year to go from Birth to slaughter weight and a Pasture raised cow more then 3 years. So you need 3 times as many cows to meet current demands. There isn't enough Pasture land to maintain the demands for Meat dairy and eggs that the world(Mostly the Global North) market demands. Rewilding/Regenerative agriculture can not produce enough Meat Dairy and eggs to meet current demands. It take 330 gallons of water to produce a 1/4 pound hamburger and only 45 gal to produce 1 plant base burger. By eating 1 plant based Burger you save enough water to shower everyday for about a month. Under current systems of Agriculture it takes 3 acres of land to feed the average meat eater for 1 year. 1/4 of an acre for a vegetarian and 1/8 of an acre for a Vegan. Based on the statistics of a UN report Called "Livestocks long shadow" A vegan who drives an SUV has a lower over all impact on the environment(More then just GHGs) then a meat eater who drives a bicycle everywhere. The head f the UN states that moving towards a MORE (not 100%but that would be better for the environment, you and the Animals) plant based diet would be need in addition in reducing Fossil Fuels to truly mitigate the worse affects of Climate Change. Current estimates indicate 1 person would have to cut out over 80%of the animal products they consume(This includes leather and wool). This doesn't apply to people in the many developing
countries of the Global south. Here is the 300 page report from the UN I mentioned >>> www.fao.org/4/a0701e/a0701e00.htm . It has been revised several times sense it was published and nothing really has changed for the good. Every statistic I mentioned is in there but in a more long winded format . There is a lot more info I can add but I am trying to keep this short and also avoid redundancy from what is in the video. There are some slight variation of what the Book he points to as to what the UN report said but they are only minor discrepancies.
Fantastic comment 👏
I think the question of the hour should not be how do we get to our GHG goals, but rather what is the most likely, all things considered, out come, in defined repeating periods, of the state of our natural and anthropogenic systems, so that we can choose an optimal, though essentially pragmatic, pathway through time within the constraints of individuals, all the way up to our global, footprint.
Now I really want to eat some good Brazilian steak. Cows are great. Can't live without them.
So........we need less people?
@@liamwinter4512
That would be one solution to the problem, though, hardly pragmatic as regards the means of achieving said population reduction.
Excellent Analysis Sir!! 🖖
Thank you kindly!
You do some really good research 🤓
I live in a modern Western city. I see hungry adults and kids every day.
OK, it's not a 'famine', but...
It's socio-economic, not famine.
@@davidkottman3440 But not unregulated capitalism?
We are ran by junkies, "profit junkies"
25 mai 2022 - Eight men own the same wealth as the 3.6 billion people who make up the poorest half of humanity, according to a new report published by Oxfam
@@a.randomjack6661 socio economic includes all that... The question is, if you take wealth away from the 10 (or thousand) richest does it improve life for the poorest?? I don't think it automatically works like that, although there may be ways to help some of the inequality. The problem is wealth tends to evaporate if attacked, rather than flow to the poor.
As a rancher I wonder if the type of ground is considered. Much of our land would be near impossible to grow plant based food. It is rocky and hard to irrigate. Ruminants can convert the grasses into food without disturbing the ground. You are not wrong in what you are saying, there are just so many variables to consider. I also wonder if it is feeding grain instead of grasses to animals which is responsible much of the methane released. I am not contradicting you just looking for answers to some questions I have. Thanks.
I've heard about seaweed to help reduce methane but I don't know much about that in cows/cattle as supplement.
I would be kind of curious what that would do to a cow/cattle from a nutritional standpoint. And thus to humans in return.
@@KCH55 The problem is getting the seaweed into the cow. This is easy enough to do in a feedlot, but not so easy 'on the range'. Also some back of the envelope calculations suggest that we will need an awful lot of seaweed -- so we need to find good places to grow it, and then harvest, process, transport, etc.
Glad I’m Vegan. Best decision of my life. Did it for ethical reasons and it turned out to be much MUCH better for the Planet & the environment. Also NEVER throwing away food. Eating everything I buy.
Until you start getting ill. Eat fish or get dairy from a small farmer that looks after his animals. It will cost a fortune like £7 for 6 eggs but you can’t put a price on your health.
well, bless your heart
Me too, so much better for health too. Less burdon on health services.
Good for you, but we can eat meat and save the planet at the same time, if we treat meat as the luxury that it is.
I feel that 'low meat' is a way easier selling point than 'no meat', and we can't afford religious wars over preferences at this point.
By all means live out your squeamishness, but don't assume it is universal, logical superior or even necessary.
Unless you want us all to go to hell in a hand basket fast.
@@madshorn5826 so caring about animal suffering is SQUEAMISHNESS? Oh so you’re a tough guy I reckon. Super badass. Fck the animals right? Fck their suffering right? So badass. So manly.
True regenerative agriculture with animals including cows actually do succeed in sequestering carbon emissions. Maybe instead of banning cows we should actually do some of everything that helps. Change current farming practices and reduce meat consumption, both. Do all of the things that help a little and stop looking for a silver bullet. If we all did the little things that helped we won't need a miracle to save us.
It is increasingly more difficult to live like you suggest although I wish we could. Our societies are so regulated these days. Illegal in some places to collect rainwater, to process rabbits on your property without a registered abbatoir, need a licensed to fish and if you barter your produce you still have to pay goods and services taxes. It keeps us all pointed towards supermarkets.
@@john1boggity56 sad, but true. We do need to reverse many laws put in place by Big AG.
I grew up on a family dairy farm in California, USA. My family still raises grass fed beef. Having spent my life around family agriculture, I have to say that CAFOs are an abomination. They are a concentration camp model for livestock.
My nephew owns and operates cattle ranch but I still advocate for people to switch to a plant-based diet. Grass-fed beef actually releases more methane than grass fed beef because the cows take longer to get to slaughter weight. And of course the amount of land needed for pasture-raised cattle is more than what is needed for c a f o cattle
IT is bad for the soil they are living on also.
Talking about feed lots.
Great episode! About regenerative farming, a lot of people seem to think that just calling something that, and perhaps the intent, makes any made up idea good or bad, a way, or even the way to save the world. Maybe that's part of the reason why some people aren't completely convinced it's all great.
Agriculture is often extremely detrimental, often more than it has to be. One of the biggest causes is that there's an ongoing price war on agricultural products. Most, if not all countries that can afford it has massive incentives and other control mechanisms to protect national production against the global market. And of course, where applicable, to keep farmers content enough to get reelected, and other aspects.
These incentives and other measures to protect local production against the global market generates a massive overproduction, which is hidden by incentives for animal production and biofuels, and in other ways. We are all essentially destroying future agriculture potential in some misguided effort to preserve local production potential. Collectively, not every individual.
We're also not doing as nearly much as we should to make seafood sustainable, as in sustainable it self, and in sustainable in general. And mostly for similarly short sighted stupid reasons as in agriculture.
One thing to considered on this issue is that red meat encompass a lot of animals and their impact on the issue varies wildly. A cow, a pig and a rabbit have different needs so the calories analysis might not be as bad. On the other hand this report left out all other animals products beside meat, that would be mainly milk but also things like leather, the alternatives for that may have a greater impact on alter resources or climate change, but from a calories perspective are way too wasteful.
Based on my previous reading:
Beef has by far the highest environmental cost
Lamb is next highest, though about 3/5 of beef
Pig is next, somewhat lower than lamb (perhaps 1/2 beef)
Chicken is next, noticeably lower than Pig (say 1/5 beef)
Fish and "others" are very cheap (environmentally).
The reportI read didn't mention rabbit or any deer. For me, Chicken and Pig are in the acceptable zone, with occasional lamb. Based on that info large scale Beef farming should probably be phased out entirely.
This is a fine argument that we have not heard. As usual they stack the facts and forget the entire truths. Half truths are lies also.
When I became aware of the impact of industrial fishing and animal agriculture I cut those things out of my diet. To know what was happening and do nothing would be deriliction of my principles as an environmentallist. Likewise I try not to buy stuff I don't need, drive an EV when it's too far to cycle, go by train instead of plane, etc, etc. OK I'm a relatively wealthy westener and can aford to, but as I see it because I can afford to I should. I am however part of a small minority who take this path, it's my experience that many people are indifferent to this approach or outright hostile. Politicians won't enforce what needs to be done because they need votes every few years. The Chinese who are a 1 party state can enforce difficult decisions. It's my opinion that when it all falls apart, as it will the Chinese will be the last country standing.
Ok, that's cool. Did you know that a long train ride has a larger carbon footprint than a jet flight of the same length? "Long" in this case means maybe 2000 miles.
@@incognitotorpedo42 How many 2000 mile train rides are there? Right share your reference because as far as I am aware electrified high speed rail has the lowest carbon footprint of almost every kind of transport except possibly a vegan on an E-Bike.
@@incognitotorpedo42That is objectively false.
I think the main privilege in choosing this is not the price of the food. It's mostly that it requires change, it requires to analyze you're life choices. People with a lot of immediate problems, like how to get money to pay your kids tuition or the rent, don't have time and energy to think about it. But i totally agree that because we can do it, we should
It cost just as much to produce the electricity to drive the EV and a gasoline engine is said.
I am already cutting back on red meat (American here). I have been aiming for 3 ounces twice a week. The rest of the week I aim for vegie protein. However, I do seem to be struggling with the dairy aspect, especially with cheese, which seems to really be equivalent to the wasteful red meat industry. Maybe you could bring this into a video at some point. It seems that dairy might be as hard to quit as the beef.
Yeah that is actually harder to reduce for me and my friends. What helps is cooking yourself. There's a lot of good milk/cream alternatives now in the developed world with which you can cook the same dishes without sacrificing taste. Cheese is too hard to replace.
Don't crucify yourself. If you can cut out everything except cheese, that is way better than most people will ever manage, so good on you :-)
It's worth asking what is the carbon footprint of whatever amount of dairy you consume versus a diet that's high in red meat (in addition to dairy). Maybe dairy is not so bad, particularly if the dairy is grass fed. ($$$)
There’s no point in cutting back on dairy when instead of cows the biggest source of methane emissions are the crystals from underneath the permafrost that are now turning into gas.
You are not the only one. We don't eat very much meat at all any more (reduced over last 10-15 years), but no milk or cheese would be a much more difficult step.
Thanks for the timely message Dave.
I remember hearing experts project (as a young man in the 1970's) that there would be worldwide starvation when the population reached 6 billion.
I can't afford to eat meat on my household income more than once a week. Oh and I live in the USA
What kind of meat? I'd be fine eating chicken, fish, and vegetables for the rest of my life.
Good
I straight up stopped buying beef altogether. Last time I decided to get some meat, I actually went with lamb, because it was the only thing that was actually reasonably priced. Even though inflation isn't as bad here as it is other places & is starting to even out to something manageable, the frigging beef is somehow getting worse- it's up to like $17+ for a pack of ground meat, right now.
A Joe Biden production....
Although I sympathize with your struggle, nutritionally you're not missing out on anything. Nobody in my family eats anything from animals for almost 20 years, we save lots of money and we are all healthier and looking younger than anyone else who eats animal products in our social circle. We eat plant based whole foods and the occasional processed substitute for fun and taste. Rice, beans and vegetables make up a fully nutritious meal for pennies. And we can also get fancy and cook more elaborate dishes when we have the time, but in general we keep it simple.
4:40 - Efficiency is not the only virtue. According to ecologist Allan Savory - (see his tedtalk) ruminant animals have a role in nature; trampling down grasses, and spreading digestive bacteria that return nutrients to the soil, promoting plant life, that then retains water in the soil - preventing desertification.
Agricultural GHG emissions would be part of the naturally evolved carbon/climate cycle, and not problematic but for fossil fuels. Were humankind to ditch fossil fuels for say - abundant clean electrical power and hydrogen fuel produced from Magma Energy, we'd deslainate water to irrigate arid land - rather than burn forests, we'd produce our own fresh water, irrigate arid land, and cattle would turn scrub into arable land!
AVERAGE family in Europe: food 20% of income; housing 70%. In Indonesia: the other way round. Solve that puzzle first.
(I made the nrs up but you know what I mean).
With regenerative/organic/biological farming product prices will have to increase for the farmer to earn a decent income. The consumer however cannot pay for it in both cases.
This former rabid carnivore is now a vegan.
Just a question 🙋♂️
How does feeding pets fit into the total picture.
Compared to live stock for meat it's very very very very small number...so round it off
@@drbachimanchi
Not sure about that in UK. I think it’s quite large. One reason I refuse to have a pet.
Pet food is composed of animal "byproducts" that would have otherwise gone to waste, and a relatively small amount of plant products. Compared to human food, and particularly considering the way that pets enhance our lives, it's a drop in the bucket.
eating pets is frown on
In some areas, buying "reject" meat directly from local farmers (male goat kids, horse meat) can be a resource-effective way to feed predatory pets. These animals would be thrown out otherwise.
In future, insect protein could be a good base for kibble when/if animal byproducts become less accessible.
Glad I decided (or actually it was never a decision) to not have children. I can sleep very well knowing that when I die, I die. Thank you and good night.
If 2 people reduce their beef and lamb consumption by 50%, it is the same as one person entirely stopping their consumption of beef and lamb. I never suggest any person needs to stop eating a specific food. Instead, reducing consumption of these foods to what is a personally sustainable practice is dramatically better than making no change.
Nature does not innately care about some hard distinction between omnivore vs vegetarian vs vegan. Instead, consider one meal changed from beef to chicken to be a win, and even better if it becomes a pattern for more meals (and it need never be the pattern for every meal).
Love your work 🙏🏻
A note to make is that many regenerative techniques aren't new but have actually been carried out and developed by many indigenous communities around the world
Thanx for encouraging people to eat less animals. Sadly the trend is too move away from red meat to eating chickens which apart from being horrendous for the individual chickens causes massive biodiversity issues in itself.
Precision fermentation and lab grown meat are two different things as well...
4:40 "... we can get pretty much all the other nutrients we need from plants too."
Actually it's 100% if you include B12 from algae.
I train with a vegan body builder and his wife both 49 years old. She runs a few marathons a year and he is ripped. They've both been vegan for 15+ years. They seem to be getting everything they need from plants!
And where do animals get their B12 from? Supplements for the most part, which we could consume directly as well.
@@philiptaylor7902 Is that actually true? I have no problem with supplements; I use a lot of them, but this seems like it's not entirely right.
Yes, that is true. In fact I get my B12 mostly from Engevita (yeast flakes in most of my cooking)
@@incognitotorpedo42 It is true. Just like protein (!) animals are unable to synthesise B12 and are entirely dependent on obtaining it through their diet. B12 is only synthesised by said blue green algae and other micro organisms. Pasture fed animals may be able to get enough through the dirt they inevitably ingest but feed lot animals are completely dependent on receiving it as a supplement in their feed. Cut out the middleman, I say.
Diet for a Small Planet explained it all years ago. It should be required reading during adolescence. We don't need animal protein. A little is OK, but much healthier to leave it out.
And, of course, everything you said is pretty spot on, as the human population continues to grow, we've traded quality of life, for quantity of life, not my choice, but majority rules... 😞
I visited Mato Grosso do Sul, it was a famous state for livestock here in Brazil. It’s terrible to see how was devastated. You have mentioned JBS , is a Brazilian company and I don’t know how this company grows so fast.
Such a beautiful place. Visited over 10 years ago and you could already see only patches of jungle with the very contrasting pasture and those funny looking white cows. Can't imagine how worse it is now :/
One has to be so careful when evaluating this information. Proponents of moving away from meat never tell you that crops fed to animals are mostly byproducts of the stuff fed to humans.
Nor do they tell you about the huge chemical burden and loss of soil carbon in industrial plant farming. Nor do they talk about the health system effects of eating garbage plant based food. It ain't the meat that is making people obese and diabetic.
While we talk about the methane production from cows (efficient users of what is inedible to people), we never talk about the affect of diet on the methane production from people (inefficient plant digesters of even edible plants). Personally, my system has settled tremendously since moving away from grains, rice, pasta, and starchy veggies.
And we need to talk about water use. Actually we don't use water but borrow it. We must not pollute it. There should be no need widespread chemical use that pollutes water with animal husbandry.
In my area, cattle are kept in smaller spaces during the winter and fed hay, giving the rangeland the rest it needs. Nothing wrong with the practice. Manure is an asset. No such thing as too much, just poor management.
I see much more hope in regenerative agriculture. Lots of great stories of restoring grasslands (remember, grasslands are a huge part of our ecology. Its not just forests) and reversing desertification. I think there should be more cows and sheep done this way and less plant crops.
As a beekeeper, I avoid industrial plant production. Its a chemical laden monoculture desert. I go near hay and pasture land. Where I keep bees I have just started to give them trees to diversify landscapes, and provide nectar/pollen for a range of pollinators.
There is no question that range land, properly managed, is far superior to industrial plant production in terms of soil health, biodiversity, water retention, erosion etc.
Our family essential boycotts, as much as possible, industrial agriculture. We buy local grass fed beef, get our pork from Mennonites in the north of our province, raise our own meat chickens, produce our own eggs, catch salmon from the river. We actually rotate our chickens around our orchard and berry crops, and their manure is an important part of our plant health. As they move about, I plant things like clover and borage to improve the nutritional content of their forage and provide nectar sources for bees and other pollinators. They also recycle the waste from our garden and table. Others parts of our property we are maximizing flowering trees to benefit bees, and are trying to get native stuff reestablished along our stretch of river to improve wildlife and salmon habitat.
Dude, nice. Thanks for spending the time to reply in such detail. It shows that you are aware of the breadth and depth of this hotly debated issue. I appreciate that you are passionate without showing simplistic ideological hate speech to go with it. If only there were more people that could grasp the bigger picture. I get the feeling most skipped reading your comment, since, apart from its length, you don't align to any of the reductionist opinions that trigger an emotional response.
@@nickbringolf1181 Many want to make things better, but do not have a good grasp of the broader issues. I happen to have a degree in plant and insect ecology which is helpful in evaluating information. Both the right and left of the political spectrum make sweeping broad statements that do not stand up to scrutiny. Here in Canada, the left tend to be in cities and I find them often quite ignorant of agriculture and land use issues. It results in bad policy related to rural folk and there is a huge divide. If science wants to maintain credibility, it better get things right. Ideologues are not welcome.
@@leroyharder4491 I couldn't agree more about public policy on the environment and agriculture. I hope that small land holders like ourselves with an understanding, awareness and real connection with nature's cycles can hold out against the misguided city voters and industrial agriculture. All the best to you and your family.
I agree, we need to eat less beef.
Repeal the enclosure act and eat local.produce and charge vat on plane fuel to stop hauling food round the planet .
Transportation of food is a small fraction of the total greenhouse gas footprint of food.
@@incognitotorpedo42Not the way America does it. Our chicken travels to more nations than most people ever do.
"We need to talk about you starving" NOT your grandchildren starving! Does NOBODY understand what's going on, on this planet NOW?!!!
Statistically most of the people with access to a RUclips video are not starving. And as sad as it is, it's easier for people to care about their imaginary future descendants than hungry strangers.
Yes. Over 7 billion people are being fed.
@@kdub6593 We were easily feeding 7 billion, but as the climate crisis affects food production more and more EVERYWHERE, expect your family to struggle to find food in a decade or less!
@@gamingtonight1526 Increased CO2 levels will increase crop outputs and the world will become greener. Furthermore, an increase in global temperatures will make available millions of more acreage for farming. Also, increased temperatures will lead to more rainfall. Plants love CO2, warm weather and rain. You're wrong, climate change is a positive for feeding the world.
There is no climate crisis. IT is the worlds natural cycle. See Lion King circle of life. Giving those groups money does nothing.
Even as an environmental scientist that likes to stay updated, i learned quite a few things. Thank you.
The amount of food waste was absolutely staggering though.
When I saw your title I thought you were going to talk about soils. It is estimated that there are only 60 years of usable soil left based on current land management practices. Soil is the 2nd largest store of carbon after the oceans and degraded soils have transferred some or all (desertification) of their carbon to the atmosphere. Soil can be rebuilt but at a much slower pace than what is lost through erosion (wind and water). Presenting soil would be a good idea as it is very fundamental to agriculture and has impacts on the water, carbon and nitrogen cycles. Nature uses chemistry and biology to grow plants as does regenerative agricultural practices unlike the chemistry only approach of fertilizer, insecticide, pesticide which all kill the biology.
The older I get the better.I feel about my decision to not have any children
exactly! Things are getting worse and the rate at which things are getting worse keeps accelerating, such that the chit will hit the fan a lot sooner than people think
My five adult kids told me that they're not having kids because of what I told them. I've been researching climate disaster since 1977 when two top government scientists told me about it
@@billyjoesmo8251 I knew Idiocracy was prophetic as soon as I saw it. 😆
@@livethemoment5148 I knew Idiocracy was prophetic as soon as I saw it. 😆
@@bzick405 odd things my adult kids when they talk to their friends the friends say why do you use such big words and they are ridiculed for it. If you're smart and use a wide vocabulary has now become a bad thing 🤫
“What can you and I do to help..?” Um…guessing that we could increase our consumption of fast food burgers&fries calories so as to terminate our lives from heart disease and diabetes…sooner rather than later.
@Just have a think.
Before anything. Hello from Trujillo Perú.
I really enjoyed watching your informative videos.
But today I feel you have been very one sided.
Petrochemical fertilisers are the most common and cheapest fertilisers like ammonium nitrate, super phosphate and potassium sulfate.
Five antibiotics are most regularly reported to be used in plant agriculture: streptomycin (the most used antibiotic worldwide), oxytetracycline, kasugamycin, oxolinic acid (OA) and gentamicin (McManus, 2014; Sundin and Wang, 2018; Miller et al., 2022).
Pesticides can cause short-term adverse health effects, called acute effects, as well as chronic adverse effects that can occur months or years after exposure. Examples of acute health effects include stinging eyes, rashes, blisters, blindness, nausea, dizziness, diarrhea and death.
Many studies showed positive associations between pesticide exposure and solid tumours. The most consistent associations were found for brain and prostate cancer. An association was also found between kidney cancer in children and their parents' exposure to pesticides at work.
As usual .....excellent. you have covered all the points!
Excellent overview. The necessary facts are on the table.
Quickly and substantially/massively reducing meat and dairy consumption in industrialised countries remains a top priority.
Greed and Inequality at the heart of Food allocation as well as other resources! Some small number of humans are hoarding vast quantities of resources and food. Getting this shared more equally is the real solution to Human Sustainability! That is why I am Voting for The Green Party to get levers of power at least working in the direction of healing rather than destruction!!!
Inequality is the natural order of literally everything. Shouting slogans at people doesn't change that.
Except we aren’t like all the other animals in many aspects. So trying to say this is just nature does not align with what we do generally.
@@NomadAlly When I say the "Natural order of things", I mean the natural order of literally everything. Stars, biomass, language, etc. And yes, it aligns precisely with even what we do. Case in point: Here you are complaining about it.
If been Canvassing Green Party all week. We need a kinder working attitude to each other and the world. As an aging hippie (85) I remember food rationing (UK) but don’t remember being hungry. I cook from scratch, grow my own veg and bottle (can) what is in glut.
I don’t do waste but plastic packaging still gets in my house and I hate it.
One of my daughters is overseeing a Tofu plant and my niece and family run an organic farm. Sheep are the animals there. It’s been a hard year with all the rain Climate in the north means animals grazing is the most efficient way of getting goodness from grass. We only need about a tenth of all the livestock to keep people healthy
Culling deer annually in Scotland would probably gives Scots all the high density protein they need.
Depends on the country you live in, but if you're in the US, voting for the Green Party (or any third party) is like a vote for fascism and drill baby drill.
Please add: temperature impact on crop yields. Higher temperatures will reduce photosynthesis and reduce crop growth. Even if theres no draught or flood.
So, we should stop eating animals since they require way more calories (from crops) than humans? Thanks for pointing that out
Exactly. Corn yields can drop by over 25% when they are in temperatures over 90°F.
With all the recent craze about paleo, ketogenic and more recently ´carnivore ‘ diet we are not taking the direction we suggest
That's a backlash mixed with very deliberate astroturfing by the multinational meat conglomerates.
What a fantastic video. I'll be sharing this around.
I went vegan 3 years ago, prompted by environmental concerns but then solidified after exploring the 'animal ethics' aspect. I'm genuinely so happy I did and have no intention of going back. I've improved my cooking and use of flavours. For anyone who is interested, honestly it's not as hard as you might think. You can do it!
Nice one, Dave! Great vid on a complex subject, informatively presented.
If you fed cow's hemp instead of grain and corn, they would have much better digestion, health and not produce as much methane.
And you don't need a metric fuckton of fertilizer and water to grow it.🤷
We already feed livestock food byproduct that we would not eat anyway.
Or eat the hemp yourself!
@@philiptaylor7902 Not sure how much nutritional value you could attain from hemp with your digestive tract
@@olafsigursons How much energy n effort does it take to grow said waste products ?
@@eyewonder6448 The seeds, not the whole plant! 33% protein and a source of Omega 3. You can also eat the buds baked in muffins for example, or so I’m told, but not for the nutritional value……..
Crop failure has now become a normal event😢
B-bbbbb-BUT CO2 IS PLANT FOOD?!
I've noticed that mangoes from my parent's country keep getting more and more expensive, year on year
That's with the currency devaluing too. I can see a future where they'll restrict exports. If mango crops were "normal", the price wouldn't be so high when exported. The mangoes you get in the supermarkets are relatively cheap. The honey mangoes from India and Pakistan tend to be pricier, and require even more ideal conditions than the chunky chewy ones in the supermarkets
Crop failure has always been a normal event.
@@SurmaSampo unfortunately the percentage is very abnormal we're looking at Food shortages
@@SurmaSampo It's not been this bad before
Stopped eating animals when I turned 60 - 8 years ago - not only does this dramatically reduce your footprint on this planet, it also dramatically improves your health - it’s the least we can do for our kids and their kids
There is a counter argument about including livestock in agriculture - not to the current level - raising livestock on appropriately managed grassland has a significant benefit in soil health and the sequestration of carbon within the soil. Look at the work of Alan Savory and others. Just saying get rid of livestock is far to simplistic an approach. It can be argued that it is the livestock sectors that should be very carefully evaluated is not grazed cattle and sheep, but pigs and poultry. I would agree that intensive feedlot beef is very questionable, particularly when the feed is produced using unsustainable water extraction to irrigate crops or at the cost on virgin rainforest.