Studies Found 7 Ways to Sequester Carbon are Equal in Regenerative Agriculture
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 июл 2024
- A recent studies that reveal seven equally effective ways to sequester carbon through regenerative agriculture practices. From cover cropping to agroforestry, we'll explain each method in detail, backed by scientific research and real-world examples.
Learn how these techniques can be implemented on your farm to increase soil carbon levels and contribute to a healthier farm.
Don't forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more videos on sustainable agriculture and environmental innovation!
#RegenerativeAgriculture #SustainableFarming #SoilHealth #regenerativefarming #Agroforestry #CoverCrops #Biodiversity #EcoFriendlyFarming #SustainablePractices
Great video every politician should have to watch all these videos about regenerative farming.
I posted it in Friday for future Germany fb group. Lets shere this were ever we can. Also directly to local politicians.
Politicians don't care about nothing but money! No money in this so it would go no where. In reality they would pay a scientist to say it's not true.
"Why do they insist on industrial, monocrop agriculture when permaculture is so much better for the environment?" I'll say it in one word: control. Henry Kissinger once said: "if you control the food then you control the nation." Industrial farming means that fewer people are needed to farm and that food production can be absolutely controlled by the elite 0.1%. Farmers are the most independent, no nonsense, actively problem solving people on planet Earth, bar no one. As they're learning in Europe right now, if you anger the farmers, the farmers will inform you of what the pecking order is. They're passing policies that are destroying small farming operations across the world, and forcing these generational farmers to sell out to corporations. It all comes back to the WEF, Great Reset, Klaus Schwab, Black Rock/ State Street/ Vanguard, Digital Currency, and ESG scores. It isn't even a conspiracy theory anymore. They've outright advertised it on RUclips with commercials they made promoting it. "You will own nothing and be happy."
@@carsonrush3352 Agreed 100% You are well informed and that was a perfect short precise statement.
Come to Uganda and learn about permaculture in its natural and rudimentary sense 😎😎
Which study are you referring to in this video?
www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1234108/full?
Polycultures allow for biological regulation of pests and disease. For example, the role of insectivorous birds and parasitic wasps in managing tomato horn worms. The key thing is areas to allow these critters to avoid predators.
Also, improvements in feeding cultures more than a reductionist-type NPK will increase the plant's resilience to pests of every kind.
@@marlan5470
You mean polycultures contribute more to natural fertility? Because they do. More life above means better soil biomes that can improve bioavailabilty of nutrients.
This is a reply to my comment and deserves to be reposted.
@carsonrush3352
20 minutes ago
"Why do they insist on industrial, monocrop agriculture when permaculture is so much better for the environment?" I'll say it in one word: control. Henry Kissinger once said: "if you control the food then you control the nation." Industrial farming means that fewer people are needed to farm and that food production can be absolutely controlled by the elite 0.1%. Farmers are the most independent, no nonsense, actively problem solving people on planet Earth, bar no one. As they're learning in Europe right now, if you anger the farmers, the farmers will inform you of what the pecking order is. They're passing policies that are destroying small farming operations across the world, and forcing these generational farmers to sell out to corporations. It all comes back to the WEF, Great Reset, Klaus Schwab, Black Rock/ State Street/ Vanguard, Digital Currency, and ESG scores. It isn't even a conspiracy theory anymore. They've outright advertised it on RUclips with commercials they made promoting it. "You will own nothing and be happy."
1
Reply
Working or restoring a degraded cattle farm with syntropic agroforestry. Planning on having coffee and cocoa as cash crops once the system is working well. In the meantime we will have multiple annual crops and pasture chickens. Long term will be timber production and dairy.
Post links to the studies please
www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1234108/full?
BLESS YOU
Thank You Been Doing it last 8 years started with 4 ducks now have 32 + Goats herd starting this year. Great Information!
In one word, it's called permaculture
Restorative ag is larger scale, better adapted to harvesting equipment. It's a subset of permaculture methods that improves soil, efficiency, etc.
@@b_uppy Its just adding commercial production perspective to PC, but that has consequences to the effectiveness. You cant just add 100 giant tractors to a permaculture system and keep everything else the same, that makes it a different thing.
@@falsename2285
Restorative ag minimizes tractor use so as to avoid soil compaction. Good farmers and ranchers know soil compaction reduces productivity.
Restorative ag is organizing PC to commercial harvest, on a very large scale.
Typical PC fails at that and is too fussy for large scale production, AKA it's very niche.
Restoration ag uses biome-appropriate plants instead of attempting "boutique" growing conditions. It's modeled specifically upon savanna spacing organized into alleycropping, --because it's the optimal spacing for most biomass.
It incorporates livestock as part of the land management team. It's designed to transition easier from conventional ag to large scale permaculture. It's also growing a lot more food better than conventional methods and that's where the *appropriate, but minimized use of technology* comes in.
Restoration ag is something other than "100 tractors" as you mischaractize it...
@@b_uppy You are uninformed. I have been designing and implementing sustainable agriculture systems for 15 years buddy. I have fixed more "appropriately teched out" farms than youve ever seen. Youre wrong. You cannot change the scale of the system to that extent AND keep it sustainable, it will always fail on an energy audit. And from the sound of it, you have never seen real permaculture, only the hippy dippy wannabe version of it.
@@b_uppy You fundamentally dont understand what PC is. I have fixed more "appropriately" teched-out farms than you have ever seen in your life. I have been doing this full time for 15 years dude. You are wrong. What you think of as PC is 1 expression of the concept, the hippy dippy lala land bullshi* type. PC is a series of filters that systems and techniques must be run through in order to insure sustainability, and maximize ecosystem functions and gains, nothing else. Increasing the scale of the system IS what breaks it, you cannot have 1 guy sustainably maintain 1000 acres, its impossible, the system needs to be broken up and a higher HUMAN LABOR input needs to be there or sustainability is not an option, entropy and consumption limitations on resources dictates this. PC is an energy audit. You are misinformed by the way that some people talk about and practice the concept. "boutique" growing conditions, I know what you are talking about, its dumb I agree, it is a misuse of the concepts to try to force unnatural conditions. Essentially you have only seen people using PC through the same thought process pitfalls as what commercial ag did to subsistence farming.
What? No mention of biochar?
The study didn't find it equal to the other systems
What about the increased methane from high density grazing?
Increased methanotrphs, increased plant growth. It's human activity which is a major methane emitter
High density grazing has always been part of Nature. Methane is a cycle. Carbon Dioxide is a cycle. Water is a cycle. Hydrogen is a cycle. Earth has never had so few grazers like today. We need more cows, more bison, more antelope - and not less. You should worry more about the plastic greenhouses that are polluting the land everywhere, and have distorted the meaning of growing "organic" vegetables. For one example, check Almeria, Spain. Then let me know if cattle grazing is the problem.
Supplement the grazing with kelp
@@billiebruv Life is a methane emitter. Reductionist thinking doesn't work when dealing with ultra complex systems. Just doesn't.
The soil sequesters more carbon and this offsets methane. Importantly you avoid overgrazing as that is as bad as CAFOs. High stocking rates must be accompanied with daily/even hourly moves. Grass should never be eaten to below half/seven inches. It's important that sufficient green material remain to protect soil from solarization/dessication, hence the frequent moves.
It has the added benefit of producing more biomass per acre, per year.
The farmers need to make money. It is a difficult story to sell to the farmer: Produce less, manage less, don't specialice on what you are good at, but be a generalist with many different crops and many different animals? This is a very contra-intuitive idea of making more money. Usually, they make all to little money. And use smaller machines, if you are using machines at all? Farmers just love big machines. The biggest tractor and the biggest equipment is the farmers biggest pride. I have no direct relation to farming at all, but have been working at a farming school for 25 years. The pupils are great, but beleive me: The biggest tractor is the best.
The ideas presented may be correct, but they are unsellable for the typical farmer. They need more money. The society needs it to be on an industrial scale, or else too many will work in the fields.
More farmers on the land means more resilience. Larger equipment means more dept, when farmers had smaller tractors and had more diverse farms was the era where farmers where doing really well financially.
Look into high intensity rotational grazing. Same land, more animals, demonstrates increasing profits and land regeneration by updated management practices. See any of many presentations by Mr Savory.
See our videos on scaling regenerative ag. We have two good ones
Changing farming and ranching practices to restorative ones have the most effect.
Accompanying better ag methods with rainwater harvesting earthworks further increases the amount of usable land, especially for agriculture. Small, frequent, hyperlocalized swales, check dams, zai planting pits, etc have the greatest impact.
These have other benefits, such as reducing downstream flooding, ground subsidence, reduced erosion, lower irrigation costs, etc.
Disappointed with this presentation, it was poor on explanation...
Conventional farming is NOT farming; it is mining. When the fertility is reduced to obtain food the soil slowly degrades, becoming less able to produce crops. This fact was not considered for thousands of years. Most desertification is manmade. Successful farms were the result of ignorance and the resilience of nature. From the early 20th century industrialization was applied by a few to maximize profits, at the expense of the many. How? The populace was tricked into using "free" govt. education, i.e., public schools. They had already paid for it with forced (stolen) money. The stated goal of public school was to create obedient servants of political authority, without question/thought by indoctrination. This insidious, malicious psychological system of stunting cognitive growth was developed in Europe to create zombie citizens to be exploited. It was known as "The Prussian System". When it was resisted, questioned, boycotted, governments forced this CHILD ABUSE on the populace. It remains today, expressed as "The Most Dangerous Superstition" by Larken Rose. When superstition trumps reason, survival is impossible. That is why we need to boycott public education for our children's mental health. That would set our species free if the first priority was teaching children how to think.
Industrial agriculture is here to stay. I look forward to the day when regenerative practices can be incorporated into industrial agriculture. My layman’s bet is that various precision agriculture technologies will enable the combination of the two.
Imagine your typical vast corporate farm, with drones able to tend to the various species of plants and animals. Go down a mixed row of crops, squirt tiny amounts of fertilizer on any that need it, while zapping pests and weeds with lasers.
The weed laser tractor. ruclips.net/video/_2s-0wgQWXM/видео.html
Sounds like a computer voice
Concerning that we now think real humans are computers :)
A little generic, but ok.
All true but regenerative agriculture alone cannot begin to feed the 8 billion on the planet. There are just too many mouths to feed. Thus Haber-Bosch & intensive farming (incl monoculture) are now necessary. Furthermore, intensive livestock farming, on its present global scale, is incredibly damaging to the ecosphere.
Check out our videos about scale and regenerative ag
That's a false premise. The opposite of true. Conventional ag is degrading land so bad that it's reducing the amount of land we can grow food on, as well as depleting water sources such as the Oglala Aquifer. As the quality of soil lessens under conventional ag practices, there is a reduction in food and biomass produced.
While things like polycropping mean your main crop will produce at 90%, this is more than made up for in the secondary and tertiary crops alongside. It also has the benefit of more resilienxy in the way of crop failure because if one crop goes, the others may still be viable, or at least usable biomass for the livestock also on the property, for example.