February, 02 2011, 11:43am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Elliott Negin,Media Director,enegin@ucsusa.org
New Report Recommends Ways to Lower Global Warming Emissions from U.S. Beef Production
Pasture-Fed Beef Has Significant Advantages over CAFOs
WASHINGTON
U.S. beef cattle are responsible for 160 million metric tons of
global warming emissions every year -- equivalent to the annual
emissions from 24 million cars and light trucks. But unlike American
drivers, farmers who raise beef on pasture can reduce global warming
emissions by storing, or sequestering, carbon in pasture soils,
according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned
Scientists (UCS).
"Given the threat that climate change poses, all sectors of our
economy - including agriculture -- have to do their part," said UCS
Senior Scientist Doug Gurian-Sherman, the author of the report. "There
is a range of affordable ways beef producers, especially those who raise
beef on pasture, can significantly reduce their impact by cutting
emissions and capturing more carbon in soil."
The report, "Raising the Steaks: Global Warming and Pasture-Raised
Beef Production in the United States," concluded that U.S. pasture beef
producers could reduce their annual global warming impacts by as much as
140 million metric tons, the equivalent of taking 21 million cars and
light trucks off the road.
Carbon sequestration, the report found, has the most potential for
mitigating pasture beef's climate impact. Such practical methods as
preventing overgrazing, increasing pasture crop productivity with a mix
of crops, and adding adequate amounts of nutrients from manure, legume
crops or fertilizers, could capture significant carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions from a variety of sources.
Pasture beef farmers also can adopt practices to cut emissions.
Pasture beef cattle emit the three major heat-trapping gases - methane,
nitrous oxide and CO2 - but the amount of CO2 is such a small percentage
of total U.S. global warming emissions that the report did not include
it. Per ton, methane and nitrous oxide are much more damaging to the
climate than CO2. Methane has 23 times the warming effect of CO2, and
nitrous oxide is nearly 300 times worse.
The 35 million head of cattle the U.S. beef industry raises annually
release more than 103 million metric tons of the CO2 equivalent of
methane into the atmosphere. Meanwhile, crop and pasture sources of
nitrogen -- such as manure and fertilizer -- generate 57 million metric
tons of the CO2 equivalent of nitrous oxide.
All beef cattle spend their first months -- and sometimes more than a
year -- on pasture or rangeland, grazing on grass, alfalfa or other
forage crops because feeding cattle grain their entire lives would cause
life-threatening illnesses. Some beef cattle live on pasture until
slaughter, but most U.S. beef cattle are fattened, or "finished," for
several months in CAFOs (confined animal feeding operations) on corn and
other grains.
The UCS report recommended a number of approaches that would reduce
the impact of pasture-raised beef. Most of them are more suitable for
the finishing stage of fully pasture-raised cattle systems -- which have
environmental and nutritional advantages over CAFOs -- but they also
could apply to the many months CAFO-bound cattle spend grazing on
rangeland.
One key is to improve cattle's diet, which, in some tests, reduced
methane production of pasture-raised cattle by 15 to 30 percent. More
research is needed to accurately estimate its potential to reduce cattle
emissions nationally. Animals fed on rapidly growing or more nutritious
types of grasses and other pasture plants, which are more easily
digested, produce less methane than cattle eating older or otherwise
less nutritious pasture plants. On this more climate-friendly diet, the
animals also grow faster, need less food, and therefore produce fewer
emissions.
Gurian-Sherman examined dozens of peer-reviewed studies and found
that cattle fed a mixture of high-quality grasses and legumes such as
alfalfa produced less global warming emissions than animals fed on
grasses alone. One particularly promising legume is a plant known as
birdsfoot trefoil. Like all legumes, it adds nitrogen to the soil, which
improves the productivity of pasture grasses. But unlike most other
legumes, it contains natural chemicals known as condensed tannins, which
reduce methane production during digestion.
There are also ways to reduce nitrous oxide, which is produced by the
action of soil microbes on nitrogen in industrial fertilizers and
manure and crop residues. The report recommends that farmers use only
enough nitrogen to produce adequate pasture crop productivity because
excess use results in especially high rates of nitrous oxide. It also
recommends that farmers spread cattle more evenly around a pasture to
minimize manure buildup in particular spots. That allows more nitrogen
to be absorbed by pasture plants, leaving less for soil microbes to turn
into nitrous oxide.
Some studies have found that CAFO systems
produce less heat-trapping emissions than pasture systems, but those
studies relied on data that assumed low pasture nutritional quality. The
scientific literature documents that planting higher quality pasture
crops, using adequate fertilizer, and managing grazing "intensity" would
substantially reduce the disparity between CAFO and pasture systems.
Smart pasture operations also have other advantages. Pasture-raised
cattle require far fewer antibiotics than CAFO-raised cattle, resulting
in fewer harmful antibiotic-resistant pathogens, such as Salmonella and E. coli. And pasture-raised beef contains healthier fats.
"The Department of Agriculture has a role to play here, too,"
Gurian-Sherman said. "It should sponsor more research to improve pasture
crop quality and productivity, and provide incentives to help farmers
adopt climate-friendly pasture practices."
The report has implications beyond U.S. beef production,
Gurian-Sherman added. Worldwide, beef contributes a substantially
greater proportion of total climate change emissions than it does in the
United States, so adopting these approaches internationally would have a
significant impact. Moreover, beef production is only one facet of
animal agriculture. According to a 2006 report by the U.N. Food and
Agriculture Organization, livestock farming worldwide generates nearly
20 percent of all global warming emissions.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
LATEST NEWS
Privacy Defenders Decry 'Spy Draft' in Section 702 Renewal Advanced by Senate
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," explained one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Civil liberties defenders on Thursday decried the U.S. Senate's advancement of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which critics say lawmakers are trying to ram through without protection against warrantless surveillance and with a provision that would effectively make every American a spy whether they like it or not.
Senators voted 67-32 in favor of a cloture motion to begin voting on RISAA, a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expires on Friday. FISA—a highly controversial law that has been abused hundreds of thousands of times—allows warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens but also often sweeps up Americans' communication data in the process.
In a 273-147 vote last week, House lawmakers passed RISAA, including an amendment critics say dramatically expands the government's unchecked surveillance authority by compelling a wide range of individuals and organizations—including businesses and the media—to cooperate in government spying operations.
This so-called "Make Everyone a Spy" clause would allow the attorney general or director of national intelligence to force electronic communication service providers to "immediately provide... all information, facilities, or assistance" the government deems necessary.
"This bill would basically allow the government to institute a spy draft," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned Thursday. "It will lead to significant distrust between journalists and sources, not to mention everyone else."
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," he added. "Regardless of whether the end target of the surveillance is a foreigner, it's indisputable that the people the government can enlist to conduct the surveillance are Americans. And what's more, these civilians ordered to spy would be gagged and sworn to secrecy under the law."
In addition to the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision, civil libertarians have sounded the alarm over the House lawmakers' rejection of an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the legislation.
Critics accuse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and colleagues including Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) of trying to rush a vote on RISAA while disingenuously claiming Section 702's powers will expire with the law on Friday. That's a misleading claim, as a national security court earlier this month approved the government's request to continue a disputed surveillance program even if Section 702 lapses.
"There is simply no defense of Majority Leader Schumer and Sen. Warner's duplicity," Sean Vitka, policy director at the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement. "House Intelligence Committee leaders poisoned this bill with one of the most repugnant surveillance expansions in history, and apparently the administration was too busy attacking commonsense privacy protections to notice. They know it, we know it, and now the American people know it."
"There can be no mistake: Sens. Schumer and Warner just helped hand the next president an unspeakably dangerous weapon that will be used against their own constituents," Vitka added. "And there is only one vote left to stop it."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—who
said earlier this week that the bill would dragoon the American people into becoming "an agent for Big Brother"—on Thursday argued that "this issue demands a debate about meaningful reforms, not a rushed vote to rubber-stamp more warrantless government surveillance powers."
In an attempt to tackle the warrantless surveillance issue, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) on Thursday proposed a RISAA amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before accessing Americans' private communications.
However, the amendment contains exceptions to the warrant requirement in the event of unspecified emergencies and cyberattacks.
"If the government wants to spy on the private communications of Americans, they should be required to get approval from a judge—just as our Founders intended," Durbin said in a statement. "Congress has a responsibility to the American people to get this right."
The Biden administration and U.S. intelligence agencies vehemently oppose the Durbin-Cramer amendment. The White House called the measure "a reckless policy choice contrary to the key lessons of 9/11 and not grounded in any constitutional requirement or statute."
"The amendment outright bars the government from gaining access to lawfully collected information using terms associated with U.S. persons," the administration added. "Exceptions to that prohibition are narrow and unworkable. They are insufficient to protect our national security."
On Wednesday, the House also passed the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act, which would prohibit the government from buying Americans' information from data brokers if it would otherwise need a warrant to obtain the data, which includes location and internet records. The Senate will now take up FANFSA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Opposite of Leadership': US Vetoes Palestine's UN Membership
Palestine's permanent observer at the United Nations said the resolution's failure "will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination."
Apr 18, 2024
U.S. President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday used the country's veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block Palestine's bid to become a full member of the U.N.
While 12 nations voted in favor of Palestinian membership and two abstained, the United States is one of five countries—along with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom—who have veto authority at the Security Council.
Since Israel launched what the International Court of Justice has said is a "plausibly" genocidal assault of the Gaza Strip in response to a Hamas-led October attack, the Biden administration has blocked three cease-fire resolutions at the Security Council. Under mounting global pressure, the U.S. finally abstained last month, allowing a cease-fire measure to pass.
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, the Biden administration was pressuring other countries to oppose the Palestinian Authority's renewed membership effort so it could possibly avoid a veto, according to leaked cables obtained by The Intercept.
"Take a moment to ponder how isolated Biden has made the U.S.," said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, after the veto. "Biden lobbied Japan, South Korea, and Ecuador HARD to oppose the Palestine resolution so that the U.S. wouldn't have to veto. They refused. So Biden cast his fourth veto in seven months (!!) This is the opposite of leadership."
In addition to the nations Parsi highlighted, Algeria, China, France, Guyana, Malta, Mozambique, Russia, Sierra Leone, and Slovenia voted for giving Palestine full U.N. membership while Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstained.
After the vote, U.N. Newsreported on remarks from Riyad Mansour, a U.N. permanent observer for the state of Palestine:
"We came to the Security Council today as an important historic moment, regionally and internationally, so that we could salvage what can be saved. We place you before a historic responsibility to establish the foundations of a just and comprehensive peace in our region."
Council members were given the opportunity "to revive the hope that has been lost among our people" and to translate their commitment towards a two-state solution into firm action "that cannot be maneuvered or retracted," and the majority of council members "have risen to the level of this historic moment, and they have stood on the side of justice and freedom and hope, in line with the ethical and humanitarian and legal principles that must govern our world and in line with simple logic."
"The fact that this resolution did not pass will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination," Mansour added. "We will not stop in our effort. The state of Palestine is inevitable. It is real. Perhaps they see it as far away, but we see it as near, and we are the faithful."
Parsi said that "a Western-friendly senior Global South diplomat" told him of Biden's veto: "Whatever agonizing claim the U.S. had to lead a self-appointed free world has died a very loud public death on the Security Council horseshoe tonight. YOU CAN'T LEAD IF YOU CAN'T LISTEN."
Biden, a Democrat seeking reelection in November, has faced fierce criticism in the United States and around the world for U.S. complicity in Israel's war on Gaza—which Hamas, not the Palestinian Authority, has controlled for nearly two decades. In under seven months, Israeli forces have killed 33,970 Palestinians, injured another 76,770, displaced most of the besieged enclave's 2.3 million population, devastated civilian infrastructure, and severely limited the flow of lifesaving humanitarian assistance.
Israel—which already got $3.8 billion in annual U.S. military aid before October 7—continues to receive weapons support from the Biden administration, even as a growing chorus of critics, including some Democrats in Congress, argues that the arms transfers violate U.S. and international law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': Columbia Greenlights Police Crackdown on Anti-War Encampment
Even after dozens of students were arrested, hundreds "rushed to take the place of their classmates" and continued the protest.
Apr 18, 2024
The arrests of dozens of Columbia University and Barnard College students on Thursday "galvanized" other supporters of Palestinian rights on the campuses, as hundreds of students occupied the school's western lawn after New York City police filled at least two buses with protesters who had been detained for setting up an encampment.
"Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest," chanted hundreds of students as they marched around the area where organizers had set up a tent encampment early Wednesday morning.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik informed the campus community on Thursday that she had authorized the police to clear the encampment.
As it has been in the past, the school has become a center of anti-war protests—and crackdowns by school officials and the police—since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in October.
Pro-Palestinian students and alumni have demanded that Columbia divest from companies that profit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories and cancel its dual degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia in November suspended the campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine—an action that pushed the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal to file a lawsuit on behalf of the students last month.
On Thursday, police and Columbia employees took down about 50 tents that had been up for more than a day and disposed of them in trash cans and alleyways—but The New York Times reported later that "demonstrators repitched a couple of tents, and ... recovered the main signage from the encampment as well," while hundreds of students were "still gathered and chanting on the south side of the grass."
The arrests came a day after Shafik testified before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on campus.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose daughter, Isra Hirsi, was among the Barnard students who were suspended on Thursday for participating in the encampment protest, questioned Shafik about whether antisemitic protests have actually taken place at Columbia, prompting the president to say there have not.
"There has been a rise in targeting and harassment against anti-war protesters, because it's been pro-war and anti-war protesters is what it seems, like, correct?" asked Omar.
"Correct," replied Shafik.
On Thursday, Omar posted on social media two images of protesters at Columbia: one from the encampment this week, and one from 1968, when students protested the U.S. war in Vietnam.
New York City Council member Tiffany Cabán was among those who condemned the university's crackdown on the protests on Thursday.
"Suspending and arresting Columbia/Barnard student activists and disbanding student organizations—including Jewish students and organizations—doesn't combat antisemitism or increase safety," said Cabán. "All it does is punish and intimidate those who believe in human rights for Palestinians. Shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular