Carbon News
Two recent articles piqued my interest because they offer a positive perspective on how agriculture affects carbon cycling. I found both articles heartening because their content portrays agriculture enterprises in a positive light, which is like a breath of fresh air in today’s environment where assigning agriculture a major portion of the blame for “climate change” is common.
First, some background since carbon is touted as the major culprit that is responsible for climate change.
• Most all human endeavors on this planet involve the use of fossil fuels to power activities of everyday life, and the burning of fossil fuels results in a release of greenhouse gases [GHG] into the atmosphere. These GHG’s [CO2 is the most significant GHG] are portrayed as being responsible for the planet’s warming trend that is occurring.
• Modern agriculture uses fossil fuels to propel machinery and to provide the energy to produce fertilizers and pesticides that are used in the production of a crop. Thus, it is easy to assign a major portion of the blame for climate change to agricultural endeavors.
• Decaying organic matter in forest, grassland, and agricultural settings releases carbon into the atmosphere, and this also contributes to atmospheric degradation. These processes associated with agricultural enterprises make agriculture an easy target to blame for climate change.
• The world is now warming faster than at any time in recorded history. Fossil fuels are the largest contributor to global climate change, and account for over 75% of global GHG emissions and over 90% of all CO2 emissions.
• Global warming and climate change are not synonymous. Rather, global warming is a major component of climate change.
• Carbon footprint is defined as the total amount of GHG’s [e.g. CO2, methane] that is emitted into the atmosphere from or as the result of a particular operation or activity. A carbon footprint is usually reported in equivalents of CO2 emissions.
A FarmProgress article titled “U.S. soy’s carbon footprint has decreased” by Jennifer Latzke provides the following information.
• The carbon footprint from raising soybeans in the U.S. decreased by 19% in 2021 compared to findings from 2010 and 2015.
• The carbon footprint for meal produced from U.S. soybeans decreased by 6%, for crude soybean oil by 22%, and for refined soybean oil by 8%. These data are from a report commissioned by USB and NOPA.
• Findings published in the report also determined that 1) farmers are changing energy consumption by using less tillage and expanding use of cover crops, and 2) manufacturers continue to improve oilseed processing efficiency by, among other things, switching from coal to natural gas as a fuel source.
• Click here for the full report prepared by Sustainable Solutions Corp.
The March 2024 issue of CSA News has a “Letter to the Editor” titled “Don’t Blame Cattle for Carbon Cycle Disruption” by Kathryn Sasowsky. Interesting quotes from this letter follow.
• “The very important thing to remember about the increase in greenhouse gases over the last 150+ years is that it is because we have upset the carbon cycle. Agriculture is a small and not insignificant part of greenhouse gas emissions, but even when the potency of methane is taken into account, it is not the main source of the problem.”
• “We have upset the carbon cycle by cutting down forests and oxygenating soil organisms through mechanized agriculture, which in turn increases the rate of organic matter decomposition.” “Both of these activities have increased the release of oldish carbon...back to the atmosphere.”
• “Don’t blame cattle, however, because they are eating current carbon, belching current carbon, and producing meat, milk, and manure with current carbon.... Cattle have not upset the carbon cycle because the greenhouse gas is recycled, i.e., no net change.”
• “The much more important change in the carbon cycle over the last 150+ years is the release of ancient carbon to the atmosphere by combustion of fossil fuels.” “Note that this carbon had been in the atmosphere in ancient times. When we now use it for transportation, production of electricity, etc., we are upsetting the carbon cycle because it is not being created at the same rate that we are burning it.”
• “I hate to see meat and dairy production, or even agriculture, be demonized when the real culprit is the use of ancient [hence “fossil”] fuels.”
The above quotes from Dr. Sasowsky are certainly worth considering when agriculture in general is painted as a major culprit in the climate change discussion.
The bottom line from all of this is humans like/need to eat, so they should find a culprit other than agriculture to rightfully blame for the climate change that is occurring across the planet. To limit agricultural activities based on their perceived significant contributions to climate change on the planet invites less food production to feed an increasing world human population. After all, 1) U.S. grocery shelves are well-stocked today because of the abundant productivity of U.S. agriculture, and for this to continue, agriculture must be allowed to move forward, and 2) since there is no foreseeable curtailment in the world’s population growth, and since society in general has determined that all of these people must be fed, agriculture is the only source of this required food. So society should consider something other than a curtailment of agriculture to address/solve the climate change crisis that engulfs the planet and that is written about so frequently in myriad venues.
Composed by Larry G. Heatherly, Apr. 2024, larryh91746@gmail.com