Tag Archives: alternative
Revealed: The Keys To Reducing The Impact Of Agriculture On Climate Change
Research published in the journal Science (5th July 2013) shows that allowing land use to be determined purely by agricultural markets results in considerable financial and environmental costs to the public. While the research has looked specifically at the UK, the same methods could be applied to any area of the world with similar results for many countries. Land use in most of Europe is dominated by agriculture. Nearly half the total annual value of EU agriculture is based on public financial support surpassing 70%, 40% and 30% in the case of Ireland, UK and Spain, respectively to name a few. The study demonstrates the importance of bringing ecosystem services into decision-making and to make full use of the potential gains from working with the natural environment and the underpinning biophysical processes. The study acknowledges that this does not come without practical challenges. A key challenge concerns the mechanics of securing the participation of farmers in delivering land-use changes to benefit society. A recommendation that the research team puts forward involves the reform of the European Union’s (EU’s) Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Recasting the CAP as a Payment for Ecosystem Services mechanism would reward farmers for delivering a bundle of key of ecosystem services including climate change mitigation by the reduction of emission of greenhouse gases, water regulation, recreation and biodiversity conservation. “The EU’s Common Agricultural Policy must account for the cost of not working with nature. It is time to reward farmers for securing the vital ecosystem services that are highly valued by society. Farmers can be the stewards of our landscapes so that we as a society we can pass them in a healthy state to the next generations.” Continue reading
Impact Investor and Advocate Discusses Sustainable Farming and the Mitigation of Climate Change
Philippe van den Bossche, an impact investor and advocate, discusses how sustainable farming practices can mitigate climate change. New York, NY (PRWEB) July 24, 2013 On July 24, impact investor and advocate of sustainable agriculture, Philippe van den Bossche, discusses how sustainable farming can lessen climate change . According to a July 17, 2013 article published on TreeHugger.com, entitled, “More research shows sustainable agriculture can mitigate climate change,” one third of greenhouse gasses being produced by humans in the past ten years can be attributed to poor crop cultivation, animal production and deforestation. However, new research is showing that improving crop yields – growing more food in a set amount of space – could reduce the emissions we release into the atmosphere by “12 percent per calorie.” The study, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, found that “sustainable farming approaches can accomplish both goals of reducing emissions and providing more food.” Hugo Valin, an IIASA researcher who led the study, elaborates: “The most efficient way to ensure sustainable intensification on the crop side is to rely on practices and technologies that are not more fertilizer-demanding, such as new varieties, improved rotations, integrated crop-livestock practices, and precision farming.” United Nations Special Rapporteur, Olivier De Schutter, recently told the UN Rights Council about the impact that “small-scale” sustainable agriculture can have on food production and the possibility of alleviating poverty in certain developing nations. “To feed 9 billion people in 2050, we urgently need to adopt the most efficient farming techniques available. Today’s scientific evidence demonstrates that agro ecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live especially in unfavorable environments.” Philippe van den Bossche, an impact investor and advocate for sustainable agriculture, comments on the recent findings: “Today’s conventional farming practices saturate farmlands with toxic pesticides and fertilizers, strip soil of nutrients and contribute to desertification. Utilizing sustainable, organic agriculture is one way to get our environment back into a healthy state.” Philippe van den Bossche is an impact entrepreneur, impact investor and Chairman/ Owner of Advancing Eco Agriculture (AEA), a leading organic agricultural consulting and manufacturing company located in Middlefield, Ohio. AEA provides consulting services and specialty nutritional materials to farms throughout the United States and Canada. Mr. van den Bossche is an advocate for organic farming and agriculture. ##### Continue reading
Bioenergy A Burning Question For Tasmania’s Forests
24 July 2013 Bioenergy a burning question for Tasmania’s forests AUTHORS Stewart Williams Russell Warman DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Stewart Williams teaches and researches at the University of Tasmania. He receives funding from AHURI and NCCARF. Russell Warman has previously worked as a policy analyst with ENGOs involved in Tasmania’s forest negotiations. Provides funding as a Member of The Conversation. utas.edu.au Harnessing the energy in wood may help wean Australia off fossil fuels. Flickr/chriscardinal With Australia trying to meet renewable energy targets and reduce emissions wherever possible, we should be considering bioenergy. Bioenergy can be made by burning biomass in a variety of forms, including agricultural by-products such as rice husks, poppy seeds, sugarcane waste and manure. It can also be made from forestry by-products such as sawmill and wood wastes. Tasmania is a prime candidate for such developments. Visiting international researcher Professor Andreas Rothe of the University of Applied Sciences, Weihenstephan , has recently released findings of a six-month study he conducted for Forestry Tasmania. He suggests that energy produced from wood “could lift Tasmania’s bioenergy contribution beyond 30%”. There seem to good reasons for Australia to transition towards greater use of bioenergy. It is a renewable and relatively secure energy source that can reduce CO 2 emissions by replacing fossil fuels. It seems a relatively straightforward proposal, especially given Prof Rothe’s experience in Europe. People of forested parts of Europe – such as Prof Rothe’s home state of Bavaria in Germany, and Scandinavia – have longstanding cultural practises and economies based on forest resources, with considerable uptake of bioenergy produced from wood. But people in Australia have a different relationship with forests. Unlike much of Europe, Australia has forests with little or no history of industrial resource extraction. Australian people have different values and perceptions about how those resources should be used. These differences are reflected in bitter conflicts over native forests in most of the states, not least in Tasmania. Recent efforts to forge peace in the Tasmanian forests signal progress. Professor Rothe takes some of these issues into consideration, and excludes the use of old-growth forest from his research. Tasmania’s bioenergy aspirations aren’t new. In 2002 Forestry Tasmania planned for a 30 megawatt bioenergy plant at a site south of Hobart, meant to burn wood residue and provide electricity to run the site and a surplus to the grid. It now includes a modern regrowth sawmill, log yard and rotary peel veneer mill. But the power plant has never been built. The proposal was submitted to the State’s planning authority but it failed to attract investment. This financial hesitation reflects uncertainties around the benefits of bioenergy. Can bioenergy substitute fossil fuels? Should we put new pressure on resources such as forests, clean air and water, which are already critically scarce (and key to other services including biodiversity conservation and food production)? Early on environmentalists and some industry sectors supported bioenergy in North America and Europe – backed by significant subsidies. But recently this support has started to unravel as mainstream economists question the logic of the subsidies, investors move away , courts intervene , and environmental organisations question the cost of the growth in biomass demand. Even before these doubts were raised in the Northern Hemisphere, there was a wariness in Australia about claims to make use of “waste” or “residue” wood in biomass. The experience of the rise of the wood-chip industry, initially slated as an industry sideline for waste logs, into a driver of native forest logging, is still fresh in the memories of many Australians. Tasmania is a prime candidate for any developments in bioenergy. Local and rural communities across the state are undergoing major changes. Bioenergy could be part of innovations as the forestry industry is restructured. But a lot more work will be required if the use of bioenergy from wood is to have any chance of going ahead with widespread community support, especially if native forests are involved. This issue, towards which the Tasmanian Forest Agreement is perhaps making some fragile first steps, concerns the need to forge a broader social consensus on how native forests are used and valued. It might be some time before Australia is ready for bioenergy. By then, ironically enough, Europe and North America might be winding back from their initial enthusiasm. Continue reading
