Part 1: What’s the problem?
Dr. Frank Mitloehner, professor and air quality Extension specialist at UC-Davis and director of the CLEAR Center, collaborates with the animal ag sector to create better efficiencies and mitigate pollutants. Mitloehner also focuses on food production challenges that will become global issues as the world population grows to nearly 10 billion by 2050.
One word that isn’t a favorite among some farmers is “sustainability,” mostly because it’s difficult to define. Until recently, sustainability meant operating a farm to keep it productive and solvent while preserving and improving the operation, but today, the term means far more.
While farmers may have previously ignored activists’ claims about sustainability, it’s becoming more difficult to be dismissive. In his interactions with farmers and the public regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, Mitloehner sees problems, some of which will be difficult to solve. His proposal is to develop a toolkit of solutions to improve sustainability in animal agriculture.
“If there’s one thing that isn’t going well in animal agriculture, it’s the way we communicate about it,” said Mitloehner as he told the story of a large dairy farm adjacent to a new housing development. “The people didn’t complain – complaining is for losers. They sued the dairy. Just imagine you suddenly have 1,000 new neighbors who don’t like you and take you to court.”
He said this is the reality confronting farmers and it’s here to stay. And the problem isn’t happening only in California – it’s affecting other states and the world.
One topic that has proven to be the Achilles heel for Mitloehner and animal ag is the impact of livestock on climate. Our “special friends” (Mitloehner’s pet name for activists) use their own statistics to prove what they believe to be the climactic impact of livestock.
To help farmers fully understand what they’re up against, Mitloehner explained the basics of solar radiation and GHGs. “The sun radiates solar beams toward the earth,” he said. “Normally that solar radiation and the heat contained therein would be reflected back to space if there weren’t a blanket of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that form a blanket, retaining some of the solar radiation with the heat, back to earth.” This blanket of gases makes life on Earth possible; without it, Earth would be too cold.
Dr. Frank Mitloehner, professor and air quality Extension specialist at UC-Davis and director of the CLEAR Center, collaborates with the animal ag sector to create better efficiencies and mitigate pollutants. Photo by Sally Colby
“We need greenhouse gases,” said Mitloehner. “The problem is humans are producing too much of these greenhouse gases, and that means the blanket is getting too thick. Too much heat is retained and that means we have increased heating.”
Most climate scientists claim the main culprit of human activity on climate is the burning of fossil fuels such as oil, coal and gas that release CO2. Climate activists say the focus should be on methane.
Mitloehner provided EPA information for the role of GHGs: All of agriculture is responsible for roughly 10% of total methane, and animal agriculture is responsible for 4% of all U.S. GHGs.
“Here’s why they say we should focus on methane,” said Mitloehner. “Of all agriculture and forestry, the UN FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization] estimates that of all global greenhouse gases, livestock emit 11%. That number has come down – 15 years ago the same organization said it was 18%. It’s a number I agree with on the global side of things.”
Activists say the focus should be on methane and not CO2 because the so-called global warming potential says one molecule of methane traps the heat from the sun 20 times as well as one molecule of CO2. (Nitrous oxide is 265 times more powerful in trapping heat from the sun.)
However, Mitloehner said this isn’t where the narrative around methane begins or ends. “Methane is significantly different from other greenhouse gases – it’s short-lived,” he said. “Once CO2 is produced and released in the atmosphere, it stays there for thousands of years. Methane stays for roughly one decade. Methane is not just produced – it’s also destroyed.”
While this is often where media reporting ends, Mitloehner believes it’s where reporting should begin. “It leaves out the fact that methane is not just produced by sources, but there are also sinks of methane that amount to close to 550 teragrams,” he said. “That means 560 teragrams are produced and 550 are destroyed, which leaves a balance of 10.”
(A teragram is equal to about one metric ton, or 2,205 lbs.)
Molecules in the air, called radicals, destroy methane in 10 to 12 years. For example, if a 100-cow dairy farm started 50 years ago still has 100 cows today, the methane produced through belching and manure and the methane that’s destroyed are roughly in balance.
“That means a constant source of methane that does not add additional warming to the atmosphere because the same amount produced is also being destroyed,” said Mitloehner. “If you were to grow the dairy herd from 100 cows to 150 cows, you’re increasing methane because you now have 50 additional cows that would cause additional warming. If you learn how to mitigate methane on the 100-cow dairy through feed additives, manure management or other means, the methane would go down over time.”
Part 2 will describe how agriculture benefits from reducing methane.
by Sally Colby
Leave A Comment