agriculture

268 readers

1 users here now

Agriculture

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

By rejecting traditional grazing and maintaining trees and wildlife habitats alongside pasture, Colombian farmers are turning their land carbon positive. But will it be enough? (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (7 children)

This just seems like blatant greenwashing for the cattle industry. This article makes the claim in the headline that it's "carbon positive", but makes an incredibly weak case, even saying that a researcher "believes" that it's carbon positive. This is opposed to the glaringly obvious fact that cattle ranching is incredibly bad for climate change and deforestation:

However, one study revealed that cattle ranching has also been Colombia’s top contributor to illegal deforestation in recent years. Between 1985 and 2019, more than 3m hectares (7.4m acres) of the Amazon rainforest were cleared for pasture.

This is just another techie sounding idea to solve climate change without doing anything, which we'll all forget about in a few years time. Does anyone even remember the whole "rewilding" fad that was huge in England 6 years back??

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Also, "Carbon positive" means they're releasing more carbon than they're sequestering.

If they were trying to greenwash they'd be claiming to be "carbon neutral" or lower.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

By rejecting traditional grazing and maintaining trees and wildlife habitats alongside pasture, farmers are turning their land carbon positive.

I'm sure that "carbon positive" can mean anything, but the context of this sentence says that it refers to carbon sequestration.

load more comments (5 replies)