Meat under attack [image credit: farminguk.com]
Phys.org pounces on another supposed climate alarm. Once again magical powers are assigned to trace gases with no evidence offered.
– – –
The global food system’s greenhouse gas emissions will add nearly one degree Celsius to Earth’s surface temperatures by 2100 on current trends, obliterating Paris Agreement climate goals, scientists warned Monday.
A major overhaul of the sector—from production to distribution to consumption—could reduce those emissions by more than half even as global population increases, they reported in Nature Climate Change.
Earth’s surface has warmed 1.2 C since the late 1800s, leaving only a narrow margin for staying under the 2015 treaty’s core goal of capping warming at “well under” 2 C.
Even further out of reach is the aspirational limit of 1.5 C, which science subsequently showed to be a much safer threshold to avoid devastating and possibly irreversible climate impacts, including coastal flooding, heatwaves and drought.
“Mitigating emissions from the food sector is essential to working toward a secure climate future,” the study’s lead author Catherine Ivanovich, a doctoral student at Columbia University in New York, told AFP.
The global food system accounts for about 15 percent of current warming levels, but only a third of national emissions reductions plans under the Paris pact include any measure to cut carbon pollution from agriculture or livestock.
To improve on previous estimates of how much feeding the world adds to global warming, Ivanovich and her colleagues looked separately at the three main greenhouse gases, which vary in potency and staying power in the atmosphere.
Once emitted, carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for centuries [Talkshop comment – dubious assertion] . Methane only lingers for about a decade but, on that timescale, is almost 100 times more efficient in retaining the Sun’s heat.
Full article here.
– – –
Study: Future warming from global food consumption (2023)
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Earth warmed 1.2 degrees. 32F = 273K; current average temp is over 283K, so how many parts of temp has earthwarmed compared with ppm CO2 ? I KNOW that say, 400ppm is the same as 400 Litres painted over an area of 1000 sq metres, filled with 1000 Cube containers, so 1/2 litre of paint to cover the outside of each container, all around – 6 faces = 6.000 sq metres. would that work ? so tell those dumbos going on about TRACE gases in the air, – barely a sniff in the volume of things: and can they then tell me that I might understand on their terms, WHAT is the PPM of warming. ??
I find it very amusing, these pronouncements of the pseudo scientists. It is alarming that they have the gall to call themselves scientists when they don’t know how to follow the scientific method and I very much doubt they have ever looked at real world conditions – I note they push their predictions far into the future beyond their lifetime and wonder why they do that, is is because they fear being laughed at when those predictions are proved wrong? I remember the Rick McKee cartoon ‘Actual Climate Change Pronouncements’ 1970 to 2014 in which he showed every one was wrong and I think we can see all those since 2014 have been wrong also – not a very good track record for ‘scientists’.
It’s all driven by models as usual.
‘We resolve these challenges by developing a global food consumption GHG emissions inventory separated by individual gas species and employing a reduced-complexity climate model, evaluating the associated future warming contribution and potential benefits from certain mitigation measures. We find that global food consumption alone could add nearly 1°C to warming by 2100.’
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01605-8
The main so-called greenhouse gas, i.e. water vapour, doesn’t even get a mention.
‘The agriculture sector is responsible for nearly half of methane (CH4) emissions, two-thirds of nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions and 3% of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from human activities worldwide. These three GHGs account for 80% of today’s gross warming (29, 5 and 46%, respectively), suggesting that agriculture may be responsible for approximately 15% of current warming levels.’
Those numbers are only found in models.
I wonder what figure they used for the IR absorption ratio for methane?
Tyndall in 1860/1 MEASURED it as 4.5 times that of CO2, but the IPCC suggested 12 in 1990 and I’ve seen 25,44,54, etc. up to 85 times plucked from the atmosphere by Cult of Carbon members, and it would seem that they are using something close to that last figure.
And why are they worrying about nitrous oxide when unknowns have 4 times the effect?
And that 1.2℃ temperature rise figure might all be caused by other than their selected Greenhouse gases.
Methane is measured in parts per *billion*. Who are they kidding making a scare out of that? 😂
Yes, but a rise of 1,400 to 1,700 p.p.b. so about 1.5 p.p.m.
Yet this, with their exaggerated figures (and their weird assumption that any warming must be man-made) means that about a third of the warming is caused by methane and CO2 is less a threat than they claim. SEE foot and shoot is their motto.
O/T but I once worked with a Technical Director who converted all claims in part per billion (on health scares) into amounts in swimming pools. On one occasion a parts per trillion claim involved a smidgen mixed into one pool, a smidgen of that water mixed in a second pool, and then a smidgen mixed into a third pool and the “victim” having to swallow 10 litres. When I asked how much was a smidgen he said “Who cares, they can’t measure parts per trillion anyway”.
Reblogged this on Utopia, you are standing in it!.
The global food system accounts for 100% of people staying alive.
That’s the only relevant point.
so just kill everyone and human emissions go away. Hmm, how could we do that… HEY, I’ve got it. We’ll spread a nearly harmless flu variant and then scare the crap out of the gullible and those perpetually afraid and then present the magic elixir to keep them safe. We’ll call it a vaccine, even though it is no such thing. Then we’ll watch them start dropping.
Using Watermelon logic, “a billion” is a lot bigger than “a million”, so parts per billion is a lot scarier than parts per million.
Some of them really are that stupid.
————-
“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” – George Carlin
This really is about power, the point of power being its use otherwise why bother? The control over the food supply is the ultimate source of control. This is why repressive governments exercise this power, the latest example being Venezuela. It’s the literal expression of George Orwell’s 1984, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.” Who knew that 1984 was a how to manual for would be tyrants?
I would like to point out that agriculture is only 10% of CO2 emissions, whereas electrical power generation is 31% and transportation is 29%. Why go after 10% when one could in theory achieve a 60% reduction in less than 20 years if they mandated nuclear, upgraded the transmission system to go all electric vehicles? If you actually believed CO2 was an issue then messing with the lives of 8 billion people upending the food supply is the very last thing one would do.
Reference https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/09/epas-clean-power-plan-and-its-moment-of-truth/
While repressive governments in 3rd world countries get away with starving their populations into submission (DPRK), attempting this on a first world population will only end up with violent revolution. I submit to those who are attempting to control the population in this way you have greatly miscalculated to think you can quell a violent response and survive the backlash. Thee most dangerous person in the world is someone who has lost everything, literally has nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking up violence. Contrary to enlightened opinion, the pen is NOT mightier than the sword, it’s only neater.
The current nonsense over NOx emissions in the EU will backfire when the price of food doubles and triples.
[…] From Tallbloke’s Talkshop […]