If we don't curb livestock production soon, we'll be in deep environmental trouble, according to some scientists. If we don't, it will generate about half of our negative emissions. This is what the scientists say we should do now:
First, declare a timeframe for peak livestock—i.e., livestock production from each species would not continue to increase from this point forward.
Second, within the livestock sector, identify the largest emissions sources or the largest land occupiers, or both, and set appropriate reduction targets for production. This process would be repeated sequentially, to set reduction targets for the next largest emitter or land occupier.
Third, within a reconfiguration of the agriculture sector, apply a best available food strategy to diversify food production by replacing livestock with foods that simultaneously minimize environmental burdens and maximize public health benefits—mainly pulses (including beans, peas, and lentils), grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds.
Fourth, when grazing land is not required or is unsuitable for horticulture or arable production, adopt a natural climate solutions approach where possible, to repurpose land as a carbon sink by restoring native vegetation cover to its maximum carbon sequestration potential with additional benefits to biodiversity.
No comments:
Post a Comment