humanespot.org humanespot.org humanespot.org
 
 
Share/Print |

Livestock and Climate Change

 
Submitted on Feb 09, 2012 (Original item from 2009) | | |
by World Watch
More Information...

Short Description:
The authors of this report address previous estimates of climate change due to livestock. They argue that previous estimates produced by the United nations (UN) left out some key data and has therefore underestimated the effects of livestock on climate change. They estimate that livestock and their byproducts account for at least 32.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year, which is 51% of annual worldwide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Abstract:
The authors speak mainly to Livestock's Long Shadow, a 2006 report by the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization. The authors argue that the report underestimates the amount of GHG emissions in a few major ways and then discussing in detail their revised calculations. They argue that the biggest mistakes were made in terms of overlooking respiration and land use by livestock, as well as leaving some methane production unaccounted for. In all, they their estimate is 55% higher than the previous UN estimate.
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6294

Spot Check Number: 1958
Sponsor: World Watch
Researcher/Author: Robert Goodland and Jeff Anhang
Animal Type: Farm Animals
Record Type: Online Reference, Organizational Publication or Materials
Research Method: Case Study, Experimental/Modeling/Applications
Geographic Region: Worldwide
Year Conducted: 2009
File Attachments: You must be logged in to access attachments (see login and registration links above)
»

Related items on HumaneSpot.org:

Goodland and Anhang's analysis has problems

Submitted by David Steele (not verified) on Thu, 2012-02-09 09:59.
It is unfortunate that this article continues to be reposted uncritically. Goodland and Anhang did us a service by pointing out that the FAO underestimated the effective green house gas emissions associated with animal agriculture. They made some serious errors in their analysis, though, such as including the respiration of farm animals in their calculations (while ignoring respiration from humans, plants, etc. and photosynthesis by the latter - i.e., the natural carbon cycle). I wrote a couple of constructive critiques on their work when it was published. They explain where and how Goodland and Anhang's analysis is useful and likely correct and where their major errors were. They are here: http://vegan.com/articles/environment/a-sympathetic-but-skeptical-look-at-goodland-and-anhangs-livestock-and-climate-change/ and here: http://www.earthsave.ca/files/2010_Winter_Earthsaver_web.pdf I strongly believe that it is best not to propagate information that is obviously, to any scientifically trained reader, in error.
»

Re: Goodland and Anhang's analysis has problems

Submitted by Carol L. Glasser on Thu, 2012-02-09 22:06.

Thank you for sharing this potential issue with other users and linking to your articles that address the issue in more detail.

Regarding what we publish on the research database: HRC works to publish a variety of research resources. We do not make judgments on methodological or theoretical foundations of research unless we feel it is irreparably flawed. As such, we rarely reject peer-reviewed research and we try to include the major studies published in the field. The reason for this is so that advocates can have access to and draw from all the animal protection research that is available.

»

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


PLEASE SUPPORT NONPROFIT RESEARCH FOR ANIMALS

Did you find this research helpful in your work for animals? If so, please consider a donation to the Humane Research Council to help us with the costs of maintaining, expanding, and improving HumaneSpot.org.