Il business orrendo del fegato d'oca

[evelon]

Originariamente inviato da GianoM

Ma guarda te... per dare credibilità a dei DATI bisogna cambiare la fonte.

La fonte è fondamentale per la credibilità dei dati.

Se riviste come Scientific American hanno l'attendibilità che hanno e le ricerche del WWF hanno l'attendibilità che hanno è proprio per la credibilità che le rispettive fonti si sono guadagnate.

Non a caso si parla di "gerarchia delle fonti".

Non è una nota polemica, solo un chiarimento.
Ovviamente tutti, anche i più autorevoli, possono sbagliare ma và da sè che la credibilità è diversa.

[GianoM]

Originariamente inviato da evelon

Sito che definisce (come riportato) "un problema" l'allevamento di animali da carne.

Qual è la parte " "? Continuo a non capire.

Originariamente inviato da evelon

La fonte è fondamentale per la credibilità dei dati.

Se riviste come Scientific American hanno l'attendibilità che hanno e le ricerche del WWF hanno l'attendibilità che hanno è proprio per la credibilità che le rispettive fonti si sono guadagnate.

Non a caso si parla di "gerarchia delle fonti".

Non è una nota polemica, solo un chiarimento.
Ovviamente tutti, anche i più autorevoli, possono sbagliare ma và da sè che la credibilità è diversa.

OK, le fonti sono importanti. Ne avresti una importante TUA che non si un " " o un " "? O un sito della FAO che NON riporti i dati che trovo su veganitalia.it?

Tipo questo:
http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0612sp1.htm
Using a methodology that considers the entire commodity chain, it estimates that livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, a bigger share than that of transport.

Conta poi che molte notizie sono frutto di studio della American Dietetics Association (la più grande organizzazione di nutrizionisti americani e canadesi) o il Dipartimento dell’Agricoltura USA. Non c'è la parola vegan.

[Maxmel]

Originariamente inviato da GianoM

Qual è la parte " "? Continuo a non capire.

OK, le fonti sono importanti. Ne avresti una importante TUA che non si un " " o un " "? O un sito della FAO che NON riporti i dati che trovo su veganitalia.it?

Tipo questo:
http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0612sp1.htm
Using a methodology that considers the entire commodity chain, it estimates that livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, a bigger share than that of transport.

Conta poi che molte notizie sono frutto di studio della American Dietetics Association (la più grande organizzazione di nutrizionisti americani e canadesi) o il Dipartimento dell’Agricoltura USA. Non c'è la parola vegan.

tralasciando la fuffa, che non merita più risposta, di chi si ostina a non voler capire, a priori, perchè all'università gli hanno insegnato, per esempio, che l'azoto proviene dai vegetali ma non a fare due più due quattro cioè a dedurre la lgica conseguenza dal fatto che la maggior parte della produzione è destinata a foraggiare gli allevamenti, vorrei postare questo link

http://www.nutritionecology.org/it/panel1/intro.html

Nutrition ecology - ecologia della nutrizione - è un termine relativamente recente. È stato coniato nel 1986 da un gruppo di nutrizionisti dell'Università di Giessen, in Germania. Si tratta di una scienza inter-disciplinare, che prende in esame tutte le componenti della catena alimentare e ne valuta gli effetti secondo 4 punti di vista principali: la salute umana, l'ambiente, la società e l'economia.

Le componenti della catena alimentare sono tutte quelle coinvolte nel processo di produzione e consumo del cibo, viene cioè seguito tutto il procedimento "dalla culla alla tomba", che comprende: la produzione, il raccolto, la conservazione, l'immagazzinamento, il trasporto, la lavorazione, il confezionamento, il commercio, la distribuzione, la preparazione, la composizione, il consumo del cibo e lo smaltimento dei materiali di scarto prodotti nelle varie fas

Il Centro Internazionale di Ecologia della Nutrizione (NEIC) è un comitato scientifico interdisciplinare preposto allo studio degli impatti delle scelte alimentari lungo tutta la catena di produzione e consumo del cibo, relativamente alla salute, all'ambiente, alla società e all'economia. In una parola: l'Ecologia della Nutrizione.

L'obbiettivo del NEIC è l'individuazione dei cosiddetti "punti critici" di impatto ambientale in modo da proporre il "minimo" delle modifiche alimentari per ottenere il "massimo" del beneficio.

Questa scelta metodologica deriva da due presupposti:

1. la generale e palese difficoltà delle persone a cambiare abitudini alimentari.
2. la assoluta necessità planetaria di cambiare le abitudini alimentari delle società tecnologicamente avanzate e le tendenze che si stanno verificando nei paesi in via di sviluppo.

Per raggiungere il suo scopo, il NEIC:

1. si avvale di 8 panel scientifici che analizzano gli aspetti più importanti relativi all'impatto delle scelte alimentari sul benessere delle persone, degli animali e del pianeta. In ogni panel, oltre a una breve introduzione, vengono proposti gli articoli piu' interessanti disponibili sull'argomento a livello internazionale.
2. effettua ricerche e studi originali
3. mantiene una bibliografia aggiornata sul tema dell'ecologia della nutrizione, per promuovere la divulgazione di queste tematiche
4. suggerisce proposte per modificare la situazione.

Fame nel sud del mondo, deforestazione, inquinamento, malattie nel nord del mondo, vita e libertà degli animali negli allevamenti intensivi, sono tutti aspetti delle nostre scelte quotidiane e conseguenze delle nostre abitudini alimentari.


basta leggere i vari panel con tanto di biografia FONTI citate chiaramente e bibliografia a corredo come si conviene.

in particolare

Panel 1 - Impatto ambientale

* Descrizione
* Introduzione
* Bibliografia

Gli animali d'allevamento sono davvero inefficienti come "macchine" per convertire proteine vegetali in proteine animali; di conseguenza, per produrre cibi animali vengono consumate molte più risorse rispetto a quelle necessarie per la produzione di cibo vegetale. Questo enorme spreco di risorse è una delle conseguenze meno pubblicizzate, ma la più devastante, della tanto decantata "Livestock revolution" (Rivoluzione del bestiame). È innegabile che questo spreco di risorse provochi un enorme impatto ambientale sul pianeta. Come affermato dal World Watch Institute, con l'evolversi della scienza dell'ecologia, è ormai assodato che gli appetiti umani per la carne animale siano la vera forza scatenante di tutte le principali categorie di danno ambientale che in questo momento minacciano il futuro dell'umanità : la deforestazione, l'erosione, la scarsità d'acqua, l'inquinamento dell'aria e dell'acqua, i cambiamenti climatici, la perdita di biodiversità , l'ingiustizia sociale, la destabilizzazione delle comunità e la diffusione delle malattie.

Questo panel esamina in dettaglio tutti i problemi ambientali e sociali sopra menzionati.

questo solo nell'INTRODUZIONE.


Tutte cose note ai più ma che ai doti sfuggono.
Per tutti buona lettura per gli altri buone

[Maxmel]

http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/frame.htm

LEAD (Livestock, Environment And Development) is a multi-institutional initiative of FAO formed to promote ecologically sustainable livestock production systems. It promotes research on livestock environment interactions; creates awareness on the complex interactions of human needs, animal production and the sustainability of global natural resources. It facilitates in developing guidelines, methodologies, processes for analysis and decision support tools for decision makers, practitioners and implementers to promulgate policies that encourage use of sustainable production systems.

Executive summary

This report aims to assess the full impact of the livestock sector on environmental problems, along with potential technical and policy approaches to mitigation. The assessment is based on the most recent and complete data available, taking into account direct impacts, along with the impacts of feedcrop agriculture required for livestock production.
The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global. The findings of this report suggest that it should be a major policy focus when dealing with problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution and loss of biodiversity.
Livestock’s contribution to environmental problems is on a massive scale and its potential contribution to their solution is equally large. The impact is so significant that it needs to be addressed with urgency. Major reductions in impact could be achieved at reasonable cost.

Global importance of the sector
Although economically not a major global player, the livestock sector is socially and politically very significant. It accounts for 40 percent of agricultural gross domestic product (GDP). It employs 1.3 billion people and creates livelihoods for one billion of the world’s poor. Livestock products provide one-third of humanity’s protein intake, and are a contributing cause of obesity and a potential remedy for undernourishment.
Growing populations and incomes, along with changing food preferences, are rapidly increasing demand for livestock products, while globalization is boosting trade in livestock inputs and products. Global production of meat is projected to more than double from 229 million tonnes in 1999/01 to 465 million tonnes in 2050, and that of milk to grow from 580 to 1 043 million tonnes. The environmental impact per unit of livestock production must be cut by half, just to avoid increasing the level of damage beyond its present level.

Structural changes and their impact
The livestock sector is undergoing a complex process of technical and geographical change, which is shifting the balance of environmental problems caused by the sector.
Extensive grazing still occupies and degrades vast areas of land; though there is an increasing trend towards intensification and industrialization. Livestock production is shifting geographically, first from rural areas to urban and peri-urban, to get closer to consumers, then towards the sources of feedstuff, whether these are feedcrop areas, or transport and trade hubs where feed is imported. There is also a shift of species, with production of monogastric species (pigs and poultry, mostly produced in industrial units) growing rapidly, while the growth of ruminant production (cattle, sheep and goats, often raised extensively) slows. Through these shifts, the livestock sector enters into more and direct competition for scarce land, water and other natural resources.
These changes are pushing towards improved efficiency, thus reducing the land area required for livestock production. At the same time, they are marginalizing smallholders and pastoralists, increasing inputs and wastes and increasing and concentrating the pollution created. Widely dispersed non-point sources of pollution are ceding importance to point sources that create more local damage but are more easily regulated.

Land degradation
The livestock sector is by far the single largest anthropogenic user of land. The total area occupied by grazing is equivalent to 26 percent of the ice-free terrestrial surface of the planet. In addition, the total area dedicated to feedcrop production amounts to 33 percent of total arable land. In all, livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all agricultural land and 30 percent of the land surface of the planet.
Expansion of livestock production is a key factor in deforestation, especially in Latin America where the greatest amount of deforestation is occurring – 70 percent of previous forested land in the Amazon is occupied by pastures, and feedcrops cover a large part of the remainder. About 20 percent of the world’s pastures and rangelands, with 73 percent of rangelands in dry areas, have been degraded to some extent, mostly through overgrazing, compaction and erosion created by livestock action. The dry lands in particular are affected by these trends, as livestock are often the only source of livelihoods for the people living in these areas.
Overgrazing can be reduced by grazing fees and by removing obstacles to mobility on common property pastures. Land degradation can be limited and reversed through soil conservation methods, silvopastoralism, better management of grazing systems, limits to uncontrolled burning by pastoralists and controlled exclusion from sensitive areas.

Atmosphere and climate
With rising temperatures, rising sea levels, melting icecaps and glaciers, shifting ocean currents and weather patterns, climate change is the most serious challenge facing the human race.
The livestock sector is a major player, responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport. [ecco cosa c'entravano le macchine]
The livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The largest share of this derives from land-use changes – especially deforestation – caused by expansion of pastures and arable land for feedcrops. Livestock are responsible for much larger shares of some gases with far higher potential to warm the atmosphere. The sector emits 37 percent of anthropogenic methane (with 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2) most of that from enteric fermentation by ruminants. It emits 65 percent of anthropogenic nitrous oxide (with 296 times the GWP of CO2), the great majority from manure. Livestock are also responsible for almost two-thirds (64 percent) of anthropogenic ammonia emissions, which contribute significantly to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems.
This high level of emissions opens up large opportunities for climate change mitigation through livestock actions. Intensification – in terms of increased productivity both in livestock production and in feedcrop agriculture – can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and pasture degradation. In addition, restoring historical losses of soil carbon through conservation tillage, cover crops, agroforestry and other measures could sequester up to 1.3 tonnes of carbon per hectare per year, with additional amounts available through restoration of desertified pastures. Methane emissions can be reduced through improved diets to reduce enteric fermentation, improved manure management and biogas – which also provide renewable energy. Nitrogen emissions can be reduced through improved diets and manure management.
The Kyoto Protocol’s clean development mechanism (CDM) can be used to finance the spread of biogas and silvopastoral initiatives involving afforestation and reforestation. Methodologies should be developed so that the CDM can finance other livestock-related options such as soil carbon sequestration through rehabilitation of degraded pastures.

Water
The world is moving towards increasing problems of freshwater shortage, scarcity and depletion, with 64 percent of the world’s population expected to live in water-stressed basins by 2025.
The livestock sector is a key player in increasing water use, accounting for over 8 percent of global human water use, mostly for the irrigation of feedcrops. It is probably the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to eutrophication, “dead” zones in coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance and many others. The major sources of pollution are from animal wastes, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and pesticides used for feedcrops, and sediments from eroded pastures. Global figures are not available but in the United States, with the world’s fourth largest land area, livestock are responsible for an estimated 55 percent of erosion and sediment, 37 percent of pesticide use, 50 percent of antibiotic use, and a third of the loads of nitrogen and phosphorus into freshwater resources.
Livestock also affect the replenishment of freshwater by compacting soil, reducing infiltration, degrading the banks of watercourses, drying up floodplains and lowering water tables. Livestock’s contribution to deforestation also increases runoff and reduces dry season flows.
Water use can be reduced through improving the efficiency of irrigation systems. Livestock’s impact on erosion, sedimentation and water regulation can be addressed by measures against land degradation. Pollution can be tackled through better management of animal waste in industrial production units, better diets to improve nutrient absorption, improved manure management (including biogas) and better use of processed manure on croplands. Industrial livestock production should be decentralized to accessible croplands where wastes can be recycled without overloading soils and freshwater.
Policy measures that would help in reducing water use and pollution include full cost pricing of water (to cover supply costs, as well as economic and environmental externalities), regulatory frameworks for limiting inputs and scale, specifying required equipment and discharge levels, zoning regulations and taxes to discourage large-scale concentrations close to cities, as well as the development of secure water rights and water markets, and participatory management of watersheds.

Biodiversity
We are in an era of unprecedented threats to biodiversity. The loss of species is estimated to be running 50 to 500 times higher than background rates found in the fossil record. Fifteen out of 24 important ecosystem services are assessed to be in decline.
Livestock now account for about 20 percent of the total terrestrial animal biomass, and the 30 percent of the earth’s land surface that they now pre-empt was once habitat for wildlife. Indeed, the livestock sector may well be the leading player in the reduction of biodiversity, since it is the major driver of deforestation, as well as one of the leading drivers of land degradation, pollution, climate change, overfishing, sedimentation of coastal areas and facilitation of invasions by alien species. In addition, resource conflicts with pastoralists threaten species of wild predators and also protected areas close to pastures. Meanwhile in developed regions, especially Europe, pastures had become a location of diverse long-established types of ecosystem, many of which are now threatened by pasture abandonment.
Some 306 of the 825 terrestrial ecoregions identified by the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) – ranged across all biomes and all biogeographical realms, reported livestock as one of the current threats. Conservation International has identified 35 global hotspots for biodiversity, characterized by exceptional levels of plant endemism and serious levels of habitat loss. Of these, 23 are reported to be affected by livestock production. An analysis of the authoritative World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species shows that most of the world’s threatened species are suffering habitat loss where livestock are a factor.
Since many of livestock’s threats to biodiversity arise from their impact on the main resource sectors (climate, air and water pollution, land degradation and deforestation), major options for mitigation are detailed in those sections. There is also scope for improving pastoralists’ interactions with wildlife and parks and raising wildlife species in livestock enterprises.
Reduction of the wildlife area pre-empted by livestock can be achieved by intensification. Protection of wild areas, buffer zones, conservation easements, tax credits and penalties can increase the amount of land where biodiversity conservation is prioritized. Efforts should extend more widely to integrate livestock production and producers into landscape management.

Cross-cutting policy frameworks
Certain general policy approaches cut across all the above fields. A general conclusion is that improving the resource use efficiency of livestock production can reduce environmental impacts. While regulating about scale, inputs, wastes and so on can help, a crucial element in achieving greater efficiency is the correct pricing of natural resources such as land, water and use of waste sinks. Most frequently natural resources are free or underpriced, which leads to overexploitation and pollution. Often perverse subsidies directly encourage livestock producers to engage in environmentally damaging activities. A top priority is to achieve prices and fees that reflect the full economic and environmental costs, including all externalities. One requirement for prices to influence behaviour is that there should be secure and if possible tradable rights to water, land, use of common land and waste sinks.
Damaging subsidies should be removed, and economic and environmental externalities should be built into prices by selective taxing of and/or fees for resource use, inputs and wastes. In some cases direct incentives may be needed.
Payment for environmental services is an important framework, especially in relation to extensive grazing systems: herders, producers and landowners can be paid for specific environmental services such as regulation of water flows, soil conservation, conservation of natural landscape and wildlife habitats, or carbon sequestration. Provision of environmental services may emerge as a major purpose of extensive grassland-based production systems.
An important general lesson is that the livestock sector has such deep and wide-ranging environmental impacts that it should rank as one of the leading focuses for environmental policy: efforts here can produce large and multiple payoffs. Indeed, as societies develop, it is likely that environmental considerations, along with human health issues, will become the dominant policy considerations for the sector.
Finally, there is an urgent need to develop suitable institutional and policy frameworks, at local, national and international levels, for the suggested changes to occur. This will require strong political commitment, and increased knowledge and awareness of the environmental risks of continuing “business as usual” and the environmental benefits of actions in the livestock sector.



Si commenta da sè.
Dal sito + scaricabile il libro completo in formato PDF.
Completo di fonti e ricerche.
Continuo a guardarmi intorno "magari" trovo anche altro

[Maxmel]

Originariamente inviato da Morkar Karamat

Continuo a consigliare la lettura delle 20 pagine delle conclusioni al mio link dello studio FAO, dove sno riassunte tutte le varie tematiche e dove però sono espressi anche altri fattori "casualmente" tralasciati dai siti di parte spesso linkati in questa discussione, ad esempio:

1) la possibilità di continuare a questi ritmi di crescita della richiesta di carne per almeno 50 anni senza problemi, semplicemente diffondendo tecnologie attualmente applicate in occidente anche nel terzo mondo, dove gli sprechi sono enormi. Per cui è bene iniziare a pensarci, ma senza allarmismi.

2) L'importanza dell'allevamento in molti paesi del terzo mondo, settore dal quale dipendono moltissimi posti di lavoro e che spesso non è sostituibile, per vari motivi.

guarda che il link sopra è ad uno studio della FAO a dice le stesse cose che hai detto tu, salvo per i 50 anni leggi è scritto all'inizio (c'è pure il logo sulla copertina del libro) e quello sopra ancora di un università tedesca, cmq delle soluzioni se n'è può parlare e ne parla pure il link sopra il tuo post, sopra ho detto la mia (che NON è quella vegetariana visto che NON sono vegetariano) ma negare il problema sostenendo che sono tutte balle è pura e semplice ignoranza