SEMN Environmental News

The latest conservation news, issues, or concerns in our backyard, city, state, or country.
High Stick
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:19 am
Location: Driftless and The West

SEMN Environmental News

Post by High Stick »

Disclaimer: There is a lot to read and digest on this link.

https://www.postbulletin.com/news/local ... fb5c4.html

brntrout
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by brntrout »

After reading this article I would be more concerned about water pollution than air pollution by far. Our Karst geology does lend itself well to having any type of pollutant spread on the ground as it eventually ends up in our ground water/trout streams!

Added: I wonder what difference is between American bison populations of the past compared to current day cattle populations in America? I have read our American bison population was once somewhere between 30 & 60 million animals. I'm sure they contributed greenhouse gases too?
Last edited by brntrout on Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

brntrout
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by brntrout »

Supposedly there are 94.5 million cattle in the US as of 2019 of which 1/3th are milk cows. So I guess if we want less greenhouse gases we need to stop eating beef? And sense 80% of greenhouse gases come from fossil fuels being burned we should probably be walking more, riding horses, bicycling or driving electric cars?
Last edited by brntrout on Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:44 am, edited 2 times in total.

High Stick
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:19 am
Location: Driftless and The West

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by High Stick »

Big fan of eating bison. Keep it medium to medium rare or it dries out quickly.

Bison in the West have made a tremendous comeback, to the the point that places like SD, Wyo, and MT cull the herds routinely. Custer has an annual bison roundup each fall.

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 1094
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by S.T.Fanatic »

brntrout wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:27 pm
Supposedly there are 94.5 million cattle in the US as of 2019 of which 1/3th are milk cows. So guess if we want less greenhouse gases we need to stop eating beef? And sense 80% of greenhouse gases come from fossil fuels being burned we should probably be walking more, riding horses, bicycles or driving electric cars?
Just how are we going to power all those electric cars? Don't make me laugh so hard I fall down hit my head and piss myself by saying wind and solar.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

User avatar
Randy
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 11:13 pm
Location: Rochester, MN
Contact:

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by Randy »

S.T.Fanatic wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:51 am
brntrout wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:27 pm
Supposedly there are 94.5 million cattle in the US as of 2019 of which 1/3th are milk cows. So guess if we want less greenhouse gases we need to stop eating beef? And sense 80% of greenhouse gases come from fossil fuels being burned we should probably be walking more, riding horses, bicycles or driving electric cars?
Just how are we going to power all those electric cars? Don't make me laugh so hard I fall down hit my head and piss myself by saying wind and solar.
It won't be the only way. Add nuclear to the mix, hydro, and supplemented by wind and solar and that's pretty much what we have now. Coal is dead, man. Even the Pres/CEO of Xcel Energy acknowledges that. Btw I'm pretty lefty on most things as you know but I'm not anti-nuke power. At least not yet. As long as we don't leave Russia or Japan in charge of nuclear power we should be okay. ;)
Image

brntrout
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by brntrout »

No matter which way we turn all modern forms of power have environmental consequences some are just better than others. I'm sure nobody is going to argue the elimination of coal burning power planets is long over due. Even driving electric cars creates environmental problems from production of those types of vehicles. To produce EV's requires the use of a lot nickel, cobalt, lithium and copper. Its no wonder we are seeing more nickel/ copper mining.( Polymet mine)

Forbes article on raw material demands to produce EV's! https://www.forbes.com/sites/woodmacken ... 29d2406c9b

Regardless if some people want too hear it or not, more people means greater demand on the planets natural resources and a long with that comes increased environmental consequences!

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 1094
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by S.T.Fanatic »

brntrout wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:17 pm
After reading this article I would be more concerned about water pollution than air pollution by far. Our Karst geology does lend itself well to having any type of pollutant spread on the ground as it eventually ends up in our ground water/trout streams!

Added: I wonder what difference is between American bison populations of the past compared to current day cattle populations in America? I have read our American bison population was once somewhere between 30 & 60 million animals. I'm such they contributed greenhouse gases too?
I think methane digesters would be a good thing but they just plain arent cost effective, and as mentioned in the article animal agriculture is only responsible for 3.9% of greenhouse gas emissions. The end result in running manure through a digester is energy recovery and fertilizer that is actually more fertile. I think the next best thing would just be to compost it.

The problem isnt the manure in this karst area, it is the high moisture content that is in the manure. There are ways to manage that issue that weren't around 20 years ago. Agriculture is getting better.

I will also hang on to my Nitrogen is Nitrogen whether it comes out of a cows ass or is trucked in dry ideal. When these dairies close their barn doors that doesn't mean that the crop land sits idle. What it does mean is the natural organic cow manure is replaced by synthetic fertilizers. It might amount to less tonnage but there is zero organic matter in it and the nitrogen content is going to be higher than what the manure contained. Nobody is addressing the impacts to the environment that creates. Talk about using a bunch of fossil fuel.

A contoured field and hay/corn rotation is also replaced by a sea of monoculture corn. Most often it happens on rented ground that gets abused and it is corn on corn every year.

These farms will never be converted back into prairie. It is in the counties best interest to keep animal agriculture alive. If they dont the alternative (outlined above) is going to be much worse.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 1094
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by S.T.Fanatic »

Randy wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:25 am
S.T.Fanatic wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:51 am
brntrout wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:27 pm
Supposedly there are 94.5 million cattle in the US as of 2019 of which 1/3th are milk cows. So guess if we want less greenhouse gases we need to stop eating beef? And sense 80% of greenhouse gases come from fossil fuels being burned we should probably be walking more, riding horses, bicycles or driving electric cars?
Just how are we going to power all those electric cars? Don't make me laugh so hard I fall down hit my head and piss myself by saying wind and solar.
It won't be the only way. Add nuclear to the mix, hydro, and supplemented by wind and solar and that's pretty much what we have now. Coal is dead, man. Even the Pres/CEO of Xcel Energy acknowledges that. Btw I'm pretty lefty on most things as you know but I'm not anti-nuke power. At least not yet. As long as we don't leave Russia or Japan in charge of nuclear power we should be okay. ;)
Hydro, really? People are slowly starting to realize the harmful effects that dams are having on aquatic life. They may not cause air pollution but id rather walk around wearing a mask than have day after day of fishless outings. I'm not into the warm water thing either.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

brntrout
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: SEMN Environmental News

Post by brntrout »

Not to be in your face, BUT, if you have too wear a mask because pollution is so bad, i'm going to assume there probably won't be much left for fish or many other species either!

As for Hydro power, at present we are stuck with it, especially in the western part of the country. If not hydro power what do you suggest it should be replaced with and what is it going to cost?

Post Reply