Tweet

Peter Ballerstedt

20 Jan, 7 tweets, 3 min read

1/6
In case it comes up.
Global sector percentages of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions should not be used in discussions of individual country's sectors.
epa.gov/ghgemissions/g…

2/6
The %s in the US (which contributes 15% of the global total) looks very different than the global total for a number of reasons: Nature of economy; Population; Efficiency of ag; Fuel sources; Standard of living; etc.
epa.gov/ghgemissions/i…

3/6
In the US, ag is included with forestry and land us changes in the accounting of emissions. When the sequestration is accounted for, that sector more than offsets its emissions. The only sector to do so. Today.
epa.gov/ghgemissions/i…

4/6
Shifting back to global figures. The accounting methodology doesn't make it straight-forward, but this source estimates that global ag sector sequesters 5% of total GHG emissions.
epa.gov/ghgemissions/g…

5/6
What's the global potential of SOC sequestration & restoration of degraded/desertified soils? Upper range 1.2 Pg C/y *for about 50 years* with a cumulative sink capacity of 60 Pg (<6 years worth of 2014-level emissions)
Lal, R. (2003). Then what? tinread.usarb.md:8888/jspui/bitstrea…

6/6
Agriculture is essential.
Ag is NOT the problem.
Agriculture is & will be *part* of the solution.
Improving the GLOBAL Agriculture, Forestry & Land Use sector's profile depends on⬆️efficiency.
Not eating animal source foods is NOT the answer (look at the other sectors).

That's my current understanding.
But I'm just a forage agronomist. I'm sincerely interested in constructive feedback if I've missed something.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @GrassBased

Peter Ballerstedt

@GrassBased

30 Nov 20

1/n Food for thought:
An understanding of metabolic health and a species appropriate diet hasn't informed conversations about sustainable health care. The "downstream" effects of food choices are usually informed by the received wisdom of the official "healthy diet."
What if:

2/n
So what if, just speculating wildly here, what if there was a way for people with T2D to stop using those medications? I know, that sounds like crazy-talk, but hear me out.

Big numbers and unfamiliar units are sometimes hard to visualize, so here's one equivalent:

3/n
And another (I'll add more).

Remember:
- These figures are *just* for the diabetes pharmaceuticals
- These figures do not include medications for related metabolic diseases.

Please note: These are preliminary figures. I've asked folks to check my work.

Read 16 tweets

Peter Ballerstedt

@GrassBased

27 Sep 20

@SimmonsBart

Real World vs biophobic #TechnoUtopianists.
1a
"Livestock are critical for sustainable development yet often overlooked. The world’s cows, sheep, goats, pigs, poultry and other farm animals are the mainstay of livelihoods across the developing world. ... "

@SimmonsBart

1b
"... And the energy and nutrient-dense milk, meat and eggs these animals produce provide hundreds of millions of families in the world’s poorer countries with basic livelihoods, incomes, food and nutrition."
whylivestockmatter.org

2a
"Globally, livestock contribute about 40% of agricultural GDP and provide livelihoods and incomes for at least 1.3 billion people worldwide. ... "
whylivestockmatter.org/economic-oppor…

Read 14 tweets

Peter Ballerstedt

@GrassBased

25 Sep 20

1/5
Food for Thought (especially for the rural #Ruminati):
“Diabetes prevalence is about 15 to 17 percent higher in rural areas than in urban areas..."

2/5
"in rural areas, the likelihood of dying due to diabetes-related hospitalizations was 3.4 percent higher in rural areas than in large central metropolitan areas..."

3/5
"Mortality rates were highest within the rural areas of the South and Midwest regions (21.0 and 15.1 deaths per 100,000 population, respectively)... "

hrsa.gov/about/news/pre…

Read 7 tweets

Peter Ballerstedt

@GrassBased

13 Sep 20

People send me things. <Thank you Mary!>
Just eat "Real Food!"

Read 4 tweets

Peter Ballerstedt

@GrassBased

25 Aug 20

@fleroy1974

1/4 Thought for our time:
"Experts should be on tap, not on top."

@fleroy1974 tweeted this '02 paper "The arrogance of preventive medicine" cmaj.ca/content/167/4/…. While it's focus is the hormone replacement therapy debacle, *perhaps* we can add a few others to the list 🤔😏🤠

2/4
"I place the blame directly on the medical “experts” who, to gain private profit (from their industry affiliations), to satisfy a narcissistic need for public acclaim or in a misguided attempt to do good, advocate “preventive” manoeuvres that have never been validated...

3/
... in rigorous randomized trials. Not only do they abuse their positions by advocating unproven “preventives,” they also stifle dissent. Others, who should know better than to promote “preventive” manoeuvres without clinical trials evidence, are simply wrongheaded."

Read 4 tweets