World Dairy Summit's focus on sustainability set to be challenged
World Dairy Summit’s focus on sustainability set to be challenged.
Friday 5 November, for immediate release. See below for invite to press conference on Monday 8th Nov.
The ‘Coalition Against the World Dairy Summit’ (CAWDS) will be exposing the true cost of current dairy practices with a series of demonstrations and acts of civil disobedience when industry leaders from around the world meet at Skycity next week in order to discuss growth and sustainability with regard to intensive dairy farming.
The coalition, made up of grassroots animal rights and climate change groups, formed to actively oppose the World Dairy Summit and raise public awareness about what is wrong with the corporate dairy model. As New Zealand’s largest and powerful dairy entity and platinum sponsor for the event, Fonterra will play a substantial role at the summit and therefore will also come under scrutiny.
Spokesperson for CAWDS, Claire Dann states “the dairy industry is responsible for animal rights abuses, increasing climate change, jeopardising human health and putting profit first before human and animal livelihoods. This is why when the industry leaders come together for the World Dairy Summit we intend to send them a strong message letting them know that this intensive dairy model has no place in our futures.”
Regarding the treatment of cows, the public would be shocked to know the suffering that goes into their milk and cheese. A spokesperson for coalition member Animal Freedom Aotearoa, Jasmine Gray, comments "the dairy industry treat cows as machines to convert grass into milk, rather than as sentient beings capable of pain and emotional distress. Dairy cows are made pregnant every year to maintain the milk supply; the calves that result are seen as a waste product and are taken away from their mother within 24 hours of birth and often slaughtered. This process is repeated annually until the dairy cows themselves are slaughtered. Their life span goes from 20 to 5 years because of this focus on quick milk production, without the bat of an eye."
Coalition member Climate Camp, see Fonterra's stranglehold over our government and the corporate dairy model it enforces both in New Zealand and overseas one of the primary reasons why New Zealand's greenhouse gas emissions continue to soar. Spokesperson Gary Cranston says “industrial dairying is responsible for over half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions, specifically in the form of methane released by the cows themselves, and nitrous oxide from chemicals used to top dress soil. Meanwhile, farmers all over the world are threatened by corporate agriculture, which pushes for false solutions like genetically engineered animals and plants, and soil based carbon trading instead of taking responsibility for the damage they are causing to our climate”.
As well as demonstrations and actions every day of the four day Summit in Auckland, solidarity events are also set to take place in Wellington and Taranaki, evidence of the growing concern towards the industry and people’s dissatisfaction with governmental leadership to address the problems it creates.
“Those involved with the corporate style dairying represented at the summit will be doing a great job of painting a nice happy picture of milk production and environmental harmony, but the public need to know that in reality there is immense animal suffering, contaminated waterways, increasing levels of climate changing gases and whole new markets being sold milk for its so called ‘health benefits’. We encourage people to find out more about where their milk comes from and join us in opposing the summit and the intensive dairy industry it represents” concludes Dann.
ENDS
for more information visit: www.cawds.org.nz
Schedule for demonstrations co-ordinated by CAWDS:
Monday 8th Nov:
8am - 10.30am outside Skycity
WELLINGTON: 12 noon: rally starting at the bucket fountain in Cuba Mall, then marching to Fonterra's offices in Vodafone House at Midland Park
Tuesday 9th Nov:
8am - 9am outside Skycity
11.30 - onwards rally outside Skycity
Wednesday 10th Nov:
8am - 9am outside Skycity
12.00 noon - Office demo at the Gold Sponsor Orica
Where: 123 Carlton Gore Road, New Market
Thursday 11th Nov:
8am - 9am outside Skycity
More about the key coalition members:
Animal Freedom Aotearaoa: A national grassroots animal rights group who have several campaigns as well as having an investigation group who document the conditions on farms and in slaughterhouses within Aotearoa.
www.animalfreedom.org.nz
Climate Camp: Climate Camp Aotearoa seeks to address the real causes of climate change and build a people's movement that can and will stop disastrous climate change.
http://www.climatecamp.org.nz/
Comments
all the best with your
all the best with your actions against this foul industry,hopefully it changes a few minds and maybe even disrupts their conference!
How many errors?
Quote: "Their life span goes from 20 to 5 years because of this focus on quick milk production"
Truth: Maybe in The States average life times of cows are this low. In New Zealand it is about 8 years. A 20 year old cow would be doing very well in the wild. Some cows on New Zealand dairy farms live to about 14 but can often get sick at this age.
Quote: "one of the primary reasons why New Zealand's greenhouse gas emissions continue to soar"
Truth: Ag emissions have gone up about 9% since 1990. Transport and electricity emissions have seen the biggest rises. Overall 'energy' has gone up 47% since 1990. Ag emissions are now 47% of NZs total while 'energy' are 46%. The latest data was for 2008. If the trend continued energy is already New Zealand's biggest emitter.
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate/greenhouse-gas-inventory-2010/index.html
Quote: "industrial dairying is responsible for over half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions"
This is just a flat out lie. As said above agriculture only represents 47% of NZs emissions. Over half of these are from dry stock farming (meat and wool). Dairy is less than one quarter. What 'industrial dairying' represents I am not sure but it is less than one quarter also.
I recently carried out a
I recently carried out a research assignment for my degree looking at the link between health, agriculture, energy and carbon emissions. The point that you are missing is that industrial dairy is responsible for a large chunk of the carbon emissions from the energy sector. The majority of coal being burnt in energy power plants in NZ are specifically owned by the dairy industry. This increases the carbon emissions that dairy is responsible for. Also, since half of the meat which is sold in the meat industry is actually a by-product of the dairy industry, you also need to add that to the final figure. And when you further complicate things by adding the climate change impact of palm kernels, industrial dairy really does come out as a climate criminal in NZ.
The point you are missing is
The point you are missing is the above press release is riddled with errors. These errors are used to convince people like yourself dairy is evil. Your post is also full of errors.
You say "The majority of coal being burnt in energy power plants in NZ are specifically owned by the dairy industry." This is a comment I very much doubt is correct. I challenge you to post proof of it. To me it sounds like BS.
"Also since half of the meat which is sold in the meat industry is actually a by-product of the dairy industry"
The emissions figures I posted did not exclude the emissions from dairy beef. If you subtract these the dry stock sectors share is even greater.
But what is more interesting is the double standard you use here. On one hand you say the emissions from dairy's by-product, beef, should all be allocated to dairy. But in the very next sentence you argue that some of the emissions from palm oil manufacture should be allocated to that industries byproduct, palm kernel. Why the double standard? Do you just have it in for dairy?
What you may find interesting is that other feeds in NZ have a similar carbon footprint to palm kernel even when the deforestation is accounted for. So the addition of palm kernel does not increase dairy's carbon footprint.
emissions
The emissions in the 2008 government GHG inventory report methane and nitrous oxide to agriculture only. That means they entire miss out the huge quantities of CO2 emitted by the industry in a number of ways. The first is transport: both on the farms; from the farms to the highly centralised factories; at the dairy factory themselves, especially in the drying factories; shipping; transport to shop outlets.
Then there is the use of urea on the farms for fertilizer. Urea is made directly from poor quality brown lignite coal. Thus, the amount of CO2 emissions is huge - but unknown from the NZ govt GHG inventory. Furthermore, NZ Solid Energy plans to build our own Lignite to Urea factory in Southland, further increasing NZ's emissions. Although again, this would come under 'energy' rather than 'agriculture' in future inventories.
Another contibutor of dairy to NZ's CO2 emissions is their significant forestry clearing. This has occurred in both NZ and overseas as a direct result of Fonterra. 25% of NZ pine plantation was felled for dairy farms in the Central
Plateau over the last 6 years! Fonterra is also contributing to massive deforestation in Indonesia because our farms now consume (in a recent 'innovation') palm kernal as stock dry feed. Palm plantations are directly complicit in the clear felling of thousands and thousands of acres of Virgin Indonesian forest. Furthermore, Fonterra has bought and is developing dairy farms in China and South America. The extent on forestry in these other nations is unclear.
Fonterra has made some efficiencies in their factories, mostly by producing marketing products from milk byproducts, like whey. They have been forced by local councils to insist on their farmers cleaning up effluent, without significant success, and what's more, they have also just asked for a 22 year extension for effluent run off into the Mangatainoka River near Whanganui. !!
The change from super-phosphate (bird guano from the Pacific) to Urea (a product of brown coal) and a change in pasture care from plant based nitrogen fixing to urea topdressing has signicantly altered our emissions profile. Given that nitrous oxide is over 300 times worse than carbon dioxide for the greenhouse gas effect, this is a serious and unnecessary change.
The NZ GHG inventory is insufficient to understand the level of emissions produced by the intensification of the dairy industry over the last 9 years. Fonterra has introduced radical change over this period, and the NZ public is relatively unaware of the implications, for the cattle, and for the climate.
Where do you guys get your facts from?
Yes they are for methane and nitrous oxide only.
But the increase would not be that huge! Look at the following link.
http://www.fonterra.com/wps/wcm/connect/50008780453f035c8ed2de9a8f155673/4224+Climate+Change+Book_v6.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
According to this document the ETS will cost the average Fonterra supplier $7,500 per year in 2013 at $25 per tonne (without ag gases). This equates to 300 tonnes CO2 per farm, or 3,150,000 tonnes over 10,500 suplliers. If Fonterra is 90% of NZ dairy this equates to 3,500,000 tonnes for NZ dairy total.
According to the inventory 'Energy' is 33,838,800 tonnes. So the energy from all those dairy plants burning 'coal' (not all burn coal) plus the fuel use on farm equates to about 1/10 NZs energy emissions, or about 4.6% NZs total emissions. If you add this to the roughly 20% of NZs emissions from dairy ag gases you get to about 25% of NZs emissions from dairy. Admittidly this is a very large number. But that does not make the lie that "industrial dairying is responsible for over half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions" is correct. You should not defend mis-information no matter how just you believe the cause. If you do you wake up having become the evil you fight against and that is far worse than losing a debate while keeping you integrity.
(before you comment that the costs are lower because of allocation, the document states Fonterra does not recieve an allocation and the following submission also does;
http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/D37EC080-877A-492A-9C17-30B67276C69E/79913/FonterraCoOperativeGroupLtd1.pdf
)
Also fertiliser; no fertiliser is not made from urea! There is a plan to do this in the future. Currently it is either made at Kapuni from gas or imported.
The 'effluent' you speak of is actually condensate.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/4284167/Fonterra-seeks-to-dump-for-22-years
Condensate is condensed water vapour from the milk evaporators. As Fonterra has said, this water is cleaner than the river.
You claim, "The NZ GHG inventory is insufficient to understand the level of emissions produced by the intensification of the dairy industry over the last 9 years". I would counter that press releases by Greenpeace and The Greens are also insufficient. Wild speculation even more so. Do you have perhaps a study that has been done that would show exactly what the impact is? This may be a good place to start. I note that Fonterra's own study showed 940g CO2e per litre of milk at the farm gate. The extra emissions from factories can easily be added to this.
At the last annual report the company processed 14.8 billion litres; (page 107)
http://www.fonterra.com/wps/wcm/connect/c7b664804472baa7945edeb7b0c23ace/Fonterra+Annual+Report+2010.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=c7b664804472baa7945edeb7b0c23ace
So the farm gate emissions were (14.8 * 0.94) 13.9 million tonnes. If Fonterra is 90% of NZ milk this is 15.4. Around 20.6% of NZs total. Adding on the processing emissions (5000 / 25 * 10500 = 2.1 million tonnes) and your still at about 23%, far less than a majority.
"no fertiliser is not made
"no fertiliser is not made from urea!"
I presume you mean: is not made from coal? Surely the urea is the fertiliser and yes it is currently made from gas at Kapuni - which I might add is a company owned by farmers (dairy and/or beef farmers I'm pretty sure).
"Condensate is condensed water vapour from the milk evaporators. As Fonterra has said, this water is cleaner than the river."
Yes the water may be 'clean' but it is often warm and warm water means more prodution of bacteria and CO2 emmitting algae which also kills off the aquatic life therein and effects the ecology of all else that live off the river systems.
"Do you have perhaps a study that has been done that would show exactly what the impact is?"
Well it easy to make such studies if you have the billions that companies like Fonterra have from capitalising off animal slavery and 'natural resource' pillaging, or that governments gather from taxes. Community activists of course have neither, just their own efforts and koha.
"You should not defend mis-information no matter how just you believe the cause. If you do you wake up having become the evil you fight against and that is far worse than losing a debate while keeping you integrity. "
Nice try. I'm glad that you acknowledge that community activists at least have integrity, unlike the PR firm you appear to work for. Don't try the guilt trip on us, it's an old one. We can argue over statistics and who emits the most but in the end the fact remains: dairy (amongst other things) emits a large amount of greenhouse gases and causes other social and environmental problems globally to which the efforts to solve this have been insufficient and do not look promising for the future because the dairy industry remains focussed on profit.
Some other considerations
Just to add to this all, an argument could also be made that dairying is ultimately cruel to the dairy farmers themselves. With both climate change and peak oil as realities of the world we live in, an industry that is more than 90% for export simply isn't going to be able to exist for too much longer. The longer we assume that such an industry is actually sustainable (in a number of senses), the less time that dairy farmers will have to re-train for a truly sustainable job (and way of life) - and as the difficulties of climate change and peak oil deepen, making the most of whatever leeway of time we have will be fundamentally important not only on the global level, but also in people's personal lives.
DANIEL ROLKE FAKE-VEGAN AND RACIST
STOCKHOLMARE DANIEL ROLKE E FAKE'VEGAN'+ SMYGRASIST
DANIEL ROLKE !
Aha! Den berömde DANIEL ROLKE !!
Nej, han är knappast känd för varken sansad diskussionston eller god smak. Ni ser ju själva ovan vad HAN är kapabel till.
Vi som har haft med honom att göra tidigare har fått utstå det där under många år nu. Vore en lättnad att bli av med.
usch! Det kan bara finnas en enda person av din kaliber, "Maestro".
DET ÄR DU SOM ÄR DANIEL ROLKE! Erkänn! (Det innebär nämligen med att vi kan avfärda allt du hittills har skrivit med att det är ett psykfall som har skrivit det.)
mvh
USCH-MAESTRO
Stockholmare Daniel
Stockholmare Daniel Rolke,,hur det känns att få sin bumerang tillbaka?
:-)
World Dairy Summit’s focus
This is because SNRIs work by inhibiting reuptake, i.e. preventing the serotonin and norepinephrine transporters from taking their respective neurotransmitters purchase Effexor Venlafaxine without prescription back to their storage vesicles for later use. where can i buy Effexor (Venlafaxine) If the norepinephrine transporter normally recycles some dopamine too, then SNRIs will where to order Effexor online also enhance dopaminergic transmission. However, while concurrent increase in dopamine (particularly in the prefrontal cortex) is likely to occur,buy Effexor online without prescription the antidepressant effects of any drug are believed to result largely from the modulation of serotonin and norepinephrine; dopamine is thought to play a comparatively small role buying Effexor Venlafaxine without prescription in depression.