Shutterstock

News CBS

Greenhouse gas emissions from livestock and land remain the same

13 December 2023 - Linda van Eekeres - 11 comments

The agricultural and horticultural sector emitted 6% more greenhouse gases in the third quarter of this year than in the same quarter in 2022. This is evident from new CBS figures. The difference is due to the fact that horticulturists have made more use of their natural gas-based cogeneration plants. Statistics Netherlands suspects this is due to the decreased natural gas prices.

However, methane and nitrous oxide from livestock and land account for the most emissions and their emissions remained unchanged. The sector's share of total emissions was 17% in the third quarter of 2023. 

Total greenhouse gas emissions in the third quarter were 9% lower than in the same quarter in 2022. According to Statistics Netherlands, this is mainly because the electricity sector emitted 37% less CO2, because 79% less energy was produced from coal. This causes the energy sector's share of emissions to drop from 23% to 16%.

Industry has the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions at almost 39%. The industry used slightly more natural gas, but less oil and coal, so that the industry's final greenhouse gas emissions remained the same.

Do you have a tip, suggestion or comment regarding this article? Let us know

Linda van Eekeres

Linda van Eekeres is co-writing editor-in-chief. She mainly focuses on macro-economic developments and the influence of politics on the agricultural sector.
Comments
11 comments
Subscriber
quite coarse 13 December 2023
This is in response to it Boerenbusiness article:
[url = https: // www.boerenbusiness.nl/article/10907164/uitstoot-broeikasgassen-vee-en-land-remains-equal]Greenhouse gas emissions from livestock and land remain the same[/url]
It's a shame that there is no breakdown between livestock and land emissions.
And also curious about emissions from natural soil.
Subscriber
Louis Pascal deGeer 13 December 2023
I very much hope that the new government has the courage to completely re-examine everything to do with climate, carbon dioxide and nitrogen on the basis of correct scientific recommendations.
If you make a balance of the net CO₂ emissions in arable and pasture farming, you will almost always see negative CU2 emissions in 24 hours due to carbon assimilation. Of course, we as a society must do everything we can to deal better with the environment, but the agricultural sector must be the hero of the story and not the unwanted guest at the table. WAKING
Bio + 14 December 2023
Dear Louis Pascal. "You are talking about looking at it all over again on the basis of correct scientific recommendations. Yes, it is true that plants in arable farming and pasture absorb net CO2. That is after all what they are intended for. Without CO2 absorption, there is no production of biomass. But that would are especially important if that biomass were stored in an underground mine and the CO2 is permanently captured. But the intention of agriculture is that the products serve as food. All carbon is then released and therefore zero net sequestration in the food system.
Subscriber
peer 14 December 2023
As long as we burn coal or oil there will always be CO2 increases
this light has been stuck at the bottom of the soil for 10000 years
Subscriber
sea ​​breeze 14 December 2023
Pascal, good idea! Bio+ is lagging behind. Name me a sector where so much CO2 is captured annually that you can still eat to stay alive, so it is neatly in the cycle! That is aquaculture alone and special in addition to agriculture. For many years, until before our era, it has been clear that nature does not produce enough to meet human demand for food. Then you can discuss whether there is any overconsumption or waste, but the final conclusion is clear! FAO is also clear and dares to go against the green ecologists that efficient production such as this is being achieved here in the Netherlands with great prospects for also closing the cycle, with fermentation of residual/by-products and use of by-products in food preparation for the consumer, which is a world model example promotion is: Cycle in order, biodiversity in order and food for people in their own country. Biggest dilemma: power-hungry in many countries who go for their own wealth and allow their subjects to flee for poverty and religious idiocy!
Subscriber
Louis Pascal deGeer 14 December 2023
Coal for energy supply? Bring coal, oil and gas under one heading? Why is the gas not permanently removed from the fossil fuel denominator? Almost clean but still in the damn box. I'm curious to know which box the "white hydrogen" will be in! Oh yes, you can extract carbon from coal and even make diamonds from it?
We are all in a mental prison, WAKE UP.
Subscriber
Ruud 14 December 2023
It is strange that there is only panic about more CO2, nitrogen and many others, but never anything about the oxygen content of the atmosphere, whether it decreases or increases, while oxygen is needed for every combustion.
(forest fire, incinerators, power plants, fossil and electric vehicles, breathing, etc, etc.
Subscriber
realist 14 December 2023
It is a fairly simple conclusion, with an increase in CO2 you have more chlorophyll production, which means that CO2 is converted into oxygen.

it remains a self-regulating system
Subscriber
roy 15 December 2023
the consumer ensures that the carbon is released again. So why attribute this to the farmer again bio+???
Subscriber
Bio + 15 December 2023
roy wrote:
the consumer ensures that the carbon is released again. So why attribute this to the farmer again bio+???
Dear Roy. I have little need to judge. Understanding (or attempting to understand) is much more fun. The fact that carbon is being released again is neither the fault of the consumer nor the farmer. It is a property of the food system. But what I see in agriculture is something different. Patting oneself on the back that carbon is being captured. Not untrue. But not relevant because that carbon is not stored for a long time (but it is if it concerns the cultivation of miscanthus/flax/hemp for construction). What also strikes me: agriculture wants to defend its position with all its might by informing the public through the real story. The real truth. But what if agriculture does not defend itself, what happens then? Surprisingly little in my opinion. People don't stop eating then. Shifts will then occur. From conventional to organic or back again. From animal to vegetable or back again. If food production is not sustainable, it is not the farmer who ultimately loses out, but the consumer.
Subscriber
Louis Pascal deGeer 16 December 2023
CO₂ a greenhouse gas? War on Carbon the Father and Mother of life, organic chemistry? Of course there are harmful carbon compounds, but they occur very rarely in primary food production, the same applies to nitrogen. And of course Ruud is right when he asks why no one is talking about oxygen, because if it is missing, only harmful compounds remain in the air, soil, plants, animals and humans. Organic work focuses on the oxygen cycle in water, soil, plants, animals and humans. All modern viruses cause a lack of oxygen in the body. Here in Brazil we learned from a Dutch farmer that aerobic soil life sets the tone with NKG No-till, with the result that no green manures or stubble are plowed under or everything remains on the surface.
You can no longer respond.

Sign up for our newsletter

Sign up and receive the latest news in your inbox every day

News Enterprise

Rabobank positive about nitrogen plan budget

BBTV Ger Koopmans (LTO)

The minister has severely damaged my trust.

Opinions Jaap Uenk

GVE standard frustrates future of dairy farming

Opinions Lubbert van Dellen

The biggest sticking point of the nitrogen letter lies in land-based requirements.

Call our customer service +0320(269)528

or mail to support@boerenbusiness.nl

do you want to follow us?

Receive our free Newsletter

Current market information in your inbox every day

Sign up