Green beef

The following is an analysis of the Argentinean Grazing system. Argentina produces the best beef in the world and what is best their method involves 100% organic, zero carbon print raising method for the cattle. How could this be possible? By smart planning and correct resource allocation. The best part? The manure left behind by the cattle fertilizes the soil to plant any kind of crops that can be in turn used to be harvested and the left overs to feed the cattle the following year. Creating a natural cycle that makes Argentinian beef the greenest one on earth!

In the Pampa Region the most popular alfalfa grazing system for beef production is the so called
“7x35” because it results from a combination of an average of 7 days of grazing (GP) and 35
days of resting (GF), which means a total grazing cycle in a year is of 42 days. The 7x35 system is simple, effective and cheaper than others that are based on higher number of paddocks. To organize the system, the pasture is divided into 6 grazing strips o paddocks, which are grazed in turns, following a regular schedule. During spring and the beginning of summer, when alfalfa is
growing very rapidly, succession of paddocks can be altered in order to maintain forage quality
sufficiently high. The escaped paddocks are generally used for hay production. On the other
extreme of the systems scale is the so-called “1x35”, that combines 1 day of GP and 35 days of
GF, and gives a total grazing cycle of 36 days. This system, which divides the pasture into 36 1-
day grazing paddocks, is more intensive than the 7x35 system and offers more flexibility for
escaping strips so as to keep highly enough forage quality; on the other hand, it requires more
infrastructure (mainly fences) and personnel attention. Due to the latter, the 1x35 system is only
exceptionally used in the Pampas for beef operations.

Using slightly different combinations of GF and GP, some other grazing systems ranging in
between the two previously described have been proposed. For example, Kloster et al. (15)
compared a 2x34 system (18 paddocks) with the traditional 7x35 system in an experiment carried out at INTA Marcos Juarez. Using the same grazing pressure for both systems, they found that the 2x34 system produced 11.2% (p<0.05) more kg of beef ha-1 than the other. According to the authors, the total grazing cycle of 36 days (2+34) in the first system produced 12.3% (p<0.01) more forage yield than the 7x35 system (total cycle of 42 days), allowing a 12.9% (p<0.01) increase in the stocking rate and thus producing a higher amount of beef per unit area.

An alternative grazing system is the so called “leaders” (L) and “followers” (F), in which two
groups of animals are formed in order to alternatively graze the same paddock: group L enters
first and consumes the upper half of the canopy, after which enters group F and grazes the
remaining forage in the paddock. Each group of animals is conformed based on nutritional
requirements relating to category, developmental stage, productivity level or species. A key point
in the use of the LF system is to manage forage allowance in order to avoid important feed
restrictions in the F group. In that sense, Redmon (19) suggested that the L group should consume
no more than 1/3 of the initially available forage and Blaser (2) took that level up to 50%. In
Argentina, Kloster et al. (16) did not find any difference in beef production per hectare between a
6x35 and a LF (3 days for each group) system. Nevertheless, the use of LF could be useful in
helping to handle the excess of forage in spring/summer, and provided there is a possibility of
forming groups of animals with different nutritional requirements.

After analyzing this simple method that requires no other investment than fencing the property one must wonder why this is not being done in the US.
It is something to think about when we are aproching a time in history where farmers, consumers and Gas companies will be competing for the same grain to feed live stock, people and produce bio fuels.

The ultimate green home

Here are 7 great reasons for building with Straw Bales:

Reason #1 Energy Efficiency.

A well built straw bale home can save you up to 75% on heating and cooling costs. In fact, in most climates, we do not even install air conditioning units into our homes as the natural cooling cycles of the planet are enough to keep the house cool all summer long.

Reason #2 Sound Proofing.

Straw bale walls provide excellent sound insulation

and are superior wall systems for home owners looking to block out the sounds of traffic or airplanes in urban environments.

Reason # 3 Fire resistance.

Straw bale homes have roughly three times the fire resistance of conventional homes. Dense bales mean limited oxygen which in turn means no flames.

Reason # 4 Environmental responsibility.

Building with straw helps the planet in many ways. For example, straw is a waste product that is either burned or composted in standing water. By using the straw instead of eliminating it, we reduce either air pollution or water consumption, both of which impact the environment in general.

Reason #5 Natural Materials

The use of straw as insulation means that the standard insulation materials are removed from the home. Standard fiberglass insulation has formaldehyde in it, a known carcinogen. Bale walls also eliminate the use of plywood in the walls. Plywood contains unhealthy glues that can off-gas into the house over time.

Reason #6 Aesthetics

There is nothing as calming and beautiful as a straw bale wall in a home. Time and time again I walk people through homes and they are immediately struck by the beauty and the “feeling” of the walls. I really can’t explain this one, you’ll just have to walk through your own to see what I mean.

Reason #7 Minimize wood consumption.

If built as a load bearing assembly, the wood in the walls can be completely eliminated, except for around the windows. The harvesting of forests is a global concern and any reduction in the use of wood material is a good thing for the long term health of the planet.

Even infill bale homes can reduce the use of wood by using engineered lumber for the posts and beams. The engineered material uses smaller, faster growing trees in place of larger, slower growing species.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Andrew Morrison is the founder and owner of A. C. Morrison Construction, LLC, a company specializing in straw bale construction. Andrew has a passion for straw bale construction that is matched only by his desire to teach his knowledge to others. Andrew is the creator and builder of the Straw Bale Village, a community of 15 straw bale homes in the National Historic Landmark City of Jacksonville, Oregon. He is a skilled, licensed General Contractor (CCB License #161204) with experience in designing and building both conventional and straw bale homes. Andrew has owned A. C. Morrison Construction, LLC, since 1996. Andrew received a BA degree from Hampshire College in 1995 for Glacial Geology. He also has a degree in construction technology. Please visit his professional web site at: www.StrawBaleConstruction.net

Energy made from Waste (solution to energy crisis?)

The method offers a potential solution to problems that might be created by increasing production of ethanol with conventional methods, which use corn grain as a feedstock. Boosting ethanol production with conventional methods would require additional crops and heavy fertilizer use, increasing runoff into waterways and threatening ecosystems.

The new concept, however, which Purdue researchers call a flexible carbon-to-liquid fuel process, would require no additional crops and use primarily wastes as the feedstock, said Fu Zhao, a Purdue assistant professor of mechanical engineering.

"This technique is more flexible than conventional methods because we can process a wider range of very different feedstocks and, at the same time, we can generate a wider range of end products - not just gasoline and diesel but ethanol and hydrogen. Or we could generate electricity directly from the gas produced," he said.

The method also would be immune to the market fluctuations of corn and other crops and less affected by disturbances such as feedstock supply shocks and market demand changes. The method also could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 50 percent compared with petroleum-derived gasoline.

The system first requires processing carbon-containing waste, such as paper, wood, plastic and rubber, into small pieces with a diameter of a few millimeters, or thousandths of a meter. The pieces would then be fed into a "gasifier," where the materials would be turned into a gas containing hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, methane and other hydrocarbons.

This gas would be further processed to get rid of everything but the hydrogen and carbon monoxide, referred to as synthesis gas or syngas. This gas could then be used to directly run a turbine to generate electricity, or it could be converted into gasoline and diesel fuel for transportation using a process called Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. The technique could be used to produce ethanol, jet fuel and other biofuels from the solid wastes. The analysis suggests that it is possible to replace 15 percent to 20 percent of transportation fuels consumed daily in the United States with liquids derived from this flexible process. These estimates are based on the present consumption level, which is about 390 million gallons per day, he said.

Findings were detailed in a paper presented on Sept. 29 during the 6th Global Conference on Sustainable Product Development and Life Cycle Engineering in Busan, Korea. The preliminary analysis was written by Zhao; Purdue doctoral student Dongyan Mu; P. Suresh Rao, the Lee A. Rieth Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering and Agronomy; and Thomas Seager, an associate professor in the Golisano Institute for Sustainability at the Rochester Institute of Technology.