Firms face pressure over “shrinking” fields for air pollution

• ECIU estimates that fields with zero emissions of particulate matter could be as much as 2.5 million tonnes of nitrogen emissions from agriculture.
• According to the report, the total amount of nitrogen is 19.5 million tonnes; meanwhile, the material cites the highest figures since 1984, with estimates of up to 390 million tonnes of airborne nitrogen emissions.
• Nationwide produce Tim O'Malley claims that it is possible to reduce emissions from agriculture or even emissions by the amount that farms will have to export through the country.

Firms in the UK are facing pressure after a report published by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) suggested that, over the past year, the country’s fields could be “shrinking” in size, with at least 2.5 million tonnes of nitrogen emissions from agriculture.

According to the Met Office, England at the UK’s warmest and driest has had the warmest winter in 190 years, and also the warmest time of year. The ECIU says that fields with zero emissions of particulate matter could be as much as 2.5 million tonnes of nitrogen emissions from agriculture.

Materials also note that ECIU estimates that the report’s findings are based on “the highest figures since 1984,” and that ECIU also estimates that farms could have up to 390 million tonnes of airborne nitrogen emissions.

Nationwide produce Tim O'Malley says that the situation “is like a samosa that will be cooked,” and that it is possible to reduce the emissions from agriculture. The material also notes that farms may be able to reduce emissions from agriculture by the amount that farms will have to export through the country.

In O'Malley’s words, “the report’s conclusions are based on incorrect information,” and that the report’s data is “inaccurate.” He also says that “the figures are wrong,” and that “it is impossible to reduce emissions from agriculture.”

According to the material, the Environment Agency in England has said that the report’s estimates are incorrect. It also says that: England’s figures are 8% higher than the average, while the UK’s is 7%; and for that, the UK’s figure is 1% lower than England’s. The material also notes that the report’s temperature forecasts are based on the data that was used, and that the report’s conclusions are “uncertain.”

The material also notes that farms will be able to reduce emissions from agriculture by the amount that was used to calculate the figures. The author adds that “it is not clear” how the report’s conclusions were reached.

ECIU analysis, published by the publication, finds that the report’s findings are based on the “highest figures since 1984,” and that the report’s conclusions are “uncertain.” The material also notes that the report’s conclusions were commented on by Tom Lancaster, and also by Martin Lines, who is the editor of the Nature Friendly Farming Network.

Tags: Europe/Ecology/Research