Translated material
Scientists have accused the UN of distorting data
More than 20 scientists turned to the UN food and agricultural organization (FAO) demanding to review or withdraw a report on carbon dioxide in livestock, which contains “multiple and disgusting errors”. It is reported by The Guardian.
The study of the FAO, in “serious distortions” in which Paul Berens and Matthew Hayek drew attention, is called the “ways to reduce emissions” and was presented at the Cop28 climate summit (UN Climate Change Conference) in December 2023 as an “updated comprehensive review” of global livestock emissions until 2050.
After Berens and Hayek discovered errors at the beginning of 2024, they said that the FAO made incorrect calculation of greenhouse emissions from the production of meat, constantly confused the initial years in the analysis and did not take into account that reduced consumption of animal products would free from grazing livestock, which, in turn, will contribute to the removal of carbon dioxide from atmosphere.
According to scientists, these mistakes led the FAO to the wrong conclusions, which, in turn, reduced the effectiveness of the diet to combat greenhouse gases. The diet proposed by scientists involved a reduction in the consumption of animal products, the production of which is one fourth of all anthropogenic emissions. Now, in the offers of the FAO, the share of animal products is higher.
In response to the complaint, the UN invited Berens and Hayek to the webinar as listeners - they could leave their questions only in the chat.
“There was no serious answer [to the mistakes made]. [At the webinar] they partially and very unscientific examined only one of the complaints and ignored most of the others. Our fears were hardly taken seriously. <...> FAO made serious mistakes and must recognize them and fix them in order to preserve his scientific authority, ”Berens said.
In response to this, the chief researcher of FAO Bet Crowford said that the emissions assessment by 2050 are a “rude forecast”. The chosen Crawford wording caused the indignation of the scientific community, and 78 ecological groups joined Hayek and Berens: together they wrote a collective letter that says that “it is unacceptable for the FAO, a respected UN institution, to close their eyes to these serious errors, calling them a“ rough assessment ”, while the data and the political recommendations that it provide have such an international influence.”
In order not to miss the main materials of the "cold", subscribe to our social networks!
