Slashdot Mirror


Can Cow Backpacks Reduce Global Methane Emissions? (bloomberg.com)

Slashdot reader schwit1 shares an article from Bloomberg which argues "It's time to have a conversation about flatulent cows." "Enteric fermentation," or livestock's digestive process, accounts for 22 percent of all U.S. methane emissions, and the manure they produce makes up eight percent more, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency... Methane, like carbon, is a greenhouse gas, but methane's global warming impact per molecule is 25 times greater than carbon's, according to the EPA.
Cargill has tried capturing some of the methane released from cow manure by using domed lagoons, while researchers at Danone yogurt discovered they could reduce methane emissions up to 30% by feeding cows a diet rich in Omega-3 fatty acids (mostly from flax seed). But now Argentina researchers are testing plastic "methane backpacks" which they strap on to the back of cows, and according to the article "have been able to extract 300 liters of methane a day, enough to power a car or refrigerator."

9 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Ignorant fools by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maybe you should learn not to jump to conclusions lest you show yourself to be the moron.

    The backpack manages to capture and collect the gases emitted through the cow’s mouth or intestinal tract via a tube inserted through the cow’s skin (which the researchers claim is painless).

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  2. Re:No such thing as 'global warming' by NatasRevol · · Score: 3, Informative

    So please tell us what happened to the 2 quadrillion pounds of ice that melted from JUST Greenland in JUST 3 years.

    https://weather.com/news/clima...

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  3. Re:Ignorant fools by nowsharing · · Score: 1, Informative

    That's a nice, happy, clean cow out in pasture too in the article. The exact opposite of what people are actually eating. It's a muddy, grassless horror show out there, and I can't imagine how it would look with a thousand sickly cows wearing festering, manure-soaked backpacks permanently attached to their bodies.

    But then, Cargill doesn't want you to stop eating meat. Just trust that they are working on a solution to the environmental catastrophe that is animal agriculture. If you've read anything at all about Cargill, you'll know that they are NOT to be trusted. The article seems to omit their dark history of political corruption and prosecution of small family farmers however.

  4. A life without steak ? by aepervius · · Score: 3, Informative

    Look you can be vegan or whatever if you want, but I think I'll take the risk and eat my juicy barbecued steak. As for the methane : it contribute only roughly 25% of the warming that CO2 does. The reason are simple : the half life of methane in the atmosphere is short and the quantity of methane are 1/200 of those of CO2. And then enteric fermentation is barely above 16% of total methane emission (all farm animals counted, not only cows). Coal mining , oil drilling and treatment is above that , about 19%. Then there are other sources, rice cultivation (12%), waste treatment and landfill (12%), burning of biomass (9%) look up wiki if you wish for more details and more importantly : the sources of citations. Sure we should keep in check, as long as we don't concentrate on "cow" and follow other venue , like reducing coal and oil CO2/Methane emissions.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:A life without steak ? by nowsharing · · Score: 3, Informative

      There certainly are a lot of interesting citations regarding animal agriculture:

      "Methane is 25-100 times more destructive than CO2 on a 20 year time frame"

      The Journal Science: Improved Attribution of Climate Forcing to Emissions
      Drew T. Shindell*, Greg Faluvegi, Dorothy M. Koch, Gavin A. Schmidt, Nadine Unger, Susanne E. Bauer
      http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5953/716.figures-only

      ”Growing feed crops for livestock consumes 56% of water in the US.”

      ”55% of water consumed in the US is by private homes. 55% of water consumed in the US is for animal agriculture.”

      Jacobson, Michael F. “More and Cleaner Water.” In Six Arguments for a Greener Diet: How a More Plant-based Diet Could save Your Health and the Environment. Washington, DC: Center for Science in the Public Interest, 2006.
      http://www.cspinet.org/EatingGreen/pdf/arguments4.pdf

      Livestock covers 45% of the earth’s total land.

      Thornton, Phillip, Mario Herrero, and Polly Ericksen. “Livestock and Climate Change.” Livestock Exchange, no. 3 (2011).
      https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/10601/IssueBrief3.pdf

      ”Livestock is responsible for 65% of all human-related emissions of nitrous oxide –a greenhouse gas with 296 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide, and which stays in the atmosphere for 150 years”

      United Nations Food & Agriculture Organization
      http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.htm

      ”Livestock and their byproducts account for at least 32,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, or 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.”

      Worldwatch Institute
      http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6294

      ”1/3 of the planet is desertified, with livestock as the leading driver.”

      UN, "Desertification, Drought Affect One Third of Planet, World’s Poorest People, Second Committee Told as It Continues Debate on Sustainable Development".
      http://www.un.org/press/en/2012/gaef3352.doc.htm

      ”A farm with 2,500 dairy cows produces the same amount of waste as a city of 411,000 people.”

      “Risk Assessment Evaluation for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Office of Research and Development. 2004.
      http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=901V0100.txt

      ”130 times more animal waste than human waste is produced in the US – 1.4 billion tons from the meat industry annually. 5 tons of animal waste is produced per person in the US.”

      Animal agriculture: waste management practices. United States General Accounting Office.
      http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/rc99205.pdf

      You could read for months, or just watch Cowspiracy.

  5. NOT "enough to power a car" by legRoom · · Score: 4, Informative

    In what world is 300 litres (presumed at STP) per day of natural gas enough to power a car? Even in something rather efficient like a Honda Civic, that's still only enough for about 5 km per day, or ~2000 km per year.

    [300 L/d of methane] * [0.0364 MJ/L of methane] / [34.2 MJ/L of gasoline] = [0.319 L/d of gasoline equivalent]
    [0.319 L/d of gasoline] / [6 L / 100 km (fuel economy of a modern compact sedan)] = [5.32 km/d]

  6. Re:No such thing as 'global warming' by pahles · · Score: 1, Informative

    It made te sea level rise 2.5 mm. It's in the article you referenced.

    --
    Sig?
  7. Re:Ignorant fools by nowsharing · · Score: 3, Informative

    You might want to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    On the other hand . . . good old Jacob Bronowski taught us the eating meat was a very important step in the Ascent of Man. Meat is a more concentrated form of protein, and freed up time to work on other stuff, besides food collection in the stone ages.

    That is a pretty outdated view in paleoanthropology. It's up there with "Man the Hunter" and "Meat Made us Human". To spare you the mountain of scientific articles, books, and studies on paleonutrition conducted by archaeologists (not those insane popular "paleo" journalistic writers), here is a Scientific American article explaining how your ancient "man" most likely arose from the ability to cook food and consume starches:
    "Human Ancestors Were Nearly All Vegetarians"
    http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/human-ancestors-were-nearly-all-vegetarians/

    You only need to look at any studies of ancient fiber consumption (derived from coprolite data) to arrive at the conclusion that our ancestors (recent and in the deep past) ate a shit-load of plants. Something like 10 times what the average westerner would eat on average.

  8. Re:Just stop raising cows by nowsharing · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's been pretty much disproved. The real culprits seem to be flour and sugar. Enjoy your vegetarian diet.

    "Disproved"? If you don't believe in science, then perhaps the evidence isn't very strong. If you read newspapers and industry sponsored "scientific journalism", you might also think there are health benefits to eating meat. For everyone who does believe in science however, start your investigation here:

    Diet Patterns and Mortality: Common Threads and Consistent Results Marjorie L. McCullough Epidemiology Research Program, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA J. Nutr. June 1, 2014. vol. 144 no. 6 795-796 http://jn.nutrition.org/conten...

    Below are a handful more studies (with lifestyle, age, location, and income adjustments included) that all suggest that meat/dairy is the primary cause of the major diseases we are discussing. Even when you adjust to include "junk-food vegans", you see that they come out ahead. It's not just processed foods that are to blame, although an increased consumption of processed foods is linked to elevated heart disease in all populations.

    M L McCullough. Diet patterns and mortality: common threads and consistent results. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):795-6.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24717365

    M A Martinez-Gonzalez, A Sanchez-Tainta, D Corella, J Salas-Salvado, E Ros, F Aros, E Gomez-Gracia, M Fiol, R M Lamuela-Raventos, H Schroder, J Lapetra, L Serra-Majem, X Pinto, V Ruiz-Gutierrez, Ramon Estruch for the PREDIMED Group. A provegetarian food pattern and reduction in total mortality in the Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea (PREDIMED) study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 May 28;100(Supplement 1):320S-328S.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24871477

    J Reedy, S M Krebs-Smith, P E Miller, A D Liese, L L Kahle, Y Park, A F Subar. Higher diet quality is associated with decreased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality among older adults. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):881-9.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24572039

    G E Fraser, D J Shavlik. Ten years of life: Is it a matter of choice? Arch Intern Med. 2001 Jul 9;161(13):1645-52.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11434797

    Thousands of peer-reviewed papers based on the large-scale studies below support the treating of lifestyle diseases by reducing or eliminating animal product consumption, paired with an increased consumption of whole plant-based foods. These are clinically valid paths to eliminating the diseases, which are most often more effective than prescription drugs, which are geared toward relieving symptoms (e.g. statins) but not the underlying causes of disease.
    Large scale, long-term studies:
    PREDIMED Studies: http://www.predimed.es/publica...
    The Adventist Health Studies: https://publichealth.llu.edu/a...
    The China Studies: https://scholar.google.com/sch...
    The Nurses Health Study: http://www.nurseshealthstudy.o...
    The EPIC Study: http://epic.iarc.fr/

    When humans stop eating meat and switch to whole-food plant based diets, the rates of all leading causes of death (obesity, cancer, heart disease, and pretty diseases of inflammation) drop. To anyone with a scientific mind, modern nutritional-science's data should pretty much indict animal based foods as the direct cause of obesity, along with the consumption of heavily processed foods. It's no wonder that the nations with the highest meat consumption have the highest rates of lifestyle diseases like obesity, diabetes, heart disease, etc.

    A