Did any of you see the CNN report about saying that a cow produces more greenhouse gas then an SUV?

Question

I love my steak! I love my Earth! What should I do?

Heather & Anders, If what you are saying is correct then isn't CNN defrauding us because of their lack of "complete" information? Maybe they should review their own editorials in "Keeping them honest"!

Answer 1

I saw that report. I think that since they were criticizing cows as a source of Global Climate Change, thus fueling the skeptics of this issue to now blame the cows instead of their SUVs, that they should have covered more of the "facts" on this matter. First of all, cows are producing methane from a consumed product which had originally removed the carbon from the atmosphere. The cow is releasing it back into the atmosphere, but the net effect is zero emissions. Even if the cow had not eaten the grass it still would have decomposed and released it into the atmosphere. It is irrelevant to try and "reduce" the amount of methane that cows produce (as they had suggested in the report), because if you feed them a different grass which results in less methane it simply means that that particular strain of grass removed less CO2 from the atmosphere in the first place, it's still zero overall emissions. Second this type of circumstance actually creates a unique opportunity. An attempt should be made to capture the methane so that it can be used by humans in its release back into the environment, thus becoming a "green" zero overall emissions energy. Cowfineries, which turn grass into methane! Methane that can fuel your BBQ... Enjoy!

Answer 2

certainly they do! If some-20years in the past+ we did not have just about as many animals interior the factories as we do now. So the upward push of cows and different livestock trapped interior the production facility farms being fed ingredients they shouldn't consume, they launch a lot of methane that's taking an element on the international warming percentile. the international's a million.5 billion cows and billions of alternative grazing animals emit dozens of polluting gases, alongside with lots of methane. 2-thirds of all ammonia comes from cows. The animals methane is 23 situations extra useful than carbon dioxide. Cows emit a huge volume of methane by using belching, with a lesser volume by using flatulence. data variety concerning how lots methane the universal dairy cow expels. some professionals say a hundred liters to 2 hundred liters an afternoon (or approximately 26 gallons to approximately fifty 3 gallons), mutually as others say that is as much as 500 liters (approximately 132 gallons) an afternoon. in spite of everything, it truly is a lot of methane, an volume comparable to the pollutants produced via a motor vehicle in an afternoon. study something interior the path of the source. And pass green, be vegan!

Answer 3

From a technical standpoint, methane is a more powerful Greenhouse gas than CO2. Whether the GHG originates from a "natural" or "fossil" source is irrelevant as long as you are talking about different gases.

No problem, just combust the methane and NOW you have a "neutral" effect.

We can modify the cattle's diet to reflect a more natural diet, taking advantage of the natural flora that have been in their digestive systems for generations...and making them LESS GASSY. But there will always be some methane as the result of cellulose metabolism - so, let's use the methane as a renewable alternative fuel!

When life gives you lemons...

Answer 4

The SUV that produces CO2 but God put plants here to recycle our air . Some just want to count only the trees but is is every plant including algae. So CO2 is not a pollutant ,it is part of Mother nature process.
Don't worry about the Methane it is not there. Methane is a very light gas and will go very high in our atmosphere. How did the environmentalist measure it ,I have Sean lots of Numbers . There is another problem with Methane . High up like that I think the intensity of the sun is oxidizing it . So there is no large lake of methane in our upper atmosphere.
If the green house gas is not there ,there is no Global warming.

Answer 5

Don't bother about it.
The real difference is: cows emissions are a part f a natural cycle. The emissions they produce (which they gain from their food) one year reenter the eco-system the next as part of the vegetation.feeding them. This cycle goes on year after year for as long as the amount of cows, and their food sources are fairly constant.
The GHG's in fossil fuel is pretty much the same with the difference that they have been taken out of the eco-system. Their rapid re-introduction takes place at a faster, and larger, scale then the eco-system can absorb, thus the rising levels of GHG's.

Bradley: Honestly, I don't think they know they are doing. Do you happen to have a link to that report? I didn't find it. :)

Answer 6

Not cows but "livestock production"... sure cows contribute some methane emissions from a cow but the majority of the greenhouse gases due to the industry, “carbon emissions from feed production,” “carbon emissions from livestock processing,” “carbon emissions from refrigerated transport,” “nitrogen emissions from feed-related fertilizer,” “emissions from aquatic sources following chemical fertilizer use…” and a few more

Answer 7

I didn't see that particular report, but it is old news. The UN has even stated that cattle are a major contributor to greenhouse gases. I wonder how many global warming activists are vegetarian.

Edit: I love how the activists are quick to discount this report, because cattle "emissions" are a natural process. Well, there is nothing natural about cattle being raised for food. "Nature" is taken out of the picture. Cattle are bred more than would naturally occur in the wild. If we didn't eat cattle, ranchers wouldn't raise as much.

Mind you, I think the whole global warming hysteria is ridiculous anyway, but I love the rationalization that is going on here.

Answer 8

its true, in their digestive system they actually fart methane!!
but that doesn't mean its not our fault...think of just how many people drive SUVs, and other cars...
if everyone stopped completely, there would be a huge change in CO2 levels, although obviously this is not practical.
we learn all about this in chemistry at school, its good they are teaching us about it now.
anyway, humans also mass produce cows for, as you say, meat and leather.
i guess you can try to cut down, or just buy pure steak, not anything with bits like gelatin, which all adds up.
its hard, but maybe this is just meant to be....

Answer 9

worms may not be as environmentally friendly as the growing number of gardeners who use them to help compost their kitchen scraps and grass clippings believe, say scientists.

'The amount of worm composting is very, very small and the amount of landfill is huge' - Wormeries 'may add to greenhouse gases'
'The amount of worm composting is very, very small and the amount of landfill is huge'

In fact, the greenhouse gases emitted by a large commercial worm composting plant may be comparable to the global warming potential of a landfill site of the same scale, according to the Open University.

This is because worms used in composting emit nitrous oxide - a greenhouse gas 296 times more powerful, molecule for molecule, than carbon dioxide.

Landfill sites produce methane which is 23 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Jim Frederickson, senior research fellow at the Open University's faculty of technology, said: "We know from research in Germany that a third of the nitrous oxide emissions coming from the soil are associated with worms.

"What we found from looking at large worm composting systems is that their emissions could be comparable in global warming potential to the methane from landfill sites."


GOBAL WORMING ?????????

Answer 10

Its not really true. Cows generally vote republican so cnn is just doing its best smear campaign.