Do Cows Contribute More to Global Warming Than Industrial Pollutants?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RAD4921
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ozone
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Cows, sheep, and other ruminants significantly contribute to global warming through methane emissions, primarily from eructation rather than flatulence. Each cow emits approximately 200 to 400 quarts of methane gas daily, with animal methane accounting for 18% of the greenhouse effect, second only to carbon dioxide. The increase in atmospheric methane is linked to a rising global cattle population, which has grown in the last decade. Potential solutions include the use of antibiotics in cattle feed to reduce methane production, although implementation varies globally.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of greenhouse gases and their impact on climate change
  • Knowledge of ruminant digestion and methane production
  • Familiarity with the role of antibiotics in livestock management
  • Awareness of global cattle population trends and agricultural practices
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of methane on the greenhouse effect and climate change
  • Explore methods for reducing methane emissions in livestock, including dietary changes
  • Investigate the role of antibiotics in animal agriculture and their environmental implications
  • Study the relationship between global cattle population growth and methane emissions
USEFUL FOR

Environmental scientists, agricultural researchers, policymakers, and anyone interested in the intersection of livestock management and climate change.

RAD4921
Messages
346
Reaction score
1
Dear Cecil:

Is it true that cow, sheep, and termite flatulence does more damage to the ozone layer than fluorocarbons? How much damage do human farts do? --Mojo, Washington, D.C.

Cecil replies:

Couple issues we need to deal with here, Moe. The first is your imperfect grasp of the threats to the Earth's atmosphere. While it's true that gas of, uh, biological origin may be a problem, the concern isn't the ozone layer (which is being damaged by chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs) but rather the greenhouse effect, which causes global warming.

Some newspaper reporters aren't quite getting it either. You were no doubt moved to write by a story in the Washington Post headlined "Feed, Animal Flatulence and Atmosphere." It described the work of one Donald Johnson, an animal-nutrition specialist at Colorado State University, who supposedly has been studying cow flatulence. According to the story, animal flatulence "contributes in a large way to the potentially catastrophic warming of the globe, the 'greenhouse effect.'" Each cow emits 200 to 400 quarts of methane gas per day, or 50 million metric tons per year.

Just one little problem. Cows don't emit 400 quarts of flatulence a day. According to Professor Johnson, they emit 400 quarts' worth of burps, known in polite circles as eructation. The Post, in other words, doesn't know one end of a cow from the other! And this is the paper that broke Watergate--although, to be fair, I don't suppose they assign their top reportorial resources to the cow burp beat.

Details aside, animal methane does present a definite threat to the biota. It's believed 18 percent of the greenhouse effect is caused by methane, putting it second on the list of offending gases behind carbon dioxide. Methane breaks down in the atmosphere to form carbon dioxide, ozone, and water, all of which absorb heat. The temperature of the atmosphere rises, the ice caps melt, and next thing you know you're pumping the Atlantic Ocean out of your basement.

There are several major sources of methane: rice paddies (methane-producing bacteria thrive in the underwater environment), swamps and wetlands (ditto), mining and oil drilling, landfills, termites (although there's still some controversy on this one), "biomass burning" (notably in the Amazon rain forest), and animals. Ninety percent of animal methane is produced by ruminants (i.e., cud-chewers). These include sheep, goats, camels, water buffalo, and so on, but most of all cattle, of which the world has an estimated 1.2 billion.

Ruminants eat hay and grass and stuff containing cellulose, which can be digested only by special microbes that, to minimize commuting problems, live in the ruminants' guts. Unfortunately, the microbes tend to make a mess, and about 6 or 7 percent of what they eat winds up as methane. Thus the problem.

Now, you're probably saying, what the hey, cows have been around forever, how come all of a sudden they're a threat? All we know is this: atmospheric methane has been increasing at the alarming rate of 1 percent a year, and something's got to be causing it. The world cattle population is thought to have increased in the last decade, and Lord knows the Brazilians don't feel like taking any more heat for torching the Amazon. So hey, let's blame the cows.

Is there hope? Professor Johnson thinks a timely application of antibiotics in cattle feed could retard the microbes' methane production. But by and large antibiotics are already in use in the U.S., while in many third-world countries cattle forage out in the fields, making antibiotics difficult to administer.

In other words, we've got still another largely insoluble problem that threatens to end life as we know it. Sometimes I wish one of these looming disasters would go ahead and happen, just to end the suspense.

--CECIL ADAMS
 
Biology news on Phys.org
How much damage do human farts do?
I don't know about their contibution to the greenhouse effect but someone told me a fat, bedridden man once asphyxiated on his own farts. This may have come from The Darwin Awards, I'm not sure.
 
What happens to the carbon in grass that grows, dies, and rots? Does most of it get converted to soil? If so, how much?
 
According to Al Gore the other night, the ozone layer is starting to repair itself and close back up again.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K