PDA

View Full Version : White House looks to regulate cow flatulence as part of climate agenda



Cebu_4_2
29th March 2014, 03:56 AM
White House looks to regulate cow flatulence as part of climate agenda

2:50 PM 03/28/2014

As part of its plan to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, the Obama administration is targeting the dairy industry to reduce methane emissions in their operations.

This comes despite falling methane emission levels across the economy since 1990.

The White House has proposed (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/03/28/fact-sheet-climate-action-plan-strategy-cut-methane-emissions) cutting methane emissions from the dairy industry by 25 percent by 2020. Although U.S. agriculture only accounts for about 9 percent of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, it makes up a sizeable portion of methane emissions — which is a very potent greenhouse gas.

Some of these methane emissions come from cow flatulence, exhaling and belching — other livestock animals release methane as well.

“Cows emit a massive amount of methane through belching, with a lesser amount through flatulence,” according to How Stuff Works (http://animals.howstuffworks.com/mammals/methane-cow.htm). “Statistics vary regarding how much methane the average dairy cow expels. Some experts say 100 liters to 200 liters a day… while others say it’s up to 500 liters… a day. In any case, that’s a lot of methane, an amount comparable to the pollution produced by a car in a day.”

“Of all domestic animal types, beef and dairy cattle were by far the largest emitters of [methane],” according to an EPA analysis charting greenhouse gas emissions in 2012 (http://epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/ghgemissions/US-GHG-Inventory-2014-Chapter-6-Agriculture.pdf). Cows and other animals produce methane through digestion, which ferments the food of animals.

“During digestion, microbes resident in an animal’s digestive system ferment food consumed by the animal,” the EPA notes. “This microbial fermentation process, referred to as enteric fermentation, produces [methane] as a byproduct, which can be exhaled or eructated by the animal.”

It’s not just the dairy industry that the Obama administration is clamping down on. The White House is looking to regulate methane emissions across the economy from agriculture to oil and gas operations — all this despite methane emissions falling 11 percent since 1990.

Methane emissions have largely been reduced because of the incentive for companies to capture it and sell it for monetary gain. Oil and gas companies, for example, have been looking for ways to increasingly capture methane leaked from drilling operations which they can then sell.

“The industry has led efforts to reduce emissions of methane by developing new technologies and equipment, and recent studies show emissions are far lower than EPA projected just a few years ago,” said Howard Feldman, head of scientific and regulatory affairs at the American Petroleum Institute. “Additional regulations are not necessary and could have a chilling effect on the American energy renaissance, our economy, and our national security.”

“Methane is natural gas that operators can bring to the market,” he added. “There is a built-in incentive to capture these emissions.”

Environmentalists have been pushing the Obama administration to crack down on methane emissions for some time, arguing that they drive global warming and pollute the air and water. Activists have argued that the methane leakage rate from natural gas operations is 50 percent higher than the EPA estimates.

“President Obama’s plan to reduce climate-disrupting methane pollution is an important step in reining in an out of control industry exempt from too many public health protections,” Deborah Nardone, campaign director of the Sierra Club’s Keeping Dirty Fuels in the Ground campaign. “However, even with the most rigorous methane controls and monitoring in place, we will still fall short of what is needed to fight climate disruption if we do not reduce our reliance on these dirty fossil fuels.”

Republicans and the oil and gas industry argue that the methane leakage rate has been estimated to be 50 times lower than the EPA’s estimate. The GOP argues that the EPA’s estimate is simply an attack on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.

“The EPA has been on a witch hunt to shut down hydraulic fracturing, and yet again the evidence doesn’t back up their excessive claims,” said Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter. “All too often we see the Agency using flawed science for political purposes, but this report – partially funded by environmental activists no less – shows EPA’s emissions estimates from hydraulic fracturing are way off.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/28/white-house-looks-to-regulate-cow-flatulence-as-part-of-climate-agenda/#ixzz2xLdxKUM2

singular_me
29th March 2014, 04:21 AM
don't take me wrong, this is absolutely insane and just another absolute proof that global warming/carbon emissions theories are a farce... but on the other end, quitting consuming daires may turn out being an EXCELLENT thing, a true blessing. Many ppl are lactose intolerant and don't even know it. Not to mention that meat is so unhealthy these days, cows get antibiotics in their feed among many other nasty things... let corporations eat the cake and suffocate under their own weight!

I used to be a rawfoodist 20 years or so ago, (and seriously considering it again as soon as I can start getting veggies from the farm I trade with on a basis of 1/2 day weekly, we are planting now) and the first thing you are taught is that no wild animal drinks the milk of another species... Natural Laws should apply here too.

associating milk to calcium to stay healthy is just another massive scam as one can get calcium elsewhere, from other foods. Additionally (factory-farm) cows need to take a break and that they are FORCED to produce milk is utterly cruel (not being a Peta activist here).


AFTER THE FLUORIDE HOAX, COMES THE MILK DECEPTION

Why milk is bad for you - Natural News

Milk isn't always bad. Mother's milk -- that is, human milk -- provides a growing infant with all the nutrition he needs for the first six months of his life. In fact, human breast milk is designed by nature to be the perfect food for human infants. Similarly, cow's milk is designed by nature to be the perfect food -- for calves, not for human beings..... So why is milk so bad, and how does it cause all of these and other health problems? According to Vivian Goldschmidt, founder of Save Our Bones, there are a variety of myths surrounding milk consumption. One of the first myths, she says, is that drinking milk creates healthy bones because of the calcium found in the milk. However, the animal protein found in milk actually depletes the human body of calcium, exactly the opposite of what milk drinkers expect it to do..... more
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031255_milk_health.html#ixzz2xLjUgLRr



LOL: reminds me that I was called a complete nut for eating raw, 20 years ago... nothing has changed, people mindsets have the habit to resist new ideas and concepts. And it is killing mankind. Every day I wake up shaking my head in disbelief in the face of the tragedy we are in

Glass
29th March 2014, 04:39 AM
I think a couple thousand years of drinking animal milk tells otherwise. The other thing to consider is the protien yield for energy input is pretty hard to rival with other methods.

The cow is like a battery. It spends it's day charging up. Converting low yield grasses via a multiple level digestive process to make sure the maximum energy is extracted. Unlike other animal manures, which come from the same grass inputs, cow manure has the lowest nutrient level. I'm suggesting this is a reasonable observation and that the efficiency of cows in converting vegetation to protein is hard to beat.

It doesn't matter if it is a meat animal or a dairy animal, the protein yield is more than we could ever do eating a diet of 100% vegetation. I don't think we would have much time to do anything else but eat. hmmm sounds like what a cow would do.

And finally, it is not the cow. It is how the cow is managed in intensive farming. It is not natural the way it is currently done.

singular_me
29th March 2014, 04:51 AM
Glass, let's not talk of vegetarianism (this is another debate that cannot be won)... but an omnivore diet. Vegerarianism will work out great for some people but it cannot be a model.

one only has to look at nature, HOW/WHAT do wild animals do to get their nutrition needs met once they stop drinking milk?

How much animal proteins do we need daily- because meat consumption is too out of whack, that's for sure? The FDA servings' table is most likely a fraud designed for wallstreet profits.

Carnivores, and man is an omnivore, kill a prey every 2-3 days, 5-6 days for big predators such as lions... from my own obsrevations, the average meat consumption per person has to be at least around 1lb/day, if not more. I know many people who will eat animal proteins for breakfast. lunch and diner... this cannot be good. It is another myth. Colon cancer may tell us something here as meat stays in the digestive system for days, literally rotting when it is overconsumed..

edit: eating raw is very insightful as when the body is on 100% organic raw fuel, it wont accept foods that it doesnt need. For example tomato taste like vinegar when the body doesnt need that type of nutrients. Nuts taste like cotton balls, meat like cardboard... and I recall that back then I was probably eating like 1.5-2lbs of aninal proteins (fish included) per week, all together. And also 1 to 2 days weekly of spontaneous fast when everything was too untasty, I was not hungry.

Not going to start an endless debate, but I think humans need to come back to their senses as they have been trained to over-consume.




I think a couple thousand years of drinking animal milk tells otherwise. The other thing to consider is the protien yield for energy input is pretty hard to rival with other methods.

The cow is like a battery. It spends it's day charging up. Converting low yield grasses via a multiple level digestive process to make sure the maximum energy is extracted. Unlike other animal manures, which come from the same grass inputs, cow manure has the lowest nutrient level. I'm suggesting this is a reasonable observation and that the efficiency of cows in converting vegetation to protein is hard to beat.

It doesn't matter if it is a meat animal or a dairy animal, the protein yield is more than we could ever do eating a diet of 100% vegetation. I don't think we would have much time to do anything else but eat. hmmm sounds like what a cow would do.

And finally, it is not the cow. It is how the cow is managed in intensive farming. It is not natural the way it is currently done.

Glass
29th March 2014, 05:35 AM
endless debate is what humans do. Over consumption is what we are talking about. So maybe we can agree that if we have an appropriate level of protein the impact of cow flatulence would be reduced.

I eat about 250gms meat a day. Maybe up to 350 on a big day. Most people now, clearly eat much more than they need. The suppliers obviously produce more than is really needed.

mick silver
29th March 2014, 06:15 AM
just if we could regulate Obama and his crew that would be something . all that hot air they put out is warming the earth at a faster rate then they thought

Twisted Titan
29th March 2014, 06:19 AM
The more corrupt the state.....the more numerous the laws

TACITUS

singular_me
29th March 2014, 06:25 AM
this cow flatulence aberation does not only expose the global warming agenda but also highlights fraudulent diets imposed upon us, which has benefits the (milk) industry for décades. It is interesting to see, once again, how the NWO uses the boom-bust cycles to control us all, although the mother of all busts is yet top come.

One thing we can really agreeing on is that fiat money induced-overconsumerism has destroyed the planet and since the elites will never mention the real cause, their fake environmental solutions come down to rationing those who cannot afford the ba$ic requirments to stay healthy.

Dogman
29th March 2014, 06:48 AM
Cow farts?

As said above cows are great in converting grasses and other organic cellulose/silicon containing plants, that humans can not eat. Into high protein milk and meat along with other useful products.

I have always wondered about frijoles refritos/re-fried beans. In many ways a serving looks like something that comes out the south end of a north bound cow, tho tastes wonderful but do contribute to green house gas production also. There are really no good way to de-gasbeans. And humans eat one hell of a bunch of beans worldwide.

So it is discrimination to go after cow farts without including beans and they that eat them into the mix.

Cebu_4_2
29th March 2014, 06:56 AM
Regulate this biatch!

http://fbworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/San-J-Asian-BBQ-Beef1.jpg

Ponce
29th March 2014, 09:02 AM
Tie a bag to the ass of those in congress and the black house and you would have all the free energy needed for the whole country.

V