Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

journals.plos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 302 posts

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#161

Post by oivey »

Doji wrote: post #125

A common misconception which I frequently see when this topic arises is the failure to distinguish carbon cycles and one-way carbon emission. You exhale carbon dioxide. However, this carbon dioxide comes from the carbon in the food you eat, and the food you eat obtained it from the atmosphere. Thus, it's a cycle. As a system (ignoring food transportation, deforestation, etc.) it's effectively carbon neutral. By contr…

It’s kind of irrelevant whether or not a cow is carbon neutral by some definition. The point is that greenhouse gas emissions are effectively reduced using this feed. Sure, it isn’t as great as getting rid of all fossil fuels, but it’s something relatively easy we could do.

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#162

Post by rhinoceraptor »

j-pb wrote: post #103
LegitShady wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you don't get your feed from the rainforest? I'm confused with the cause and effect of your statement.

Most crops grown are for livestock. We grow so much that we've stated to deforest the amazonas for it. You will never be able to feed mainl seaweed, nor by grazing alone. The advantage of soil protection from grazing is thus negated by the additional feed production.

This is utterly false. About 20% of livestock feed is fodder crops and grains. The rest is grass, leaves, and plant matter by-products such as crop residue, oil seed cakes, etc. All things that are inedible to humans.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22119...

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#163

Post by frederikvs »

Doji wrote: post #125

A common misconception which I frequently see when this topic arises is the failure to distinguish carbon cycles and one-way carbon emission. You exhale carbon dioxide. However, this carbon dioxide comes from the carbon in the food you eat, and the food you eat obtained it from the atmosphere. Thus, it's a cycle. As a system (ignoring food transportation, deforestation, etc.) it's effectively carbon neutral. By contr…

Even if atmospheric methane has not increased in recent times, it may be a good idea to try and reduce it.

We have too much of one greenhouse gas, and so far we've been unable to change that. Reducing another greenhouse gas could partially compensate for that.

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#164

Post by airhead969 »

samuelbalogh wrote: post #15
rebuilder wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The devil is in the details, like: how do you get it done?

Use the soy we are feeding cattle to feed humans directly. Cut out the middleman - lots of resources freed up all of a sudden. Keep subsidies to beef low and increase subsidies for plant protein (peas, beans, soy). Encourage healthy plant-based diets all over the world. Profit from the vast areas saved to start reforestation projects.

Why not tax meat into oblivion?

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#165

Post by sdenton4 »

lazide wrote: post #144
DubiousPusher wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that simple. Not all American beef is raised on native grasses.

Why is native or not native important from a carbon balance perspective? Alfalfa still pulls carbon from the air when it grows.

Corn, people... American cows prominently eat corn.

It is extremely fertilizer and pesticide intensive, and entirely engineered. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, the fertilizers are also fossil fuel based.

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#166

Post by Doji »

oivey wrote: post #161
Doji wrote: post #125

A common misconception which I frequently see when this topic arises is the failure to distinguish carbon cycles and one-way carbon emission. You exhale carbon dioxide. However, this carbon dioxide comes from the carbon in the food you eat, and the food you eat obtained it from the atmosphere. Thus, it's a cycle. As a system (ignoring food transportation, deforestation, etc.) it's effectively carbon neutral. By contr…

It’s kind of irrelevant whether or not a cow is carbon neutral by some definition. The point is that greenhouse gas emissions are effectively reduced using this feed. Sure, it isn’t as great as getting rid of all fossil fuels, but it’s something relatively easy we could do.

If the seaweed is a pure win, then I agree with this. I just think a deeper understanding is also worthwhile.

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#167

Post by Doji »

frederikvs wrote: post #163
Doji wrote: post #125

A common misconception which I frequently see when this topic arises is the failure to distinguish carbon cycles and one-way carbon emission. You exhale carbon dioxide. However, this carbon dioxide comes from the carbon in the food you eat, and the food you eat obtained it from the atmosphere. Thus, it's a cycle. As a system (ignoring food transportation, deforestation, etc.) it's effectively carbon neutral. By contr…

Even if atmospheric methane has not increased in recent times, it may be a good idea to try and reduce it. We have too much of one greenhouse gas, and so far we've been unable to change that. Reducing another greenhouse gas could partially compensate for that.

Sorry I didn't mean to say that atmospheric methane has not increased. It definitely has, as other commenters have pointed out. However, I contend that most of this increase is likely from other factors. Melting of the polar ice caps, factory emissions, etc.

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#168

Post by airhead969 »

klmadfejno wrote: post #31
airhead969 wrote: post #4

This is like improving ICEs to enable their continued existence. To what end? How about eliminating meat ag altogether since it's a waste of resources, a significant component of man-made climate change, a pandemic risk, a major source of pollution, driver of deforestation, and poses a threat to antibiotic resistance? But no, the typical rationalizations include: "Muh cheezburger is muh freedom. I can eat whatever I…

You could start by not representing people who eat meat as stereotypical fat redneck americans, which, in addition to just being baseline offensive, is hardly a dominant trait among people who eat meat.

Some of my extended family raise longhorns in Texas for tax dodge ("working farm") and social validation reasons. They are definitely obese, redneck Americans who chew tobacco and are months away from their latest stroke, heart attack, and/or cancer.

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#169

Post by agurk »

titzer wrote: post #130
Doji wrote: post #125

A common misconception which I frequently see when this topic arises is the failure to distinguish carbon cycles and one-way carbon emission. You exhale carbon dioxide. However, this carbon dioxide comes from the carbon in the food you eat, and the food you eat obtained it from the atmosphere. Thus, it's a cycle. As a system (ignoring food transportation, deforestation, etc.) it's effectively carbon neutral. By contr…

> Since the methane released from cattle is continually degrading, it does not accumulate. That's like saying lakes are impossible because of rivers. If you look at historical methane concentrations in our atmosphere, they are already almost 3x of pre-industrial levels, and over 3x of mean historical levels over the past ~1 million years [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane

Interestingly only about 1/4 of today's emissions are directly caused by all agriculture according to NASA[0]. A decent chuck of modern emissions are caused by other human activities.

> Across the study years, wetlands contributed 30 percent of global methane emissions, with oil, gas, and coal activities accounting for 20 percent. Agriculture, including enteric fermentation and manure management, made up 24 percent of emissions, and landfills comprised 11 percent. Sixty-four percent of emissions came from tropical regions of South America, Asia, and Africa, with temperate regions accounting for 32 percent and the Arctic contributing 4 percent.

[0] https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146978/methane-emis...

Re: Red seaweed supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80% in beef steers

#170

Post by zests »

nickelcitymario wrote: post #98
zests wrote: post #74

I find this hard to believe. Here is my epistemic estimation: if this were legitimate, it would be huge news. I've been hearing about this for several years now but somehow it never amounts to anything. I would have expected large scale cattle studies by now but I have not seen any of those.

1) It IS huge news. It's been reported pretty heavily. (Or at least, I've stumbled across this news many times from many different and mainstream sources. I suppose it's possible that my filter bubble is making it seem like a bigger deal.) 2) What's the incentive for the farmer? The benefits are entirely externalized. Less methane is good for the planet, but paying to add seaweed to the feed is nothing more than an a…

There may be no incentive for the farmer but plenty of incentive for the scientist, the government and the philanthropist.

My conclusions is that GHG from cattle is simply not as big of a deal as the environmentalists would make it seem. Another comment mentions that decaying grass also releases methane so I'm not even sure if there are any accurate numbers on the true effect of livestock on emissions.

Post reply on HN