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

Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

goodnewsnetwork.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 409 posts

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#81

Post by triceratops »

tunesmith wrote: post #15

I saw some math once... not sure how correct it is, but it was something like given the co2-equivalent emissions of methane, even if all cows simply disappeared tomorrow, it would still only take care of about 5% of our global GHG emissions. So if that's true it wouldn't really be a gamechanger. Still worth doing though (the seaweed, not the mass slaughtering)! And if everyone plants 350 trees then maybe we'll get so…

You just need 5 of these 5% solutions to cut the problem by a quarter. Many mickles make a muckle, as George Washington was fond of saying.

It's also good because a wide variety of experts from different fields can attack the problem from different angles. We won't be talent-constrained.

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#82

Post by esotericn »

m0zg wrote: post #77
mateodelnorte wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An additional thing to consider is that not all greenhouse gases are created equal. You can find any number of articles to cite as source that methane is 20 to 30 times worse for the atmosphere in causing warming than carbon dioxide. https://blogs.princeton.edu/research/2014/03/26/a-more-poten...

I've run the numbers and it looks like all cattle on earth emit something like 150MT of methane per year. Multiplied by 20 (to get CO2 equivalent), that's 3GT. That's about 8% of the yearly total CO2 emissions (37GT). Certainly not negligible, but not earth shattering either. For comparison, per-capita CO2 emissions in the US are 16.5 metric tons. Per cow methane emissions are about 100kg per year or 2-3 tons in CO2…

8% for the sake of what amounts to a flavour in your mouth is pretty earth shattering.

Consider: would you spend 8% of your entire financial budget on beef? On an income of $30K, say, you'd spend $2400 on beef, ignoring all other food and other expenses?

I'd even flip it around - take a random person off the street, in the UK, say, and tell them you'll give them 2 grand a year to stop eating beef. How many people do you think would take you up on that who don't even care about the environment?

It's stark raving bonkers.

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#84

Post by chrisco255 »

deevolution wrote: post #80
goodalgae wrote: post #26

My company is currently working to grow Asparagopsis Taxiformis, here in the US, for this purpose. I agree with comments that we have big issues to tackle in regards to methane sinks failing, such as permafrost, and there are things to be said about people moving en masse to plant based diets – but, the future will always be a mix of tomorrow and today. Many people will still eat beef, and we need to ensure we reduce…

This would be a tremendous benefit if it can be deployed at scale, which I'm sure it eventually could. HOWEVER, This solution fails to address the excessive amount of water consumption required to raise these cows. fresh, clean water is already becoming a major global crisis. The simplest and most effective solution to ensuring our survival as a species remains switching to a plant-based diet. Too many people adopt a…

There is no evidence of a fresh water shortage. We had the wettest year in 125 years in the U.S. this year. Where is this coming from? Water usage is a local issue, not a global one. Certain local communities have to watch water usage depending on rainfall. Certain ones do not. Either way, cows drink water and pee water. Water goes through the same cycle it has for billions of years. The U.S. used to have a wild bison population as great as the present cattle population. Same digestive system. Beef is one of the healthiest foods on the planet, and we evolved to eat meat, and have been eating it for 2.5 million years. I'm all about sustainable agriculture. I'm not all about faddish diets and eco-fascism.

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#85

Post by Kaibeezy »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #64
kibibu wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cows are much better at extracting nutrients from, say, grass than humans are. In places where nuts, vegetables, fruits aren't available, meat may be a more environmentally friendly choice.

But almost nobody is eating pasture-raised meat, though the industrial meat complex loves that you think that or are pointing it out as if that's how beef is made.

I asked a small town butcher in Scotland if his beef was grass-fed and got seriously laughed at. Then he sold me some damn good steaks.

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#87

Post by bacon_waffle »

tunesmith wrote: post #15

I saw some math once... not sure how correct it is, but it was something like given the co2-equivalent emissions of methane, even if all cows simply disappeared tomorrow, it would still only take care of about 5% of our global GHG emissions. So if that's true it wouldn't really be a gamechanger. Still worth doing though (the seaweed, not the mass slaughtering)! And if everyone plants 350 trees then maybe we'll get so…

The EPA says [1] 9% of the US's GHG emissions are from agriculture, so there's an upper limit. However, the more relevant consideration is how much more GHG comes from ruminants compared to other protein sources [2].

[1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...

[2] https://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-top-10-foods-with-the...

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#88

Post by petersellers »

chrisco255 wrote: post #84
deevolution wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be a tremendous benefit if it can be deployed at scale, which I'm sure it eventually could. HOWEVER, This solution fails to address the excessive amount of water consumption required to raise these cows. fresh, clean water is already becoming a major global crisis. The simplest and most effective solution to ensuring our survival as a species remains switching to a plant-based diet. Too many people adopt a…

There is no evidence of a fresh water shortage. We had the wettest year in 125 years in the U.S. this year. Where is this coming from? Water usage is a local issue, not a global one. Certain local communities have to watch water usage depending on rainfall. Certain ones do not. Either way, cows drink water and pee water. Water goes through the same cycle it has for billions of years. The U.S. used to have a wild biso…

> There is no evidence of a fresh water shortage.

The UN disagrees. [1]

> We had the wettest year in 125 years in the U.S. this year.

Surely you're not using a one time event to argue against the scientific consensus of climate change?

> Beef is one of the healthiest foods on the planet, and we evolved to eat meat, and have been eating it for 2.5 million years.

What does this have to do with the water consumption used in raising cows?

[1] - https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/climate-change/

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#89

Post by comicjk »

AtomicOrbital wrote: post #66
mateodelnorte wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An additional thing to consider is that not all greenhouse gases are created equal. You can find any number of articles to cite as source that methane is 20 to 30 times worse for the atmosphere in causing warming than carbon dioxide. https://blogs.princeton.edu/research/2014/03/26/a-more-poten...

Water vapor is by far the biggest green house gas

This is true but not very informative. Each greenhouse gas absorbs heat at different wavelengths, with no single gas covering the spectrum. Adding CO2 or methane increases heat absorption, even in air that's saturated with water vapor.

Re: Tasty Seaweed Reduces Cows’ Methane Emissions by 99%

#90

Post by daveFNbuck »

bacon_waffle wrote: post #51
m0zg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like just growing seaweed won't be enough though. You'd have to grow it _in close proximity to the cows_, otherwise there are other greenhouse gases that will be emitted before the cows can eat it. It's also unclear to me what this means in terms of water consumption, and therefore sustainability. I'd be curious to hear how (if at all) these issues could be addressed.

Doesn't this seaweed grow in the sea? As far as I understand, the main water concerns as relate to cows, are about freshwater for growing fodder.

If you grow it in the sea, you're creating the transportation problem the poster was complaining about.
Post reply on HN