[flagged]
A single cow can produce around 250 to 500 liters of methane per day through belching and farting. Let's take an average of 400 liters/day. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas.
400 liters/day × 365 days = 146,000 liters/year.
Convert to kilograms (since methane’s density is ~0.656 kg/m³):
146,000 liters = 146 m³ → 146 × 0.656 kg = 95.8 kg of methane/year per cow.
Methane has a global warming potential (GWP) of about 28 times that of CO₂ over 100 years. So, 1 kg of methane is equivalent to 28 kg of CO₂ in terms of warming effect.
95.8 kg of methane × 28 = 2,682 kg of CO₂ equivalent per year per cow.
2,682 kg CO₂e/year × 1 billion cows = 2.68 billion metric tons of CO₂ equivalent annually.
So the cow farts are a bit less than 8%. That isn't insignificant.
Two people have provided rough calculations that show they do have a measurable effect.
What's your point?
Me? I think we can probably survive some cow farts as our ancestors who hunted buffalo and burnt down entire ecosystems doing so did. We should focus on the real solutions that will move the needle, like proper human-scale city design and nuclear power.
There is no silver bullet that's going to be a 25% reduction all on its own. The only way to win is a combination of changes each of which reduce emissions by a few percentage points.
Maybe there are other ways we could reduce their methane emissions short of getting rid of all of them.
I agree that other solutions are needed to properly address climate change though.
Source: https://environment.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-greenh...
(But our current right-wing populist government likes to pretend the problem does not exist, so they have to be slapped on the wrists by courts and the EU.)
But the farmers have been intimidating politicians by blocking highways and inner cities with tractors and other equipment. Funnily, if anyone else does this they get arrested, but farmers get a carte blanche to disrupt society.
Unfortunately, big agricultural companies hired a marketing company to start a political party which claims to be pro local/small farmers, but is actually just pro big agriculture.
The questions are mainly targeted at the consumption of animal products: meat, dairy products and eggs. Their research shows that reducing the consumption of animal products, and therefore switching from a meat-eating to a vegetarian or vegan diet, reduces land requirements by two-thirds.
https://www.uu.nl/en/news/calculate-the-land-use-impact-of-y...
Not everyone even has to stop eating meat. Just reducing meat consumption to 1-2 days per week would go a long way.
Don't get me wrong, good meat is delicious and there are plenty of ecosystems that require grazing and large herbivores to maintain, but the current system is devastating and doesn't provide nearly as much nutrition to the end user as it consumes in its production.
If that was your conclusion, then you did the math wrong, or did not understand the math.