Hacker News Reader

Comment by Mintz | Hacker News Reader

Does that statistic take into account all the greenhouse gasses the cows emit through flatulence? If not, the number might be a little higher...

View on HN

If people shift from eating beef to eating beans aren't they simply redirecting the methane emissions from one rectum to another? (In a manner of speaking).

Cow farts are carbon neutral. Grass sucks the carbon out of the atmosphere, cows turn carbon into dinner and flatulence, carbon re-enters the atmosphere. Get rid of cows, and you'll have grass fires returning that carbon to the atmosphere.

Yes but not all carbon is created the same. The methane from cow farts has much greater greenhouse potential than CO2, CO, and soot from grass fires.

I can't believe I'm seriously posting about cow farts. Must get back to work. Must. get. back. to. work.

Methane is a much more dangerous greenhouse gas than co2 alone.

Eating less meat will make a bigger impact than driving less.

Yes, and properly pastured cattle sequester carbon dioxide as well.This doesn't mean the methane issue goes away, but if we could eat less meat, make CAFOs go away, and raise cattle in a more sustainable manner, I think we'd come out ahead.

I am a little puzzled here--how do properly pastured cattle sequester co2? If you do grass farming, the cattle's manure will fertilize the grass, but I wonder if there is a net sequestration in the process.

Carbon neutral but not global warming neutral. Methane is worse, like 1000 times worse, per molecule, than CO2.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com