Methane

[holwellcourtfarm]

"If we are to reach" . . . . . . an arbitary target that we've come up with.

One of the ways that might in our heads bring about a tiny change is to attempt to stop the increase in consumption of meat and dairy in other parts of the world that could frankly do with improved nutrition. By doing this those of us in power in the affluent countries can avoid grasping the fossil fuel nettle because that would REALLY sting.

We could also admit to ourselves that the fossil fuels we have ALREADY burned will continue to compound climate change long after we're gone. Fannying around blaming ruminants is what we've come up with to distract everyone for a while.

"This climate thingy is really, really urgent..........

But, we can't hurt the economy, can we! "


It's like nobody noticed the DasGupta review earlier this year!

 

[Huno]

Just do your own thing

 

[hoff135]

My best mate used to work offshore and said they used to release the methane gas without burning it like you sometimes see on an oil rig. Called it cold flaring and apparently was quite acceptable but regulated.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

My best mate used to work offshore and said they used to release the methane gas without burning it like you sometimes see on an oil rig. Called it cold flaring and apparently was quite acceptable but regulated.

Acceptable to who???

 

[hoff135]

Acceptable to who???

Well indont know. The authorities I presume. Maybe someone with more knowledge can shed more light on it.

 

[delilah]

There must be folks on here who know Stuart Roberts, could someone point him to the stuff on here that explains why methane belched by cows is a natural part of the carbon cycle. Stuart has just been on the farming programme doing the usual NFU line of 'yes cows are bad but British cows aren't as bad as foreign cows'. It's not a viable position for an industry to keep going on national media and agreeing with the presenter that cows are destroying the planet.

 

[delilah]

A distinction emerges here between biogenic methane (methane from biological sources such as agriculture or wetlands) and fossil methane (‘natural gas’ leakage). For biogenic methane, this CO2 resulting from methane breakdown does not represent an additional source of carbon in the atmosphere, while for fossil methane it does. For further information on the breakdown of methane, including this point, see section 3 of our explainer Agricultural Methane and its Role as a Greenhouse Gas

Is this not the whole issue summarized in a sentence ?

 

[Tarw Coch]

There must be folks on here who know Stuart Roberts, could someone point him to the stuff on here that explains why methane belched by cows is a natural part of the carbon cycle. Stuart has just been on the farming programme doing the usual NFU line of 'yes cows are bad but British cows aren't as bad as foreign cows'. It's not a viable position for an industry to keep going on national media and agreeing with the presenter that cows are destroying the planet.

I find it hard to believe he doesn’t know, as a senior representative of the industry he ought to know, surely in his position he owes it to those he represents to do some homework.

 

[delilah]

I find it hard to believe he doesn’t know, as a senior representative of the industry he ought to know, surely in his position he owes it to those he represents to do some homework.

Deputy President this morning, President on Any Questions two weeks ago, constantly apologizing for cows destroying the planet. Everyone on here who is slogging their guts out producing a quality, environmentally sustainable product must wonder why the hell they are bothering.

 

[Henarar]

There must be folks on here who know Stuart Roberts, could someone point him to the stuff on here that explains why methane belched by cows is a natural part of the carbon cycle. Stuart has just been on the farming programme doing the usual NFU line of 'yes cows are bad but British cows aren't as bad as foreign cows'. It's not a viable position for an industry to keep going on national media and agreeing with the presenter that cows are destroying the planet.

that professor on farming today did admit that ruminants had in the past at least have prevented and may still be preventing an ice age.
the ruminants should be applauded for that shouldn't they

 

[Henarar]

they seem to want us to by more inputs to feed to animals to reduce methane, someone will make money from that and it probably wont be the farmer

 

[Tarw Coch]

they seem to want us to by more inputs to feed to animals to reduce methane, someone will make money from that and it probably wont be the farmer

Will that work?
Can it work?
I would imagine in some circumstances it will be counter productive

 

[Henarar]

Will that work?
Can it work?
I would imagine in some circumstances it will be counter productive

No idea but I wonder what the environmental cost of producing and distributing these inputs would be?

 

[neilo]

Will that work?
Can it work?
I would imagine in some circumstances it will be counter productive

One could argue that those better inputs could be achieved by better pasture management, so that the grass was of higher nutritional value than the fields of ‘gone to seed’ rubbish that lots of cattle are plonked in for months at a time?

Keeping that grass in a reproductive state would mean it grows more (up to a third more supposedly), so absorbing more CO2 from the atmosphere and, at the same time, growing stock faster so that they have less time to belch.

 

[Global ovine]

Methane represents 15% of total Green House Gas emissions globally. As well explained in posts above, it comes from 2 sources, fossil and biogenic (CO2 cycling). Of the biogenic component the industry most in the firing line is ruminants for meat and dairy. This is an absolutely ridiculous claim to blame a food industry that only contributes 7% of the methane emitted. If ruminant animals double in number, it would still only represent a tiny % of what results from burning fossil fuels. Yet the vocal continue to call for meat free diets, but never talk about GHG losses from rice paddies that contribute the bulk of man controlled biogenic methane let alone fossil fuel burning.

Current science (in NZ) already shows a 23% variance in GHG emission between sheep. An annual reduction in flock emissions of 1 - 2% is achievable from breeding without negatively affecting other traits or acceptable rates of gain in other traits. Early work suggests cattle will be similar.
Diet additives, vaccines, rumen flora probiotics and rumen training at a young age are all currently being researched with positive preliminary results in reducing methane emissions.

Obviously a fragmented farming industry is an easier target to attack than the fossil fuel energy sector such as OPEC and influence a naive public that sucks up all sorts of BS.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Methane represents 15% of total Green House Gas emissions globally. As well explained in posts above, it comes from 2 sources, fossil and biogenic (CO2 cycling). Of the biogenic component the industry most in the firing line is ruminants for meat and dairy. This is an absolutely ridiculous claim to blame a food industry that only contributes 7% of the methane emitted. If ruminant animals double in number, it would still only represent a tiny % of what results from burning fossil fuels. Yet the vocal continue to call for meat free diets, but never talk about GHG losses from rice paddies that contribute the bulk of man controlled biogenic methane let alone fossil fuel burning.

Current science (in NZ) already shows a 23% variance in GHG emission between sheep. An annual reduction in flock emissions of 1 - 2% is achievable from breeding without negatively affecting other traits or acceptable rates of gain in other traits. Early work suggests cattle will be similar.
Diet additives, vaccines, rumen flora probiotics and rumen training at a young age are all currently being researched with positive preliminary results in reducing methane emissions.

Obviously a fragmented farming industry is an easier target to attack than the fossil fuel energy sector such as OPEC and influence a naive public that sucks up all sorts of BS.

Using the impact share figures from Monday's IPPC AR6 report global methane emissions in the last decade break down like this:

Fossil fuels released as much methane as ruminants did and have been under reporting this for years.

Landfills are a pretty big deal on it as well. At least we get food in return for the ruminant emissions, we get nothing for the landfill ones.

The easiest methane emissions to tackle are actually the coal, oil and gas ones (stop mains leaks, stop or capture leaks at wells) and the landfill ones (collect it and use for heating).

The report also states that the major issue is from rising methane emissions and these are in Asia, The Americas and Eastern Europe.

Finally, and critically, it states that cutting methane emissions will only buy time (around 11 years) to get on with DEEP AND PERMANENT cuts in carbon dioxide emissions in all countries and that doing one without the other will be pointless.

Ruminant methane is a very small part of the problem, blown out of all proportion because it suits everyone else's narrative.

Have you got any links to published evidence on the methane emissions variability within species? It would be very useful to have.

 

[DaveGrohl]

Using the impact share figures from Monday's IPPC AR6 report global methane emissions in the last decade break down like this:

View attachment 979289

Fossil fuels released as much methane as ruminants did and have been under reporting this for years.

Landfills are a pretty big deal on it as well. At least we get food in return for the ruminant emissions, we get nothing for the landfill ones.

The easiest methane emissions to tackle are actually the coal, oil and gas ones (stop mains leaks, stop or capture leaks at wells) and the landfill ones (collect it and use for heating).

The report also states that the major issue is from rising methane emissions and these are in Asia, The Americas and Eastern Europe.

Finally, and critically, it states that cutting methane emissions will only buy time (around 11 years) to get on with DEEP AND PERMANENT cuts in carbon dioxide emissions in all countries and that doing one without the other will be pointless.

Ruminant methane is a very small part of the problem, blown out of all proportion because it suits everyone else's narrative.

Have you got any links to published evidence on the methane emissions variability within species? It would be very useful to have.

If they did a "rate of increase of non-cyclical methane" into the atmosphere version of that pie chart it would be fascinating. And far more revealing of where the actual methane problems lie. Do you think it's occurred to these clever and important people? Nah, me neither.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

If they did a "rate of increase" into the atmosphere version of that pie chart it would be fascinating. And far more revealing of where the actual methane problems lie. Do you think it's occurred to these clever and important people? Nah, me neither.

I've got the latest (2019) DEFRA official emissions excel spreadsheet open right now. It carries this caveat:

The GWP (Global Warming Potential) of a greenhouse gas measures its effectiveness in global warming over 100 years relative to carbon dioxide. The GWPs used in these statistics are from Working Group 1 of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change

Pollutant		GWP2
Carbon dioxide6	CO2	1
Methane	CH4	25
Nitrous oxide	N2O	298
Hydrofluorocarbons	HFC	12 - 14,800
Perfluorocarbons	PFC	7,390 - 17,340
Sulphur hexafluoride	SF6	22,800
Nitrogen trifluoride	NF3	17,200

So the figures are badly affected by using GWP100 for methane and will look different when the sixth assessment report methods kick in.

It also says their margin of uncertainty for methane is 16%.

Bearing tghese things in mind I have drawn 2019 figures from it to create these 2 pie charts:

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

This one is almost useful:

Table 1.2: Estimated territorial greenhouse gas emissions by source category, UK 1990-2019
Coverage: United Kingdom	Million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e)
NC Sector	NC Category	2019
Energy supply		95.8
	Power stations	58.5
	Refineries	12.6
	Manufacture of solid fuels and other energy industries	15.3
	Solid fuel transformation	0.1
	Coal mining and handling	0.5
	Exploration, production and transport of oils	0.4
	Power station flue-gas desulphurisation	0.0
	Exploration, production and transport of gas	3.8
	Offshore oil and gas - Flaring	4.0
	Offshore oil and gas - Venting	0.6
Business		77.9
	Incidental lubricant combustion in engines - Business	0.1
	Refrigeration and air conditioning	10.3
	Closed foams	0.4
	Firefighting	0.3
	Solvents	0.0
	One component foams	0.0
	Iron and steel - combustion and electricity	9.4
	Industrial combustion and electricity (excl. iron and steel)	44.2
	Commercial and miscellaneous combustion and electricity	11.8
	Electronics, electrical insulation, scientific research, military applications and sporting goods	0.7
	Non energy use of fuels	0.0
	Accidental fires - business	0.0
	N2O use as an anaesthetic	0.6
Transport		122.2
Aviation	Civil aviation (domestic, cruise)	1.0
	Civil aviation (domestic, landing and take off)	0.4
Road	Passenger cars	67.7
	Light duty vehicles	19.2
	Buses	3.1
	HGVs	19.5
	Mopeds & motorcycles	0.5
	Road vehicle LPG and biofuel use (all vehicles)	0.4
	Incidental lubricant combustion in road engines	0.2
	Urea use in abatement technology	0.1
Railways	Railways - mobile combustion	1.7
	Railways - stationary combustion	0.0
Shipping	National navigation	5.5
	Incidental lubricant combustion in marine engines	0.0
	Fishing vessels	0.5
Other mobile	Military aircraft and shipping	1.7
	Aircraft support vehicles	0.6
Public	Public	7.9
Residential		69.2
	Residential combustion	67.6
	Use of non aerosol consumer products	0.0
	Accidental fires - residential	0.0
	Aerosols and metered dose inhalers	1.5
	Composting - household	0.1
	Recreational use of N2O	0.0
Agriculture		46.3
	Stationary and mobile combustion	4.5
	Incidental lubricant combustion in engines - agriculture	0.0
Enteric fermentation	Cattle - enteric fermentation	16.4
	Sheep - enteric fermentation	4.2
	Goats - enteric fermentation	0.0
	Horses - enteric fermentation	0.4
	Pigs - enteric fermentation	0.2
	Deer - enteric fermentation	0.0
Wastes	Cattle - wastes	5.2
	Sheep - wastes	0.1
	Goats - wastes	0.0
	Horses - wastes	0.2
	Pigs - wastes	0.8
	Poultry	0.4
	Deer - wastes	0.0
Other (agriculture)	Liming	1.3
	Direct soil emission	9.9
	Field burning of agricultural wastes	0.0
	Urea application	0.3
	Indirect soil emission	2.3
Industrial processes	10.4
	Sinter production	1.3
	Cement production	4.4
	Lime production	1.1
	Soda ash production & use	0.2
	Glass production	0.4
	Fletton brick production	0.0
	Ammonia production	1.0
	Aluminium production	0.1
	Nitric acid production	0.0
	Adipic acid production	0.0
	Other - chemical industry	0.3
	Halocarbon production	0.1
	Magnesium cover gas	0.1
	Iron and steel production	0.9
	Titanium dioxide production	0.2
	Bricks production	0.3
	Non ferrous metal processes	0.0
	Use of N2O - Industrial Process	0.0
Land use, land use change and forestry	5.9
Forest land	Forest land remaining forest land	-17.2
	Biomass burning - Forest land	0.3
	Land converted to forest land	-0.2
	Drainage of organic soils - Forest land	0.7
	Direct N2O emissions from N mineralization/immobilisation - Forest land	0.1
Cropland	Biomass burning - Cropland	0.0
	Cropland remaining cropland	10.1
	Land converted to cropland	5.3
	Direct N2O emissions from N mineralization/immobilisation - Cropland	0.5
Grassland	Biomass burning - Grassland	0.2
	Grassland remaining grassland	0.6
	Land converted to grassland	-4.4
	Drainage of organic soils - grassland	2.6
	Direct N2O emissions from N mineralization/immobilisation - Grassland	0.0
Wetlands	Wetlands remaining wetland	0.5
	Drainage of organic soils - wetland	2.0
	Land converted to wetland	1.0
Settlements	Settlements remaining settlements	1.7
	Biomass burning - Settlements	0.2
	Land converted to settlements	3.5
	Drainage of organic soils - settlements	0.0
	Direct N2O emissions from N mineralization/immobilisation - Settlements	0.4
Other (LULUCF)	Harvested wood	-2.2
	Indirect N2O emissions	0.2
Waste management	19.0
	Landfill	14.2
	Waste-water handling	2.6
	Waste Incineration	0.3
	Composting - non-household	1.0
	Anaerobic digestion	0.2
	Mechanical biological treatment	0.7
Grand Total		454.8
Footnotes:
1. The entire time series is revised each year to take account of methodological improvements.

 

[DaveGrohl]

Interesting that cropland remaining cropland is almost two thirds of cattle methane, so not quite the golden bullet that the vegan activists imagine.
Btw you clearly have too much time on your hands.