4 ms·

Cows consume carbon (grass, organic matter), produce carbon (methane, other organic matter), and are composed of carbon (more organic matter). Isn't the article

• darawk 9y ago
  Ya, but why wouldn't you levy this tax equally on all carbon-generative activities? Why single out cows? I'm all in favor of taxing carbon, but we should do it in a holistic way. Not one thing at a time.
  • curun1r 9y ago
    Because not all carbon-generative activities also produce methane, which is the real destructive part about beef. Also, some other carbon-generative activities (e.g. driving) are already taxed pretty heavily.
    • SllX 9y ago
      Different emissions have different levels of global warming potential. If carbon dioxide has a global warming potential of 1, then Methane has a Global Warming Potential of 28-36 over 100 years [0]. I wouldn't even single out carbon dioxide per se. If you're going to start an emissions tax and do it right, you might as well target all green house gas emissions and base the tax rate off their global warming potential which takes into account both the energy they absorb and their longevity in the atmosphere. [0] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warmin...
  • tommoor 9y ago
    The article explains the case for this. Meat from cattle is easily substituted, gas for heating your home less-so.
    • nradov 9y ago
      Why should ease of substitution be a factor? If the goal is to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, a tax on natural gas would give people an incentive to improve insulation or build smaller homes or just turn down the thermostat.