5 ms·
It's the burps, actually. And it's not nearly as dangerous as publicized. Methane's lifespan in the atmosphere is much, much lower (think two orders of magnit
by glastra 7y ago
It's the burps, actually.
And it's not nearly as dangerous as publicized.
Methane's lifespan in the atmosphere is much, much lower (think two orders of magnitude) than carbon dioxide [0], for example.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane
- the8472 7y agoThe methane turns into CO2. Which means for the amount of carbon they release it's strictly worse than the same amount of carbon released as CO2.
- glastra 7y agoYes, you are right. I have conveyed my point only half-way and I apologize. What I meant is that methane is known to have a bigger heating effect than other greenhouse gases, like x28 that of CO2 if I recall correctly. This is used as part of the anti-ruminant argument, when comparing the effect of methane expelled by animals to the rest of greenhouse gas emissions. However, if you take into account the reduced lifespan, that 28-time increase is definitely less relevant.
- the8472 7y agoFrom the WP article you linked: > Methane in the Earth's atmosphere is a strong greenhouse gas with a global warming potential (GWP) 104 times greater than CO2 in a 20-year time frame; methane is not as persistent a gas as CO2 and tails off to about GWP of 28 for a 100-year time frame And once you take positive feedbacks into account additional emissions can be problematic even within "short" timeframes.
- glastra 7y agoAbsolutely, I never said methane was without effect. However, its effects on global warming are greatly exaggerated by environmentalists and/or those with vegan ideologies. In my opinion, focus should definitely not be on meat consumption. Anyway, as a disclaimer, I follow a carnivore diet consisting of only animal products. You can expect me to be heavily biased.