2 ms·
I'm a little bit skeptical of this claim, because cows turn the "sequestered" carbon (partly) into methane, which is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.
by rob74 5y ago
I'm a little bit skeptical of this claim, because cows turn the "sequestered" carbon (partly) into methane, which is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.
- EverywhereTrip 5y agoA cow eating grass isn't eating sequestered carbon. It's part of the carbon cycle. It is a living organism eating a living plant. If a ruminant doesn't graze a grassland, it needs to burn...which releases carbon. If neither one of those things happen, the grassland will die and decompose. Grasslands and ruminants co-evolved. Sequestered carbon would be underground. If there were no fossil fuels dug out of the ground and burned, there are no amount of cows that could cause a problem with warming. ALL ruminant animals produce methane. Deer, moose, elk, antelope all do. It is part of fermentation. A cow eating grass is more carbon neutral than other things people try to pass off like biodiesel.
- EdwardDiego 5y agoTrue, although research is ongoing into minimising this[1] and a product based on the above research is being prepared for the market. [1]: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247820 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...