4 ms·

> And on the scale humanity uses plastics, adjusting our behaviour this way, could mean a significant amount of carbon being locked out of the atmosphere contin

> And on the scale humanity uses plastics, adjusting our behaviour this way, could mean a significant amount of carbon being locked out of the atmosphere continuously as more of this seaweed plastic is used. Ok, that makes sense. I guess I was forgetting the scale that this could be operated over. If this truly does replace plastics continuously then I suppose that would be a huge temporary win for sequestration.

jvanderbot 4y ago
This may also operate like old growth forest, in that it will cause an ecosystem to spring up that will capture a big amount of carbon just to build itself, then will essentially be sequestered until someone cuts it down and burns it. Or we make coal or something from the seaweed and have closed cycle fuels. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/03/210302094053.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/03/210302094053.h...
chaps 4y ago
Seaweed put into cattle feed also significantly reduces methane release!
- toiletfuneral 4y ago
  [dead]
- roboticmind 4y ago
  It doesn't significantly reduce emissions. The numbers often touted for it are rather misleading as they miss how little it can change overall emissions > What’s more, feeding cattle algae is really only practical where it’s least needed: on feedlots. This is where most cattle are crowded in the final months of their 1.5- to 2-year lives to rapidly put on weight before slaughter. There, algae feed additives can be churned into the cows’ grain and soy feed. But on feedlots, cattle already belch less methane—only 11 percent of their lifetime output > Unfortunately, adding the algae to diets on the pasture, where it’s most needed, isn’t a feasible option either. Out on grazing lands, it’s difficult to get cows to eat additives because they don’t like the taste of red algae unless it’s diluted into feed. And even if we did find ways to sneak algae in somehow, there’s a good chance their gut microbes would adapt and adjust, bringing their belches’ methane right back to high levels. > All told, if we accept the most promising claims of the algae boosters, we’re talking about an 80 percent reduction of methane among only 11 percent of all burps—roughly an 8.8 percent reduction total https://www.wired.com/story/carbon-neutral-cows-algae/ https://www.wired.com/story/carbon-neutral-cows-algae/
  - chaps 4y ago
    Thanks for the info! 8.8% still sounds like a lot, but definitely less than I was expecting. Edit: Other sources from sibbling threads say it's much, much more than 8.8%.
    - mikeg8 4y ago
      https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-beaches-to-burps-native-australian-seaweed-key-to-reducing-methane-emissions-from-cows https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-b...
    - roboticmind 4y ago
      They are not looking at *overall emissions* which is the exact reason why they are getting larger numbers. They are only looking the emission reduction in feedlots which is a major point of that article I cited
  - mikeg8 4y ago
    This article from Australia claims a 95% methane reduction using a native seaweed additive. https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-beaches-to-burps-native-australian-seaweed-key-to-reducing-methane-emissions-from-cows https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-b...
    - roboticmind 4y ago
      That's still red seaweed ("FutureFeed’s solution uses a specific type of red seaweed"). It like other seaweed additive, can only really be used in feedlots where as mentioned above, only account for ~11% of emissions
  - magnuspaaske 4y ago
    Anyone looking seriously at reducing the emissions from their steaks will over time realise that just eating less beef is easier. There's something kind of amazing about how the cattle industry tries to greenwash itself, since all it really does is remind the rest of us that we can also just live without them.
- mikesabbagh 4y ago
  I have an idea, how about we feed cattle green grass and make sure they poop in the fields. This way, we dont need to transport food to them and we dont need to have poop lagoons. That is a revolutionary idea many can't accept

jvanderbot 4y ago

This may also operate like old growth forest, in that it will cause an ecosystem to spring up that will capture a big amount of carbon just to build itself, then will essentially be sequestered until someone cuts it down and burns it. Or we make coal or something from the seaweed and have closed cycle fuels. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/03/210302094053.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/03/210302094053.h...

chaps 4y ago

Seaweed put into cattle feed also significantly reduces methane release!

toiletfuneral 4y ago
[dead]
roboticmind 4y ago
It doesn't significantly reduce emissions. The numbers often touted for it are rather misleading as they miss how little it can change overall emissions > What’s more, feeding cattle algae is really only practical where it’s least needed: on feedlots. This is where most cattle are crowded in the final months of their 1.5- to 2-year lives to rapidly put on weight before slaughter. There, algae feed additives can be churned into the cows’ grain and soy feed. But on feedlots, cattle already belch less methane—only 11 percent of their lifetime output > Unfortunately, adding the algae to diets on the pasture, where it’s most needed, isn’t a feasible option either. Out on grazing lands, it’s difficult to get cows to eat additives because they don’t like the taste of red algae unless it’s diluted into feed. And even if we did find ways to sneak algae in somehow, there’s a good chance their gut microbes would adapt and adjust, bringing their belches’ methane right back to high levels. > All told, if we accept the most promising claims of the algae boosters, we’re talking about an 80 percent reduction of methane among only 11 percent of all burps—roughly an 8.8 percent reduction total https://www.wired.com/story/carbon-neutral-cows-algae/ https://www.wired.com/story/carbon-neutral-cows-algae/
- chaps 4y ago
  Thanks for the info! 8.8% still sounds like a lot, but definitely less than I was expecting. Edit: Other sources from sibbling threads say it's much, much more than 8.8%.
  - mikeg8 4y ago
    https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-beaches-to-burps-native-australian-seaweed-key-to-reducing-methane-emissions-from-cows https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-b...
  - roboticmind 4y ago
    They are not looking at *overall emissions* which is the exact reason why they are getting larger numbers. They are only looking the emission reduction in feedlots which is a major point of that article I cited
- mikeg8 4y ago
  This article from Australia claims a 95% methane reduction using a native seaweed additive. https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-beaches-to-burps-native-australian-seaweed-key-to-reducing-methane-emissions-from-cows https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/from-b...
  - roboticmind 4y ago
    That's still red seaweed ("FutureFeed’s solution uses a specific type of red seaweed"). It like other seaweed additive, can only really be used in feedlots where as mentioned above, only account for ~11% of emissions
- magnuspaaske 4y ago
  Anyone looking seriously at reducing the emissions from their steaks will over time realise that just eating less beef is easier. There's something kind of amazing about how the cattle industry tries to greenwash itself, since all it really does is remind the rest of us that we can also just live without them.
mikesabbagh 4y ago
I have an idea, how about we feed cattle green grass and make sure they poop in the fields. This way, we dont need to transport food to them and we dont need to have poop lagoons. That is a revolutionary idea many can't accept