Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Scientists Rail Against Senator Who Belittled Research …

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 04:04 PM
Original message
Scientists Rail Against Senator Who Belittled Research …
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/scientists-rail-senator-belittled-research/story?id=12459570

Scientists Rail Against Senator Who Belittled Research

Researchers Say Federal Funds Went to Project More Important Than Just 'Cow Burps.'

By RUSSELL GOLDMAN
Dec. 23, 2010

A team of scientists who study pollution's role in global warming are outraged at a GOP Senator who, they say, has maligned their work as wasteful and petty by describing it as a study of "cow burps."



Sen. Tom Coburn, R- Okla., released on Monday his annual "Wastebook" report, a look at 100 projects that received federal funding which, he says, contributed to record deficits in the past year.

Among those projects was a $700,000 grant from the Department of Agriculture to a team of environmental scientists at the University of New Hampshire to study greenhouse gas emissions – the chemicals associated with global warming – in the dairy industry.



"Federal Study Investigates Cow Burps" is how the research is described in the "Wastebook," but Aber said it's a far more sophisticated look at how different toxic chemicals, particularly nitrogen, produced by dairy farming can be mitigated to reduce greenhouse gases.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Creative Donating Member (831 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. I don't have much use for Coburn, but why do they need fedgov money to conduct their research?
Besides that, we already know that dairy farming produces nitrogen and my own research tells me that it is very good for tomato plants.

We can't afford to borrow $700,000 from the Chinese to learn what we already know.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. And what do you know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creative Donating Member (831 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I know enough to be able to identify cow manure when I see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Watch a lot of Larry the Cable Guy, do you?
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Livestock is more responsible for global warming than transportation is
18% vs. 12%.

Methane is 23x as potent a greenhouse gas as is CO2. No cow manure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Methane levels are 1.75 ppm.
Not sure how your comparison is working? Livestock methane vs transportion CO2 emissions? Do you have a cite for that? Transportation makes up roughly a third of all emissions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. "Livestock's Long Shadow" (UN Report)
Edited on Thu Dec-23-10 09:24 PM by wtmusic
"Atmosphere and Climate

With rising temperatures, rising sea levels, melting icecaps and glaciers, shifting ocean currents and weather patterns, climate change is the most serious challenge facing the human race.

The livestock sector is a major player, responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport."

ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0701e/a0701e.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Here's an excellent breakdown:
Edited on Thu Dec-23-10 08:54 PM by joshcryer


edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas">percentages are by greenhouse gas potential
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-29-10 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. "....why do they need fedgov money to conduct their research?...."
Um, because private corporations only fund research that helps in some way to improve their bottom line.

So-called "pure" scientific research is the fount of most useful knowledge in today's world. And those dollars come from the tax money I gladly pay so that our knowledge base grows greater and more trustworthy every year.

Betcha you don't see the need for publically funded universities, either, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-23-10 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. Perhaps a "Wastebook" of money wasted on useless senators is in order.
Cob urn makes my list, along with any of them that threatened filibuster to hold up obviously popular bills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 03:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC