Eating Beef is Green.

[Touchdown]

Hows that for a flamer?;)

http://www.ecofriend.org/entry/mooove-over-wind-and-solar-energy-cows-poop-is-here-to-stay/

Move over Wind and Solar Energy, Cow dung is here to stay!

Being used in various developing countries for over three decades now, biomass has a lot of potential to reduce carbon footprint. By capturing and storing CO2 from biogas into the ground, the biogas becomes carbon negative and scrubs our past CO2 emissions out of the atmosphere.


Booming with energy

It is a booming renewable energy sector with an average growth of 25%-30 % annually. Electricity produced from biogas is playing an integral part to the global energy market. Investments leapt to around $100bn in 2006.

In the UK, government’s drive to develop renewable resources has resulted in 600 megawatts of contracted capacity. Methane produced by decomposing organic matter in landfill sites is used to generate enough electricity to power 350,000 households. The UK is the largest market for this technology in the world. Its members are world-leaders in landfill gas technology.

Europe is coming in a big way to use Biogas, where it is being developed on a large scale for the production of fuels for stationary power generation (to be used in natural gas plants or in fuel cells) as well as for the transport sector. It is being fed into the natural gas grid (attracting subsidies) or in dedicated pipelines supplying cities. Some European countries have thousands of farm-based digesters and are producing significant quantities of biogas.

Methane from landfill also.

King County Taps Methane Gas for Renewable Energy
April 14, 2009
King County, Puget Sound Energy, and Bio Energy-Washington, a company that specializes in building landfill gas-to-energy systems, are joining forces to turn the public’s garbage into natural gas. The collaboration should generate enough electricity to power an estimated 24,000 homes.
This project will use methane gas generated from decomposing garbage buried at the county’s Cedar Hills Regional Landfill in Maple Valley, about 20 miles southeast of Seattle. Methane will be collected, processed, and piped to Puget Sound Energy’s natural gas-fired power plants.
“By partnering with Puget Sound Energy and Bio Energy-Washington, King County is fulfilling our commitment to a cleaner, greener future,” said King County Executive Ron Sims on April 6. “We are reducing carbon dioxide emissions roughly equal to taking 22,000 average passenger cars off the road each year, and we’re creating a valuable commodity from what was previously considered a useless byproduct.”

http://www.eponline.com/articles/71655/

Go ahead and eat your meat.... Puddin'.

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. And I figure, since cows make so much CO2, by eating a cow I'm doing the earth a favor

:rofl:

Seriously, though, I remember seeing a show back in the 80s about some tribal peoples somewhere using goat flatulence and gas from the goat manure to power their farm - maybe not totally, but they were using it to make energy.

And I thought, "Wow, too bad Americans are too goddamned stubborn and ignorant to do something that simple and laudable and easy".

Yessirree, America the Leader is not very often a leader, except in "How to live excessively".

[damntexdem]

61. Wish I could, but my cardiologist has me off of red meat.

But I eat plenty of chicken.

And chickens can be raised in very-sustainable ways, not that they are now. But then, every type of common foodstuff can be raised in more-sustainable ways than corporations do it now.

[LeftyMom]

2. Oh for fuck's sake.

Beef production is enormously wasteful of grain, land, food, fuel and water, produces enormous amounts of waste resulting in water contamination, leads to deforestation and erosion of grasslands as well as the death of native wild life (often at federal expense) and suddenly it's "green" just because somebody found a way to make a few bucks off a small fraction of the shit produced?

:eyes:

[Touchdown]

6. Oh' for bite me's sake.

Agribusiness and farming is much more wasteful than flock herding.

It takes up land, water, fertilizer, seeds (now patented seeds), major equipment all using internal combustion engines, packers, refrigerators, warehouses and water contamination.

It results in dustbowls, the death of native wildlife (naturally the deer's grazing land. Now they all have been pushed up the mountains, where the grass is less available), erosion of grasslands.

Man has taken ownership of all of the useable, and natural grazing land on Earth from the creatures you supposedly cry for, by building farms until there is no land left... or water (see California's Central valley).

[Maru Kitteh]

14. "flock herding?" Who the hell are you joking?

This is how cattle are raised. The only green grass they see is on the other side of the fence, out of reach while they spend their whole lives ankle deep in their own shit.

There's your burger America. It sleeps, walks and lays down in it's own shit every day until it dies.

"flock herding" - good lord.

[Touchdown]

15. Did I say anything about factory farming?

Look, I'm the first to admit and am willing to push for open range, grass fed, organic beef without them being injected with steroids and being fed the remains of other cattle.

That is not the point of my OP. The point is that this technology is beneficial, and is already in use in many places around the world.

Browbeating meat eaters because you hate it is one thing. Pretending that your agenda is to save the planet is utter bullshit... and pun intended.

[XemaSab]

20. That's finishing

It's only a portion of the cow's life.

[Maru Kitteh]

48. Bull. I've lived among more of them than people my entire life. I've seen the evolution.

MOST of them spend their life. Just. like. that.

[pipoman]

54. Right now, today

I can buy rib roasts for my restaurant for less than $6 per pound. There simply is no way feeders can buy the grain and grass needed to take calves the 18-22 months needed to bring them to weight buying feed then sell prime cuts for $5.65lb. Don't work.

[pipoman]

34. Wrong

most cattle are raised on farms. They are grazed throughout the year. In the spring they are grazed on pasture grass supplemented with a very small amount of grain, they are rotated from one pasture to another throughout the growing season. They are grazed on various crop stubble fields in the fall, corn, milo, sorghum, etc. In the late fall they are brought into corrals and fed baled grasses, alfalfa, silage, ect, and a small amount of grain. In the spring the whole cycle begins again. In my area of the country we raise winter wheat, so from early September through late October most cattle are grazed on the wheat grass which becomes the following spring's wheat crop. The photo above is a feed lot. Feed lots are used usually only for the last 60 to 90 days before the cattle are slaughtered, this is the fattening time. It is far more expensive to feed cattle in a feed lot than to feed them on available range land/crop byproducts. Wanna loose your ass faster than the market fell under *? Try buying all of the feed needed to raise cattle for 18-22 months. Even at market prices (wholesale) for grain and baled forage, your beef will cost you at least twice grocery store prices. See any calves in the photo above? How about young cattle? Every head in that photo is attached to a beef that is within 30-90 days of market weight.

[Javaman]

44. wow, the amount of knowledge you know about cattle farming is extremely limited.

I get all my beef from a local cattle rancher that only keeps no more than 35 head at anyone one time. All of it is grass fed, no hormones or antibiotics.

stop using a broad brush to paint your views.

If you are really so "green" you really need to read several books, one being "the omnivores dilemma". And do you even buy your produce or meet from farmers markets? Most farmers markets require proof of practice. Meaning anyone that sells at them must show that they use only organic means to raise or grow the things they sell.

You seem like a person concerned with the world around us, I suggest you do a bit more reading before you make such general statements.

I have nothing against Vegetarians, I was one for a very long time, but I am constantly amazed as to why they are so angry at meat eaters.

oddly amusing, really.

[Maru Kitteh]

49. Yeah, your anecdotal knowledge of one local dude trumps my lifetime in the rural Midwest.

It must just be my imagination on the way to work, to neighboring towns, etc, but enough about me.

This stupid fairytale notion that most cows spend their lives skipping through green fields of rich grass are just that.


By the way, I DO understand that most people want to eat meat and will probably continue to do so. I applaud local ranchers who raise their herds in a responsible way, but they are a niche market.

Pretending that most meat does not come from factory farming is just delusional. Have you ever stood in a grocery store and REALLY thought about how many dead animals were in there? In the meat aisle sure, but you have to add in the frozen section, the pet-food section, the soup section, the box dinner section, the canned meat section, the deli, the chip aisle, the ethnic foods sections, the baby food section....... etc..... Now, think about how many fast food places surround that store. Car after car after car all picking up paper bags of dead critter sandwiches - with a rich supply of more in the freezer. Multiply that by one square mile of just one town.

It's staggering.

That sheer, enormous volume of meat cannot come from 35 head operations.

[pipoman]

53. They don't come from 35 head operations

they also aren't raised in feedlots. I have been in and around the cattle business for decades. There is no way to feed out cattle in lots and sell processed meat for sub $5.00lb...no way. They must be ranged and fed crop byproducts (corn stalks, milo stubble, silage, etc.). The only time you will find calves through yearlings in feedlots are when they are being prepped for market 60 to 90 days before crossing the auction block or during winter months (2-4 months most places). Then upon the sale they are returned to range until they reach optimum size, 18-22 months. Again, it is cost prohibitive to feed cattle out from calf to freezer in feedlots, even for major producers. The cost of buying grain and grass at current wholesale market isn't feasible.

[Javaman]

56. You're a fool.

if you honestly believe that I don't think factory farms are real, I have a bridge to sell you.

Stop using very week arguments to puff up your ego.

I stated what I do, and I make no claim that everyone is like me.

Yes, factory farms are bad and need to be done away with but your high horse attitude needs to be toned down.

you will now be blocked because of your completely irrational point of view.

have fun and I look forward to your ignored reply.

[LeftyMom]

16. That's kinda funny.

I actually live in California's central valley, and it's not like that at all. There are deer living within walking distance of my house, mountain lions too. And I live pretty close to the center of the biggest city in the valley. Water's only short because so much of it goes to irrigate parts of Southern California that really shouldn't support either farms or people in a large scale manner. So way to talk out your ass on that one.

As for the rest:

-Livestock grazing is extremely damaging to native plants and wildlife. Cattle break up and compact soils so that they are more vulnerable to erosion and less supportive of native plants, drink absolutely insane amounts of water, and are very energy intensive in their rearing and transport due to their water needs and weight. When kept on range native animals that might predate the animals (wolves and coyotes) transmit disease (bison) or otherwise threaten the profitable conversion of livestock animal's flesh into food are killed- this killing is often subsidized. When confined (as in the case in the OP, nobody's wandering rangelands scooping up cow patties) they must also be drugged to minimize their death from disease, fed staggering amounts of feed that could otherwise go to humans, and something has to be done with their shit. Other grazing animals are no better in this regard, which is why in nature large grazing herbivores don't stay in one place for long.

-Most of the monocropped grains and soy in this country (90% or more in many cases) go to animal feed, almost all of that to animals for human consumption.

[Touchdown]

23. I was referring to this...

The board also voted to approve a $2 billion budget and a 19.7 percent rate increase for downstream agencies, which includes a $69-per-acre-foot surcharge for court-ordered supply reductions from the California Bay Delta to protect a threatened fish.

That surcharge could be dropped if measures are taken to improve conditions for the fish, the delta smelt, board members representing Orange County said after the vote.

The rate increase will take effect Sept. 1.

http://greenoc.freedomblogging.com/tag/water-rationing/

The water rationing for San Juaquin is now at zero from the California Aqueduct.

And... I made no judgement on whether or not so many people should farm or live in southern California. It's not my ass that's talking here.

[LeftyMom]

30. Water politics are something of a California obsession.

If you're not from here (and I take it you're not) you'd realize that annual allotments to farmers are based on (in roughly this order of importance):

1. The current state of the Sierra Nevada snowpack (at present: not good)
2. Any number of ongoing legal battles regarding competing water rights for different state and local agencies, private land owners, conservation groups arguing for the water needs of threatened species, the fishing industry, the Coastal Commission, and my Aunt Sally. Well, I don't actually have an Aunt Sally, but if I did she'd have a stake in water squabbles because everybody else does.
3. There's more than one aqueduct, the ruling you have cited only effects one and most of San Juaquin County's farms get their water directly from the delta anyhow, that ready water source (and frequently flooded, fertile soil) being precisely why most of those farms are where they are.
4. The current water situation isn't any more dire than any number of other droughts we've had in the past. Northern and Central California tend to have a boom and bust cycle when it comes to the water supply, though various water projects do help somewhat to minimize the problem by storing water in times of plenty.

edit: You're trying to tell me what the Central Valley is like and you live in DENVER??? :rofl:

[Touchdown]

31. There is an endangered fish in the Delta.

...which forced the state's hand. It's actually the Endangered Species Act, from the Federal Government promting this, not California.

And I grew up in the "other valley"... cuz like, it's sooo Trippindicular to be from Encino!

[LeftyMom]

38. No kidding.

There are a lot of endangered fish in the delta, and if flows are too low then the salinity increases upstream, which isn't good for the fish OR the delta farmers.

Seriously, I'm glad you read an article about water politics in the Central Valley once, but it's really intensely complicated and somewhat arcane. You may not realize how funny you sound trying to explain it to a native, but trust me, it's a bit like trying to explain the grammar of your second language to a native speaker.

PS Increasing river flows under the Endangered Species Act isn't a new thing- there was a big case a few years back (2000 or so) in Southern Oregon and a lot of farmers there got no water at all for a year or two as a result.

[Touchdown]

40. Good to know someone in the...well, know.

Now, on to the methane extraction. Keep in mind that it isn't a "small protion" as you say. The rest gets packaged up with dirt and used for re-newing the soil and providing plant food for growing the crops that you do approve of us eating. 100% of cow shit is beneficial.

[LeftyMom]

42. And spreading disease.

See the Salinas spinach scare of a few years back, which was eventually traced to a leaking waste storage "lagoon" next to a spinach farm.

[Touchdown]

47. So you have nothing positive to say about my OP.

I tried to be less of a snark douche. I failed. I get it.:eyes:

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. The beef in the back of my refrigerator is definitely green.

:scared:

[Canuckistanian]

12. All the major food groups in one gelatinous mass

You've hit the nutrition jackpot.

Be proud!

[Mojambo]

4. Green, and delicious! n/t

[flvegan]

5. No it isn't. n/t

[Touchdown]

7. 'Tis so. Times ten!

:P

[flvegan]

10. No it isn't. Infinity.

So there.

[Touchdown]

18. Thats it!!!! I'm telling Mom!

Snot!;)

[flvegan]

21. Go ahead. You're adopted, so she loves me more.

[shadowknows69]

8. Isn't that offset a bit by all the rainforests that have died to keep the beef fed.

[Touchdown]

9. Rainforests are slashed and burned to grow crops like sugar

Cows don't need trees. They don't eat trees.

[depakid]

11. More deforestation and desertification occurs due to cattle

which is probably the single most destructive agricultural practice mankind engages in.

[Touchdown]

17. Proof? Links?

Mr. foreskins in the landfill prevents AIDS?

[depakid]

26. It's been a WELL KNOWN fact for decades

The majority of the commercial destruction in the Amazon Basin from the 1960s to early 1990s was not due to logging or mining, but to cattle ranchers and land speculators who burned huge tracts of rainforest before planting the areas with African grasses for pasture. In Brazil, government figures attributed 38 percent of deforestation from 1966-1975 to large-scale cattle ranching. Cattle ranching has been even more widespread in parts of Central America, led by Costa Rica, which has one of the worst deforestation rates in Latin America. During the 1970s and early 1980s, stretches of rainforest were burned and converted into cattle pasture lands to meet American demand for beef.

http://rainforests.mongabay.com/0812.htm

--------------------

Researchers Highlight Overgrazing

...As a result of growth in human population and increased demand for meat in developing nations, the world's population of cattle has increased from 720 million in 1950 to about 1.5 billion in 2001, according to statistics compiled by FAO.The number of sheep and goats expanded from 1.04 billion to 1.75 billion during the same time period.

This increase in livestock production since 1950 has led to severe overgrazing worldwide, according to Christopher Delgado, a senior research fellow a the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute.

Since mid-century, 20 percent - some 680 million hectares - of global rangeland has been degraded by overgrazing, he says. Overstocking rangeland reduces soil fertility and ultimately the size of the herd that can be sustained, says Brown.

Once severely damaged by overgrazing, grasslands are hard to restore, he adds. ''Overgrazing of rangelands initially reduces their productivity but eventually it destroys them, leaving desert,'' says Brown.

http://ipsnews.net/fao_magazine/environment.shtml

Cattle ranching also causes severe damage to riparian areas and fisheries in the UNited States- and is directly responsible for the detruction on millions of acres of Pinyon Pine and Juniper forests on BLM lands.

Bottom line- those who are eating beef are part of the problem.

[Touchdown]

28. So, your not for extracting methane from cow dung to...

provide clean, renewable energy?

You'd rather browbeat the whole world to become vegan. Good luck with that.

[depakid]

32. Anything to ameliorate the problems

including your proposal and including discouraging people from eating cows.

I'm no vegan- but I haven't eaten cows in 25 years- for a lot of reasons. Good thing too, considering all the time I was in Britain in the late 1980's.

It'll be interesting to see what the epi curves for CJD look like in the states, since the beef supply's been contaminated since at least the mid 1990's. And still is.

[Warren Stupidity]

33. Hold on there sparky.

You demanded evidence that cattle grazing was the primary cause of amazon rain forest deforestation and you were provided it. Out of simple politeness you have to at least acknowledge that you were just plain old wrong on this issue, before you get to segue to your next talking point.

[Touchdown]

37. Okay. I was wrong. Happy now Scooter?

What was my first point in the OP? Methane energy production, right?

So why is it that I'm being inundated with cattle destroying the Earth posts instead of them, and you sticking to the original topic?

It was my first talking point. You got off point.

[shadowknows69]

13. Um, no bullshit? Cows don't eat trees?

Deforestation is the conversion of forested areas to non-forested areas. The main sources of deforestation in the Amazon are human settlement and development of the land.<7> Between 1991 and 2000, the total area of forest lost in the Amazon rose from 415,000 to 587,000 km², an area twice the size of Portugal, with most of the lost forest becoming pasture for cattle.<8>

<http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Amazon+Rainforest>

[sam sarrha]

19. i first thought, "you can't really be that stupid", but..i was wrong you must be really stupid

[Touchdown]

29. Actually you are the stupid one.

My post is about extracting methane from cow dung, as well as from landfills to provide clean fuel for gas power plants.

You followed the herd in missing the point by posting about the evils of omnivorism.

[Warren Stupidity]

35. You should edit/obliterate your incriminating post first

and then claim that you never said anything as stupid as:

"Rainforests are slashed and burned to grow crops like sugar
Cows don't need trees. They don't eat trees."

That is a much better tactic. Totally dishonest of course, but it seems you are out for an argument-game and not for a discussion anyway.

[Touchdown]

39. You'll have to help me out here.

Cows do eat trees? They don't grow sugar cane in Brazil? What's stupid?

Second, the one I responded to had no input or opinion on my original post, about methane harnessing. He only wanted to de-rail the thread, which shows that it was he was not out for a discussion.

Are you a debate teacher by any chance? Or do you just like to play traffic cop from time to time? You haven't weighed in on the subject, so I assume you came in here just to grade my essay and make me come to the chalkboard.

[Hanse]

45. Do cows eat trees? No, they eat grass.

Which is why rainforest is slashed and burned, then replaced with pasture land to raise cattle.

And the vast majority of rainforest is destroyed for cattle pastures.

Of course, the distant second is soybean production.

Which is why people who eat tofu are scum and should be ashamed of themselves.

[rucky]

22. Which also proves that corn syrup is good for the environment. n/t

[LostinVA]

58. Dear fucking jeebus -- you really are uneducated on this

I am a meat-eater, I am even a beef eater on occasion, but I am also educated on this and a decently green person, and never in my wildest imagination would I say something so fucking wrong and ignorant, and then be proud of my ignorance.

[Touchdown]

62. You are proving my other post's point with every sentence.

You are superior, strident, and condescending. what a turn on. Way to recruit new people to the cause.

[Baclava]

24. I love my meat

If it was good enough to increase my ancestors brain size, it's good enough for me

[sam sarrha]

25. links to beef's environmental devistation.. >>Link>>

http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0129-brazil.html
Nearly 80 percent of land deforested in the Amazon from 1996-2006 is now used for cattle pasture, according to a report released today by Greenpeace at the World Social Forum in Belem, Brazil.


http://epa.gov/methane/

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-greenhouse-hamburgerThe FAO report found that current production levels of meat contribute between 14 and 22 percent of the 36 billion tons of "CO2-equivalent" greenhouse gases the world produces every year. It turns out that producing half a pound of hamburger for someone's lunch a patty of meat the size of two decks of cards releases as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as driving a 3,000-pound car nearly 10 miles.

[Touchdown]

27. And... your links lead right up to the solution for harnessing

... it for energy and re-use (see link at OP), as in fertilizing those crops for our other source of food.

[sam sarrha]

51. the point is that you can do what you propose but with devastating losses in other areas, its only

about 5% efficient. you can do it but only by losing the rest of whats left of the amazon rain forest and the all the arable land http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/ar/arable+land.html left in africa and the 3rd world. this will lead to starvation and Famine.. the destructive behavior of the animals will create deserts, the water the beef uses will cause drought.. the water used in beef production in the usa is the equivalent of every man woman and child here taking 8 showers a day.

Beef is very unhealthy to eat also, a major cause of heart disease.. and other conditions
http://www.cqs.com/beef.htmhttp://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=+health+problems+due+to+beef&btnG=Search

[Hanse]

36. Cows are solar powered. Carbon neutral.

Sure, cows release CO₂ into the atmosphere. And they can do this because they eat grass. And grass grows because it takes CO₂ out of the atmosphere.

So cows are just another part of the natural carbon cycle.

As opposed to somebody burning coal, to generate electricity, to power a computer that they use to complain about other people eating foods that they don't like.

[depakid]

41. Methane is 20 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2

That beside the fact that cattle raching DESTROYS CARBON SINKS -which makes the practice (and the fast food industry that it supports) anything but carbon neutral.

In fact, it's a major aggravating factor for climate change.

[Hanse]

43. Well, I do my part to save the environment.

By breeding and force-feeding my own free range geese for foie gras.

[Touchdown]

46. That's why the methane is brunt before it enters the atmosphere.

The heat from that methane burning is used for power generation.

Most landfills now only have methane furnaces. Once that get's channelled into a turbine power plant, then electricity can be made. What is burnt off is clean and is no longer a greenhouse gas.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

57. Cows have ruminators?

Where are their ruminators? I can't find those in any anatomical drawings I've looked at.

[omega minimo]

50. Soylent Green is Beefle!!!!

[muriel_volestrangler]

55. I have my doubts about some of the figures in the article

For instance:

"Cow dung gas is 55-65% methane, 30-35% carbon dioxide, with some hydrogen, nitrogen and other traces. Its heating value is around 600 B.T.U. per cubic foot.
...
About one cubic foot of gas may be generated from one pound of cow manure at around 28°C. This is enough gas to cook a day’s meals for 4-6 people in India."

600 BTU is the energy equivalent of 0.0037 UK gallons of kerosene, or 0.6 fluid ounces. If they cook a day's meals for 4-6 people with 0.6 fl. oz. of paraffin (roughly a tablespoonful), I take my hat off to them. If they cook practically nothing, then of course it may be true, but not a very useful comparison.

[Algorem]

59. let's burn the meateaters for energy.they got lotsof grease.burns good.

[LostinVA]

60. This beef eater says: what a dumbass, uneducated OP

:wtf: