Belching cows and pigs could start costing farmers money if a proposal to charge fees for air-polluting animals becomes law. Farmers so far are turning their noses up at the notion, which is one of several put forward by the US Environmental Protection Agency after the Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases emitted by belching and flatulence amounts to air pollution ...
... The executive vice president of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Ken Hamilton, estimated the fee would cost owners of a modest-sized cattle ranch $30,000 to $40,000 a year.
Must be an easier target than SUV drivers and coal fired power stations. Presumably the idea is to replace ranches with biofuel crops, and import meat so some other country causes the pollution!
Wrong end, aurora. Most of the damage is done by the other end.
Oh, and by the animals that eat the cattle.
Reminds me of the old one about the difference between a cow and the James Last orchestra: the cow has the horns at the front and the arsehole at the back.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
Reminds me of the old one about the difference between a cow and the James Last orchestra: the cow has the horns at the front and the arsehole at the back.
When I, and many of the other students, go to CAT for the MSc, we eat vegetarian food and it causes us the most awful wind: much worse than any I ever suffer at home on a healthy mixed diet.
kenneal wrote:When I, and many of the other students, go to CAT for the MSc, we eat vegetarian food and it causes us the most awful wind: much worse than any I ever suffer at home on a healthy mixed diet.
kenneal wrote:When I, and many of the other students, go to CAT for the MSc, we eat vegetarian food and it causes us the most awful wind: much worse than any I ever suffer at home on a healthy mixed diet.
Thanks for sharing that with us Ken.
I should have replied to emordnilap's post. Militant veggies are hypocrites, vegans are logical: I can accept them. You can't eat dairy produce or fish without causing the death of animals that they so hate about us meat eaters.
Everything eats something else and plants scream when you pick them, so I'm told. They also react to someone who has killed another plant so what's the difference between killing an animal and a plant?
I think the CAT flatulence is a result of eating all those murdered babies, or is it abortions, to get some proteins. After all shouldn't beans and peas have a right to grow into fully fledged plants before they are killed and eaten? ':?' At least my cattle have three or four good years before I eat them.
With all this fuss about what food we should and shouldn't eat I hear the Soylent Corporation might actually be worth buying shares in . . . LOL
'The honey bee is vital to the environment! Every year in America, they pollinate six billion dollars worth of crops! If you kill the bee, you're gonna kill the crop! If you kill the plants, you'll kill the people!'
Sand Dancer Nick wrote:With all this fuss about what food we should and shouldn't eat I hear the Soylent Corporation might actually be worth buying shares in . . . LOL
If Soylent Corporation was actually Soylent Co-operative, I'm sure there could be some excellent resources found around the City of London, Westminster, Washington etc. They would make a far better contribution to the world than they have managed so far
ROAST beef and diary products may have to disappear from the British diet if the country is to meet its pledge to cut carbon emissions by 80%, a government report has warned.
It found that the greenhouse gases generated by agriculture, and especially by Britain's 10.5m cows, will seriously undermine any attempt to meet the targets.
The report, from the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, warns that farming generates greenhouse gases equivalent to 65m tonnes of CO2 a year.
