UN says cows are greatest danger to global environemnt

[Glaz]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10414793

Cows have emerged as the world's top destroyer of the environment.
A United Nations report has identified the world's rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife.
And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs.
The report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats.
But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.

their wind and manure emit more than one third of emissions of another, methane, which warms the world 20 times faster than carbon dioxide.

Mooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

 

[MachZer0]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10414793




Mooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

Does this mean that Al Gore won't be winning the Academy Award or the Nobel Peace Prize?

 

[Ryal Kane]

Hey! New Zealand Herald! First time I've seen it sited here.

Yes, Cows are probably very bad for greenhouse gases. They're also pretty inefficient as meat source and take up a huge amount of land. The amazon rainforest is being cut down primarily for grazing.

Reliance on diary should be something to be considered as well as reliance on oil. Sooner or later we're oging to run out of space and resources to feed that many cows.
They are part of the problem, but not the only part.
Small changes across the board would probably reduce things quite a lot. It's amazing that politics and money can have such an influence on peoples opinion in this area. If we lose the basis of our civilisation then neither will be worth anything.

 

[Voegelin]

"Four legs bad, two legs good."

 

[Voegelin]

Sooner or later we're going to run out of space and resources to feed that many cows.

I can't feed any on my land so don't feel bad.

Could get a couple dozen in under the maple trees but zoning won't allow it.

 

[JoshuaW]

It sounds silly, but it's true that the Amazon rain forest is being cut down to make room for cow pastures. Still, I suspect cars and trucks are more harmful to the environment.

 

[MachZer0]

I can't feed any on my land so don't feel bad.

Could get a couple dozen in under the maple trees but zoning won't allow it.

I should get a tax break since I don't own any cows and am therefore doing my share to improve the environment. Not owning cows certainly helps more than owning a hybrid vehicle, doesn't it?

 

[Voegelin]

I should get a tax break since I don't own any cows and am therefore doing my share to improve the environment. Not owning cows certainly helps more than owning a hybrid vehicle, doesn't it?

Depends. Are hybrids upholstered in fine Corinthian leather? If so you would be helping to eliminate at least one cow from the planet.

 

[SummerMadness]

Haha, let's laugh at the report but never address any of the points raised. [staff edit]. I'm pretty sure none of you are clamoring to live next to cattle feedlots or slaughterhouses. But I see the usual hit and run posting, so I don't expect anyone to actually address the points brought up in the report.

 

[feral]

Cows have emerged as the world's top destroyer of the environment.
A United Nations report has identified the world's rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife.
And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs.
The report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats.
But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.

their wind and manure emit more than one third of emissions of another, methane, which warms the world 20 times faster than carbon dioxide.

I heard about this a few years ago. It's briefly mentioned in "Fast Food Nation" and I've seen various news reports saying so. A lot of people mock groups like PETA, which has been sending out this message for years, which is truly unfortunate because if the majority of folks had bothered to heed the warning, something could have been done about it sooner (not to suggest I appreciate all PETAs offerings, mind you). I'm not sure what can be done about it. America is extremely dependant on beef, and while there are other countries that eat a lot of meat I think we are the most, or at least right up at the top in the amount of beef consumed and cattle bred (by U.S. companies, at least, but housed elsewhere). If everyone were to decide to abstain it would be great but I doubt it's plausible.

Haha, let's laugh at the report but never address any of the points raised. [staff edit] I'm pretty sure none of you are clamoring to live next to cattle feedlots or slaughterhouses. But I see the usual hit and run posting, so I don't expect anyone to actually address the points brought up in the report.

I understand how you feel. It is frustrating when people refuse to get serious about important issues. [staff edit]

 

[Voegelin]

Haha, let's laugh at the report but never address any of the points raised.

About had my fill of cut and paste charts and graphs. Not interested at all in the UN "conclusive" report as it has predictions going out 30 and 70 years. That isn't science. That is augery. If Al Gore can produce cartoons about Global Warming and the UN can publish frightening Politically Correct children's books on it, then we can laugh at it.

But to return to the OP. Cows do emit gas. Maybe that does raises the temperature of the planet. Dinosaurs indicate this might be true. They were much, much bigger than cows. Aside from eating each other, they ate a lot of plants which produce gas when digested. The planet was a lot hotter when they were around. Bananas grew in Oregon. So maybe we should be content with cows. It could be worse. Pterdactyls could be perching on Coit Towers and Diplodocidae nesting in Oklahoma City. With the gas they emit, a 95 degree day could be a cool spring morning.

"Arnold Schwarzenegger is blaming man for global warming. And today, Al Gore agreed with him. That's so typical. Two cyborgs, 'Oh, let's blame the humans.'" --Jay Leno

 

[SummerMadness]

About had my fill of cut and paste charts and graphs. Not interested at all in the UN "conclusive" report as it has predictions going out 30 and 70 years. That isn't science. That is augery. If Al Gore can produce cartoons about Global Warming and the UN can publish frightening Politically Correct children's books on it, then we can laugh at it.

But to return to the OP. Cows do emit gas. Maybe that does raises the temperature of the planet. Dinosaurs indicate this might be true. They were much, much bigger than cows. Aside from eating each other, they ate a lot of plants which produce gas when digested. The planet was a lot hotter when they were around. Bananas grew in Oregon. So maybe we should be content with cows. It could be worse. Pterdactyls could be perching on Coit Towers and Diplodocidae nesting in Oklahoma City. With the gas they emit, a 95 degree day could be a cool spring morning.

"Arnold Schwarzenegger is blaming man for global warming. And today, Al Gore agreed with him. That's so typical. Two cyborgs, 'Oh, let's blame the humans.'" --Jay Leno

Thanks for proving my point, you didn't address anything, same MO as usual. The fact that you just said "cows emit gas" shows that you ignore and dismiss everything without even addressing the points brought up.

 

[Avatar]

I do my best to combat global warming by eating as much beef as I can. The more dead cows the better, after all.

 

[Glaz]

I do my best to combat global warming by eating as much beef as I can. The more dead cows the better, after all.

I thought about that myself, was even going to tile the thread: 'eat a steak, save the world'; however, eating more would increase demand and therefore increase the number of cattle and just make it worse. Maybe we could just go out and have one giganitc global cookout.

 

[Voegelin]

Maybe we could just go out and have one giganitc global cookout.

In India. Lots of cows wandering around loose there.

Check out this satellite image of haze at the confluence of the Ganges and Brahmaputra Rivers and this one of Bombay. Our subcontinental friends need help now culling that herd.

 

[KenH]

Dear U.N.,

Keep your hands off my steak.

Thank you.

 

[Avatar]

Dear U.N.,

Keep your hands off my steak.

Thank you.

Yeah. If God didn't want the world to heat up He wouldn't have made Cows so tasty.

 

[SummerMadness]

In India. Lots of cows wandering around loose there.

Check out this satellite image of haze at the confluence of the Ganges and Brahmaputra Rivers and this one of Bombay. Our subcontinental friends need help now culling that herd.

Yet again, you post something that ignores the report. Using logical fallacies to prove a point won't endear others to your position or create a modicum of respect for your views.

The UN report focuses on the cattle industry, not just the plain existence of cows. It focuses on the deleterious impact of clearing forests for more grazing land and the impact of huge feedlots on the surrounding environment and rivers. One has to look no further than the dying breed of American ranchers to see how the polluting feedlots have changed the landscape.

Bringing up cows in India either shows a lack of knowledge on the subject or a deliberate misrepresentation of the subject. Being intellectually dishonest will never garner respect and yet again shows how many conservatives with contempt for the environment operate. There still is a refusal to address any of the points in the report and pretending as if there are no consequences to actions doesn't mean that they are not there.

The line of thought I see is the guy that buries garbage in his backyard and believes that because he doesn't see any garbage, there is no garbage...

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

well said

 

[Avatar]

Yet again, you post something that ignores the report. Using logical fallacies to prove a point won't endear others to your position or create a modicum of respect for your views.

The UN report focuses on the cattle industry, not just the plain existence of cows. It focuses on the deleterious impact of clearing forests for more grazing land and the impact of huge feedlots on the surrounding environment and rivers. One has to look no further than the dying breed of American ranchers to see how the polluting feedlots have changed the landscape.

Bringing up cows in India either shows a lack of knowledge on the subject or a deliberate misrepresentation of the subject. Being intellectually dishonest will never garner respect and yet again shows how many conservatives with contempt for the environment operate. There still is a refusal to address any of the points in the report and pretending as if there are no consequences to actions doesn't mean that they are not there.

The line of thought I see is the guy that buries garbage in his backyard and believes that because he doesn't see any garbage, there is no garbage...

Um, his point was valid. Of the 1.3 billon head of cattle on earth India has by far the largest amount of any nation at 400 million. China and Brazil come next with 150 million.