Urban Ecoist

Cows fart.  Cows fart a lot. Cows fart methane, and methane is twenty times more effective at trapping heat in the Earth’s atmosphere. So are cows to blame for global warming?

Way back in high school debate class, a friend and I were debating global warming (yes, way back then in 1993 — this argument is nothing new, people). She was flying through the negative side of the argument and blithely read a piece of evidence that read something along the lines of cows are to blame for global warming and humans have nothing to do with it. It was kind of besides the point in the argument, and anyone who participated in high school-level debate knows that most of what you do is read quotes from articles and scientific journals as fast as you can in hopes that your opponent doesn’t have time to refute it. I didn’t even catch this little tidbit of silliness, until Mrs. Gillespie (shout out!) pointed out the cow fart argument. Luckily, Lori brought it up in a rebuttal, so I didn’t have to refute it — and yes, I won, but as always I am digressing. Kind of.

Cows and their flatulence have been the focus of some global warming nay-sayers for years, but those farts are also a valid contributor to rising methane levels. But hardly can anyone point the finger at cows without also pointing four fingers back at ourselves?

Do cows live in the wild? Yes, they do. The San Diego Zoo website can tell you all about it if you click on this link. But how many cows live on this planet simply because we like to eat them and drink their milk?

There is approximately one cow per 4 people on this planet, or 1.5 billion cows. Ironically, India has the most cows, despite the fact that they don’t eat them. In the US, we have about 100 million head of cattle, or one cow per 3 people, slightly higher than the world’s average. That’s a whole lotta fartin’ goin’ on.

You may run across the whole issue of cow farts in the news here and there, as the US Environmental Protection Agency had proposed putting a tax on cows in an attempt to curb greenhouse gases and curb global warming. Of course, the cattle industry went berserk, and the EPA said, just kidding, we were only saying that to see what the cattle industry would say.

Huh? Actually, double huh, because I am not sure how effective a tax on cattle would be in reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Yeah, taxes on cows would increase beef prices to consumers and then maybe consumers would give up beef, but if you think of the scope of how much beef is consumed in the US alone, by way of fast food, golly, would Americans really be able to give up red meat?

Methinks that the fast food industry would find some way to “water down” beef with more fillers to keep people hooked.

But for those of us that can see the forest for the trees, it is hard to deny that if we did in fact reduce the amount of beef consumed, maybe that could have a real impact on the amount of methane pumped into the atmosphere. Granted, it may not make a tremendous difference once that permafrost melts and all that methane trapped under ice and frozen soil comes bubbling up, but we urban ecoists try to make individual efforts in hopes of creating a larger change.

And I have written in the past about how much water it takes to raise cattle. Giving up beef could help out this planet in more ways than just in terms of methane. Cows drink a lot of water and eat a lot of grain, which also needs water. Processing beef also required water. And water is something we ain’t got to spare anymore.

cows, fart, flatulence, methane, tax, global warming, water, beef, fast food, EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, India, US, cattle industry,