Cut methane by 40%? California tries to legislate flatulence. A limerick.

On September 19, 2916 Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a bill (SB 1383) that requires the state to cut methane emissions from dairy cows and other animals by 40% by 2030.  The bill is yet another massive blow to the agricultural industry in the state of California that has already suffered from the Governor’s passage of a $15 minimum wage and a recent bill that makes California literally the only state in the entire country to provide overtime pay to seasonal agricultural workers after working 40 hours per week or 8 hours per day (see “California Just Passed A $1.7 Billion Tax On The Whole Country That No One Noticed“).

According to a statement from Western United Dairymen CEO, Anja Raudabaugh, California’s Air Resources Board wants to regulate animal methane emissions even though it admits there is no known method for achieving the the type of reduction sought by SB 1383.

cowbackpacksMaybe like this?

In Climate Change remedy tools

both Kerry and Jerry are fools.

Do away with methane,

no more fart? That’s insane.

Enteric digestion still rules.

112815_cow_digestion_730_free

More terror worse than ISIS. First HFC’s, then Methane. Obama, Kerry, Sanders, Clinton full of delusion. A Limerick.

The air in the air Londonderry

is terror, says charlatan Kerry.

HFC’s must depart,

next we go for the fart:

Desist! No more dairy in Derry!

From European Commission Global Methane Reduction Actions
Methane emissions vary considerably by sector with the agriculture sector accounting for 50% of the total emissions. The development of the top six sources of anthropogenic methane emissions between 1990 and 2010 in the EU are shown below and demonstrate the success of the EU and national efforts.
While agriculture and waste are accounting for 81 % of total EU methane emissions fugitive emissions from the energy sector are below
the global figures and account for 19 %. Oil &Gas and coal exploration are a minor source and are expected to decline over the next decades.
Meanwhile back in North America: The time is right for a continental approach to methane reductions. June 2016, President Peña Nieto, President Obama and Prime Minister Trudeau met in Ottawa for the North American Leaders’ Summit (NALS), and energy and environment issues were ripe topic for trilateral cooperation.

After all, it was North American action at NALS that catalyzed global action on hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), another dangerous greenhouse gas, when the three countries proposed a joint amendment to the Montreal protocol in 2009. Similarly, cooperative action on methane at the next NALS would further solidify the countries’ climate leadership and could catalyze global action. Without question, Mexico joining the United States and Canada methane reduction goal of 40-45% is the largest climate commitment NALS can deliver.

 

Cut Methane 40-45%? Climate hysteria gone crazy. A Limerick

cowbackpacksA Message that EPA sent.

Cut Methane by 40%.

No more rice, no more beef,

no more milk, no more cheese.

And yet, it will not make a dent.

What is the EPA belching out now?

Let us go over the main contributors to Methane gas generation. methane_sources

The biggest contributor to Methane generation worldwide is Rice paddies, with about 20%. Of this U.S.A. has 1.2% of the worldwide rice production, so if we eliminate domestic rice production we will reduce the our Methane budget by a quarter of one percent, assuming people switch to potatoes and pasta.

Next, also about 20% of the Methane generation are wetlands. These swamps are most cherished by environmentalists, since they are spawning grounds for all kinds of life. No one seriously wants to drain all swamps anymore, so no cuts there.

Third, with about 12% are Ruminants, Methane belching from cows and people eating beans. We could make a dent in this methane production if people totally switched their diet. Maybe a fart-tax would price beef and dairy products out of the market? Don’t forget bean-tax!

Fourth is termites with about 8%. No, Orkin would not be able to handle this. Besides, Orkin uses strong poisons.

Fifth, also about 8% is Biomass burning. Our country is already doing much better than the rest of the world. Much of this burning is sticks and straws and cow-chips for the third world dinner fire.

Sixth is landfills , also about 8%. The largest landfills are already being fitted with methane recovery pipes, which is good. We may recover yet another couple of percent of the Methane budget.

Seventh is coal mining, contributes about 8% world-wide. Obama has promised to obliterate coal mining in the U.S. Unfortunately for him China is consuming over half of the world’s coal, so even if we did away with all coal mining, that would reduce the world-wide Methane budget by less than 2%.

Eighth is gas production, about 8%. The U.S. petroleum industry already burns off the methane, converting it to CO2,  or recovers it as fuel. Not so worldwide. There can be improvements there, but not more than 2% of the worldwide budget.

Next is Methane wells in the ocean bottom and algae blooms in waters over fertilized by nitrates. This is probably under-estimated at 5%. U.S. has done great strides in for example the Chesapeake Bay, but more can be done. We could possibly gain 1% in the Methane budget from ocean cleanup.

The result? No way can we reduce Methane output by 40 – 45% unless we totally change our standard of living, our eating habits and our life-style.

How much reduction in global temperature would it give us? Less than 0.1C!

It turns out that there exists methane-eating bacteria, and they grow better with increased temperature, stripping the coal atom from methane, converting the rest to methyl alcohol and digesting that too. The Arctic, rich in methane eating bacteria may well be a methane sink, not a methane source.

Any takers?

Background: NY Times, Business day:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is expected to propose as soon as Tuesday the first-ever federal regulation to cut emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming, by the nation’s oil and natural-gas industry, officials familiar with the plan said on Monday.

The proposed rule would call for the reduction of methane emissions by 40 to 45 percent over the next decade from 2012 levels, the officials said. The proposal was widely expected, after the Environmental Protection Agency said in January that it was working on such a plan.

The new rules are part of Mr. Obama’s broad push for regulations meant to cut emissions of planet-warming gases from different sectors of the economy. This month, Mr. Obama unveiled the centerpiece of that plan, a regulation meant to cut emissions of carbon dioxide by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, a move that could transform the way the nation produces and consumes electric power.

The new rules on methane could create a tougher regulatory scheme on the nation’s fossil fuel production, particularly on the way that companies extract, move and store natural gas.

Environmental advocates have long urged the Obama administration to crack down on methane emissions. Most of the greenhouse gas pollution in the United States comes from carbon dioxide, which is produced by burning coal, oil and natural gas. Methane, which leaks from oil and gas wells, accounts for just 9 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gas pollution — but it is over 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide, so even small amounts of it can have a big impact on global warming.

The oil and gas industry has resisted methane regulations, insisting that new rules could stymie a booming natural gas industry and that voluntary industrywide standards are sufficient to prevent methane leaks. Mr. Obama is pressing efforts to cut harmful emissions as he works toward forging a United Nations global warming accord in Paris in December. The aim of the accord is to commit every nation to enact policies to cut greenhouse gases. The United States has already submitted a plan to the United Nations laying out how it will cut domestic greenhouse gas emissions by up to 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025.

Growing GMO modified rice eliminates Methane pollution. An inconvenient truth for Green Heads. A Limerick.

gmo-riceA true GMO revolution.

Grow rice without Methane pollution.

Half the world fed with rice.

Feed the hungry, how nice.

“Green heads” will explode: – Wrong solution.

In addition to a near elimination of greenhouse gases associated with its growth, SUSIBA2 rice produces substantially more grains for a richer food source. The new strain is shown here (right) compared to the study’s control. Image courtesy of Swedish University of Agricultural Science

Source: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/07/29/the-perfect-storm-for-environmentalists-gmo-engineered-rice-reduces-greenhouse-gas-emissions-to-near-zero/

A majority of people are worried about GMO food. Yet we all eat it, knowing or not. The modification gene in this rice is taken from a gene in barley. It works by producing more starch instead of more roots. Test plantings in China yielded 90% reduction in Methane production compared to unmodified rice.

One possible downside: Less roots may mean less minerals absorbed, and more starch may mean less protein as a percentage of the rice.

Cut dairy emissions 25% by 2020. Fart tax anyone? A

The White House has proposed cutting methane emissions from the dairy industry by 25 percent by 2020. Although U.S. agriculture only accounts for about 9 percent of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, it makes up a sizeable portion of methane emissions — which is a very potent greenhouse gas.

Cows-heading-homecowbackpacksPicture left: The cows are coming home to get milked, well nourished from a healthy grass diet
Picture right: Research cow from Argentina fitted with a methane collecting backpack. This cow is fed feedlot style.

You cannot accuse EPA to be lax;
It works very hard to propose a fart tax.
They are running on fumes:
Tax the bovine perfumes!
Throw all the bums out! Let us give them the axe.