No, Vox, Measuring Burps and Farts Will Not Save the Planet

A recent article at Vox, titled โ€œScientists are measuring burps and farts. It could help save the planet,โ€ claims that methane produced by farm animals is causing dangerous global warming, and thus that reducing agriculture-related methane is critical to limiting warming to the 1.5ยฐC target established for political ends in the 2015 Paris climate agreement. This is false. Animal related methane is not a threat to the environment, contributing little if anything to global warming.

From ClimateRealism

By Linnea Lueken

A recent article at Vox, titled โ€œScientists are measuring burps and farts. It could help save the planet,โ€ claims that methane produced by farm animals is causing dangerous global warming, and thus that reducing agriculture-related methane is critical to limiting warming to the 1.5ยฐC target established for political ends in the 2015 Paris climate agreement. This is false. Animal related methane is not a threat to the environment, contributing little if anything to global warming.

The article primarily references research efforts by scientists in Columbia who measured the amount of methane different farm animals produce in their burps and gas depending on what kind of forage they eat, in order to determine the feed that will produce the least methane. Animals are placed in chambers and their emissions are monitored.

Vox writes:

These chambers are part of a multiyear project to lower the amount of methane produced by farm animals. This is important. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, responsible for roughly 20 to 30 percent of global warming since the Industrial Revolution. The bulk of global methane emissions stem from human activities, and the largest single source among them is agriculture โ€” namely, the burps of ruminant animals such as cattle, goats, and sheep, as well as their manure.

Vox cites the International Energy Agency, not a scientific organization by the way, to claim that most methane emissions are due to human activity. This is not an established fact and is likely false. Multiple peer reviewed research papers, here and here, for example have found that natural sources of methane, such as but not limited to releases from wetlands, and other agricultural sources, like emissions from rice paddies, are the largest sources of methane in the atmosphere. Indeed, recent research indicates that human methane emissions, from oil and gas operations, for example, have declined in recent decades even as production has increased and atmospheric methane in general has grown โ€“ suggesting an increase from natural or other human sources

Although methane is, as Vox says, a โ€œpowerfulโ€ greenhouse gas with much more warming potential per molecule than carbon dioxide, it has a short atmospheric life as so plays a relatively minor role in the atmosphere when it comes to long-term warming. NASA, one source for Voxโ€™s story admits as much. What Vox and NASA neglect to mention, however, is that methaneโ€™s absorption bands occur at wavelengths that the most powerful and abundant greenhouse gas, water vapor, making up as much of 97 percent of the greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, already covers. Methane, a small trace gas, is a very minor player despite alarmism surrounding it.

With that in mind, it is more useful to look at greenhouse gas emissions in general. Data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) focusing on the United States (since the nation has the best and most easily available data) clearly show that livestock emissions are a small part of human emissions overall. (See figure below)

Figure 1. Greenhouse gas emissions by sector in the United States. Note that beef production is less than half of the entire livestock sector, at just 2 percent. Source: Data from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Graphic by Anthony Watts. Artwork icons in graphic licensed from 123rf.com.

Vox targets beef production in particular, writing:

โ€œWithout addressing emissions from the food sector, itโ€™s impossible to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, beyond which climate change will be catastrophic. Lowering meat (and especially beef) consumption is probably the most important part of that effort, but itโ€™s an uphill battle as meat consumption is projected to rise globally over the next few years.โ€

But beef production only represents 2 percent of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and is beaten out in emissions by crop agriculture, which contributes 10.2 percent of U.S. emissions. These numbers are likely similar in most western countries. Climate Realism has covered these facts multiple times before, here, here, and here, for example. The facts havenโ€™t changed, yet climate alarmists arguments are never revised or improved.

That data supports research done by Prof. Habil Wilhelm Windisch, Ph.D., of the Technical University of Munich, which indicates ruminantsโ€™ contributions to greenhouse gas emissions are exaggerated by climate alarmist groups and media outlets like Vox, by a factor of 3 to 4 at minimum.

Further, methane emissions have been steadily dropping in the United States since the 1990s, according to data from the EPA. (See figure below)

It may be worthwhile to run the โ€œlivestock gas chamberโ€ experiments for data collection purposes, or to learn more about ruminant digestion and how to improve the efficient digestion of foods livestock consume. Ultimately, though, it is a waste of time and money if stopping the gradual warming of the planet is the goal. All it is likely to accomplish is to drive additional research dollars to scholars whoย attackย modern, high-yield, fossil-fuel-intensive, agriculture, while making meat more expensive, making it harder for the worldโ€™s poorest people to afford it. Voxโ€™s own comments clearly indicate they support reducing meat consumption and its projected increase in the developing world โ€“ in short, the authors assumed from the outset that livestock methane emissions were contributing to dangerous climate change, which is, in fact, something they should have to prove. As such Vox is willing to mislead and ignore relevant data to make the case for reducing meat consumption as critical to fighting what the authors perceive as dangerous climate change.

In the Heat of Climate Change Drama, Spain May Choose Its Own Path

Spainโ€™s looming national election serves as a pivotal stage where contentious climate narratives collide. A harsh heatwave currently gripping the country provides a sensational backdrop to the political drama, with many dubbing the election as the โ€˜climate referendumโ€™. Warm temperatures and water-use restrictions are being portrayed as dire warnings of global warming consequences.

From Watts Up With That?

By Charles Rotter

Spainโ€™s looming national election serves as a pivotal stage where contentious climate narratives collide. A harsh heatwave currently gripping the country provides a sensational backdrop to the political drama, with many dubbing the election as the โ€˜climate referendumโ€™. Warm temperatures and water-use restrictions are being portrayed as dire warnings of global warming consequences.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-07-15/european-heatwave-how-climate-is-playing-out-for-spain-s-election

However, amidst this landscape of escalating climate hysteria, the Vox party stands firm. Notoriously characterized as a โ€œclimate-change denialโ€ party, Vox is poised to play a crucial role in the upcoming government. Yet, it is essential to scrutinize the term โ€˜climate-change denialโ€™ โ€“ a catchphrase often used to suppress meaningful dialogue and debate surrounding the issue. Contrary to this misleading label, Vox isnโ€™t denying climate change but contesting the exaggerated and often unfounded panic that surrounds it.

Challenging the prevailing climate orthodoxy, Vox boldly critiques the 2021 Spanish Climate Change law and the new European nature protection legislation. The party warns that such stringent regulations could thrust society back into a metaphorical cave-age, fostering impoverishment rather than advancement.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/spain-election-bike-lanes-low-emission-zones-crosshairs-rightist-run-cities-2023-07-17/

In the field of agriculture, Vox staunchly opposes the governmentโ€™s water use regulations, supporting farmers who are crucial to Spainโ€™s economy. Here, the party recognizes the need to balance both socio-economic and environmental factors, rather than blindly following alarmist environmental policies. Far from denying the existence of climatic changes, Vox appears to prioritize a comprehensive and pragmatic approach over alarmist narratives.

Far too often, climate change is painted as an impending doom, an unsolvable catastrophe looming over the horizon. However, this narrative simplifies a complex issue, reducing it to a binary of denial and acceptance, while ignoring the nuances in between.

As Spain prepares to lead the EUโ€™s rotating presidency, its approach to this contentious issue will be under the global spotlight. Will the nation succumb to the fear-driven climate narrative, or will it chart a balanced path that considers wider perspectives? Is it possible to deviate from the alarmist script, recognizing the climate not as a ticking time-bomb, but as a natural phenomenon that requires measured understanding rather than panicked reaction?

The outcome of the July 23 elections might hold answers to these questions. Amid the clamor of climate alarmism, the hope is for rationality to triumph over fear, and for a comprehensive view of environmental policy to emerge that doesnโ€™t sacrifice economic stability for green symbolism.


For more on Climate Politics, go to our ClimateTV page and select Climate Politics in the topics filter.