Iconic Films

2 for 1 tickets to Singin' In The Rain, this coming Monday. Book now

Navigation - link to other main sections from here

From The Times

July 10, 2007

How to stop cows burping is the new field work on climate change

Lewis Smith, Environment Reporter

They have become the fashionable target for environmentalists, but four-wheel-drive vehicles may be less damaging to the environment than the cows and sheep essential to the rural economy.

The methane emissions from both ends of cattle and sheep are causing so much concern in government that it has ordered researchers to find ways to cut down on the emissions from livestock, which account for about a quarter of the methane – a greenhouse gas 20 times more powerful at driving global warming than carbon dioxide – pumped into the atmosphere in Britain. Each day every one of Britain’s 10 million cows pumps out an estimated 100-200 litres of methane.

This is the equivalent of up to 4,000 grams of carbon dioxide and compares with the 3,419g of carbon dioxide pumped out by a Land Rover Freelander on an average day’s drive of 33 miles.

With the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation predicting that methane emissions from livestock could increase by as 60 per cent by 2030, the issue is being treated with some urgency.

Scientists attempting to find new foods for cattle have already exploded the myth that most bovine emissions come from the rear. They have found the majority come from belching.

Attempts to find a diet for cattle that will result in less flatulence are being made by researchers as part of a government-backed project.

A study in New Zealand suggested that the methane output could be reduced by up to 50 per cent and small-scale research in Britain has found that “significant quantities” could be prevented from getting into the atmosphere. A Department for Enivonment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesman said: “Recent research suggests that substantial methane reductions could be achieved by changes to feed regimes in farm animals.

“Improving the longevity of dairy cows may also result in decreased methane production as a result of a reduction in the total number of animals needed to produce the same quantity of milk.”

He added that in the longer term the department was also looking at the feasibility of reducing methane from livestock by genetically engineering the digestive system.

Sheep are now being sealed in polytunnels in field experiments to find out if the results of laboratory tests can be matched outdoors. They were chosen in place of cows because they are ruminant but more manageable for research. Mass spectrometers analyse the air in the polytunnels before the sheep eat and the fug afterwards when they have digested their food.

The key to reducing the methane from livestock is, researchers believe, to make the diet of the cattle and sheep more easily digestible.

Michael Abberton, of the Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research in Aberystwyth, said rye grass with a high sugar content, white clover and bird’s-foot trefoil, a traditional meadow flower also known as “bacon and eggs”, all show promise. “Contrary to popular myth the methane comes mainly from belching rather than from the other end,” he said yesterday. “We know the diet of the animal does have an impact on the methane emissions. There are a range of approaches we can take.

“We are, for example, working on high-sugar rye grasses which are designed to increase the effectiveness of the processes in the animal’s gut.”

Particular effort is being put into investigating how bird’s-foot trefoil can be made to grow more abundantly in pastureland as the tannin it contains is thought to be especially helpful in reducing emissions.

The mechanisms within a ruminant’s stomach that produce methane are not fully understood, but the scientists believe that if they make the food more digestible it will reduce the quantity of methane produced by microbes in the gut.

High-sugar rye grass is already on the market, said Dr Abberton, and has improved milk and meat yield from cattle, but new strains of grass and clover are under development to make them more digestible to reduce the impact of livestock on climate change.

The team of scientists, funded by Defra, believe that farmers will need to be shown additional advantages if they are to be persuaded to go to the expense of introducing new strains.

The £750,000 project, led by the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, will run for three years and will also consider how emissions of nitrogen, another greenhouse gas, can be reduced in livestock. Agriculture accounts for 37 per cent of methane and 67 per cent of nitrous oxide emissions in Britain.

Have all these "concerned" people in government been told just how much methane is produced by the world population of termites? What are they going to do about this problem, start a breeding programme for anteaters?

Derrick Roberts, Walsall, England

What about the difference between a corn/grain fed animal and a grass fed animal? Also, what if we stopped eating so much meat? Then we wouldn't need as many cows!

Marty, Chicago,

YES to a new naturally grown diet

NO to new genetically designed feed that could give us a new more resilient 'foot and mouth'

Seph Oregon, Leeds,

Sorry veggies, the answer is surely EAT THE COWS, that will stop them belching and farting all over the place.

Steve, Sharjah,

Further, the methane cycle is not well understood at present, but unlike CO2, it disappears into natural "sinks" in the enviroment over a decade or so cycle.

Over the last twenty years the actual concentration of methane in the atmosphere has actually fallen - methane fluxes from 25 parts per billion per year (ppb/yr) in 1980 to about 5 ppb/yr in 2004.

For those Vegans out there may I suggest dropping rice from their diet as well, as rice paddies are the primary source of methane from agriculture, and all organic food, as manure is another great source of methane, but why bother to eat at all, as plants are in themselves a good source of atmospheric methane as well!

So why is "methane" a big issue, can it be because it reflects a Government agenda, that does not want to confront the real problem, our over consumption of fossil fuels, that is unsustainable regardless of the climate change issue. Agriculture is an easy target, but not the problem.

Timothy Coram, Dorset,

What a complete load of nonsense. Why are people so desperate to avoid the obvious, that a veggie diet will help fight climate change? Are we so inane that we have to look for reasons beyond "it tastes good" to continue our brutalisation of non-human animals?

Instead of fiddling with the natural functions of other animals, we should be looking at our own arrogance that has got us into this position in the first place, and to putting an end to our horrific abuse of other animals and the earth in general.

Sometimes I am thoroughly ashamed to belong to the human species.

Jennifer Hynes, Plymouth, England

Nuts...

Does not educated people realize how incredible stupid beyond words this is?? Cows burping causing the PLANET TO WARM??

Seems it is VERY easy these days to brainwash people.

ps: you know why it does not FEEL warmer these days than in, say, 1980? Becuase it IS not warmer.

typen, Oslo, Norway

This is really incredulous - it really goes to show that the environmental / carbon footprint band wagon has gone long enough. May be the dinosaurs killed themselves with excessive belching and f*@t%*g!

Steve Mason, Wellingborough, UK

All I have to say: stop eating beef. No eating, no consumption, no more cows breeding and no more burps. Ah yes, and of course no more cow milk either...
Blaming animals is easier. Even if cows cause damages, why blaming their burps instead of blaming us, our way of life, our industry.... things we could control far better than the natural life of animals!

Louise, Soissons,

Have the politicians nothing better to spend our hard earned cash on?
Utterly ridiculous or should I say udderly

Anna, Birmingham, UK

Tight fitting corks, anyone?

Mike Bibby, St Albans, England -not EU

Every meat-eater gobbles up about 80 animals a year, so if we all went vegetarian we would save this huge amount of animals. If the animals did not need to be breed in the first place, there would not be any of these methane emissions. Animals like cows are breed only for the purpose of meat so if we stopped eating meat the environment would benefit.
I am a vegan, I am doing my huge bit for the planet, i only eat organic food and use natural toiletries. A good company is: www.theorganicdeliverycompany.com.
I just hope that more people follow my footsteps.

Lottie, London,

The solution to all our problems is simple: Do away with people, and nature can run its course.

Ben JW Berg, Blue, Texas

I wonder if Eco-warriors will be killing cows to save the planet?

I'm sure that would cause some SERIOUS internal moral conflict.....!

Mike, Shrewsbury, England

I see no problem in reducing my driving/ my air travel/ etc to help reduce global warming. BUT I WILL NEVER STOP EATING STEAKS!!!!!

Tuckles, Enfield, UK

Let's face it, we need to reduce world population back to sub 4 billion, then the planet (& worlds animals, including humans) might have a chance.
The world governments need to agree something like a 50 or 100 year plan to stabilise world pop. at significantly lower levels. The predicted 9 billion in the near future is asking for more trouble.

Niv, Chesham, UK

What madness, next they will be calling for a cull on the plains of the Serengeti.

Christopher, Hindhead, UK

In this country cows have been ill for 40 years or so. When I was a boy (1950's) cow pats stood round firm and about 4 or 5 inches high. I have rarely seen a proper cow pat these past 40 years. There is a spray or dribble of diarrhoea. Farm yards can be a sea of liquid muck at milking time. Sort out this problem and maybe the methane problem would reduce as well. I also observed fields with new water troughs and piped water in the 50's (There were grants for this.) But nowadays most of those have gone, cattle drink from streams polluted by other cattle, or sometimes I see cattle in fields with no water. This is a terrible way to treat animals. We need fresh clean water and I suspect cattle do as well; otherwise ill health will remain endemic in the national herd and methane emmissions will remain high

Nicholas Ball, Loughborough, Leics UK

But a good beef steak does taste great...

Dave, London, UK

The government is right to want to reduce emissions, but it should start with itself.

Roland, London,

Is nitrogen a greenhouse gas? I've read nitrous oxide is. I noticed Reading University has made a press release about investigating the use of a fodder food called sainfoin to reduce the methane emissions from cattle.

Kevin Varney, Reading, UK

This is just nature doing what nature does while our animal stock eat grass, I see this as a waste of good money. It also goes to show that climate change (I'm not entirely convinced of either as our climates have been hotter & colder in the past without our help) is not just a result of human acvitity and goes to show the natural world has a big impact on warming as well. It really goes to show that as soon as gobal warming is mentioned research grants are easier to get which is why we have so few arguments against warming as its not politically correct.

Seamus, London,

I would have thought the answer was very simple.
You fit bag attachments onto the rear end of every cow, and encourage them to produce even more methane. Once the bags are full, sell them to the power plants. Cheap renewable energy.

Mikios, Hull, England

An easy way of reducing the amount of animal sourced greenhouse gas is by reducing the massive overstocking of livestock and moving away from the current, unhealthy for us and the environment , meat based diet. Artificial technological fixes to prop up our unsustainable habits for another few years are a waste of money and effort. Our government while pledging to meet emissions targets, amid concerns that they will not be able to, are still effectively subsidising a worse global warming problem than our motor cars. When land degradation problems are factored in, a much worse problem. Meat is expensive in resource terms - far more than is currently represented in supermarket prices, expensive in health costs, and now demonstrably in environmental cost.

However, as long as we get a burger at our Live Earth concert, who really cares? Let's ask Al Gore and his Aberdeen Angus.

Me, Here, Itis

Ruminants, whether domesticated or wild, have been eructing methane for millions of years, whilst this is interesting, it is a natural phenomena, just as in the same way bogs produce marsh gas (yet more methane).

Is it being seriously suggested, that the engine of climate change is being fuelled by the sacred cows of India, or the herds of the Serengetti.

Ruminants digest cellulose, the indigestible part of plants, and methane is a byproduct of this fermentation process, this makes them very efficent converters of "solar" energy in the form of grass into meat, milk and fibre.
Is n't this an example of the diversionary "every little bit helps" approach to climate change and lets not face up to the real problem - our fossil fuel consumption.

Timothy Coram, Dorset,

So far, nobody has demonstrated this supposed science - I wonder why. Instead of chanting the global-warming mantra, let us, please, have some verified evidence.

Lay people such as I are bewildered when one set of 'scientists' say that CO2 causes so-called global warming (wouldn't worldwide warming be better) and another set says that there was more CO2 when the earth was much colder.

Instead of quasi-religious evangelization, I'd like a reasoned debate with undeniable facts as its basis. If there really is a link between CO2 and so-called 'global warming', 'top scientists' should be able to prove it. Then, we can all commit to doing our part to reduce the threat. Is that too much to ask?

J R Sothen, Basildon,

Don't you think that this exposes the whole global warming bandwagon for the joke that it is? We are now asking Daisy the cow to lay off the Guinness and Tikka Masala for the sake of the planet.

Nobby Clark, The Hague, today,

Methane is an excellent source of energy, actually.

starling, Lancaster,

Seems to be an obvious conclusion - we should change our diet!!

... So why are we not hearing this loud and clear through the various green campaigns in the media/press just now?

Brian Murray, Edinburgh, UK

What's the date today? April 1st? This is beyond reason. Is this a new phenomenon? Have cows just started belching and farting?

Of course not. When will we grow up and realise that the only cause of climate is the Sun, and all the frequent changes throughout geological times have been caused by changes in the Sun and the impact it has on the Earth?

Let's stop messing about in the belief that Man (or cows) are a significant cause of climate change, and concentrate on dealing with the huge consequences of what looks like a significant if so far short-lived shift. And not trying, Canute-like, to stop it.

David Hoggard, York,

I think the very idea of cows burping causing environmental damage is ludicrous beyond belief. The entire environmental damage spin being played is totally false-our planet is in a normal cycle as proven by respected research and fact finding-this is another example of humanistic policy run amock and the popular media, as usual, is buying into it without studying all the facts. Just because one person says something is true doesn't make it so. Truth is NOT relative. True is true and wrong is wrong-there is no middle ground.

Debbie Foxx, Mars Hill, US/NC

What complete twaddle. What are we going to do about the millions of wild ruminants? The sun causes global warming not belching cows. Anither complete and utter waste of money.

Roger Tilbury, Worthing,

Something's not right with the maths here:

200 litres of methane is 142g or 3 kg CO2 equivalent (using 21x as the multiplier)

A Freelander diesel emits 205g/km or 10.8 kg of CO2 for an average daily 33 mile journey. So this vehicle is nearly four times worse than a cow.

Tom Pike, London,

It appears that vegetarians, who frequently eat large quantities of legumes and therefore produce amazing volumes of flatulence, may be as guilty as cows of overwhelming the environment.

Maybe we should outlaw vegetarianism and the resulting flatulence.

Mike, Brookville, Indiana USA

Surely the obvious answer to this to encourage less consumption of meat and dairy produce, therefore reducing the need for the vast numbers of animals bred purely for these industries?

A plant-based diet has long been proven to have great health benefits; given the above findings it appears to also be one of the most effective ways to reduce damage to the environment. Would the millions being spent on making cows fart and burp less not be better spent promoting and enouraging the pulic to adopt a healthier and greener diet?

Katherine Lloyd, Merseyside,

"and will also consider how emissions of nitrogen, another greenhouse gas, can be reduced in livestock."

WHAT?? This is on a par with the ridiculous claims that nitrogen in tyres can improve fuel consumption! The atmosphere is nearly 80% nitrogen, people, and has been for millions of years................

Grahame Veale, Newton Abbot,

So now they want to stop cows from burping?

Hasn't this insane polical correctness nonsense gone far enough?

Well, speak with the cows! Reason with them!:

"Bessie, dear! It's about your burping and..ahm, farting. It releases a lot of methane gas, nitrogen and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This causes a
greenhouse effect and is changing the Earth's climate, causing global warming. If you don't stop, the North Pole is going to melt and Santa Claus, and all his reindeer - including Rudolph - will drown! You are also ratlling Al Gore's brain...what little there is of that...and getting his tnickers in a kwist!

We were thinking of sending you to the slaught...Oh, let's not even talk about that! Fortunately for you, Love, Berty came up with this wondereful idea that we are going to stick in your rear! It's called a catalytic converter! That will take care of the back end, but you will still have to stop the burping. There's a good girl!" Ah, communication!

Garth Rex, Glendale Heights, USA

What a waste of money. If you look at the transportation of goods generally around Europe and the World you would be surprised at the distances that they have to be moved. It is nonsense to ship sheep from Australia to the UK for example as we have more than enough to feed ourselves.

We should concentrate on being more independent and to stop moving items from China to the UK just because labour is cheaper.

Until we actually have a high cost for each gram of pollutants pumped into the atmosphere then we will continue to move heavy items around the world instead of manufacturing these locally.

Joseph Kellie, Edinburgh, Scotland

So isn't the conclusion obvious? - We need to change our diets!

You have to wonder why is this message so noticeably missing from the media/press coverage on climate/environment issues?

Brian Murray, Edinburgh, UK

This is meddling with God's creation. Changing an input, diet, will change the output, milk and meat. Meddling by adding anti-biotics in feed has resulted in resistant strains of disease. Why, oh why do they try to better God with something they admit they don't understand - stop it!

Phil Anslow, Brentwood, Essex

....or.....(and how about this for a totally MAD idea!)....we could all eat less meat and consume less dairy produce.....thereby reducing the amount of animals needed, rather than spend millions on trialling alernative foods?

Or is that too simple?

Angie, Worcester, UK

Methane isn't 20 times more potent than CO2, it is 72
times more potent, it just doesn't last as long. The 20 figure is averaged over 100 years. Beef is an environmental disaster for water reasonas as well as methane reasons and the heme iron causes colon DNA damage (according to UK Medical research Council research) which is why big beef eating countries like Australia have massive rates of colorectal cancer.

Geoff Russell, Adelaide, Australia