This just links to a picture?
Fixed.
Thanks. Figured it was a mistake.
Pushing a solution that requires dependence on animal agriculture is just someone trying to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge.
Also, was there supposed to be a linked article?
Why does just a picture and a headline have so many upvotes? Is this community asleep at the wheel?
“Let’s take all that yucky methane released by cows and make it fuel!”
- how’s that help?
“It keeps the carbon from entering the atmosphere.” - okay genius. What uses the fuel?
“Engines I suppose”. - and the engine combusts it and creates…?
“Exhaust?” - and that exhaust is made of…?
“CO2 and NOx and SOx.” - and is released to…?
“The atmosphere.” - So how does that help?
“I have a new fuel revenue stream.”
I think you need to compare the greenhouse effect from methane as compared to that CO2, NOx and SOx released by burning off the methane. There is a reasone the EPA requires waste water treatment plants to flare off methane rather than freely releasing it.
Methane is roughy 1000x as potent at global warming as CO2.
You may not like cattle farming, but take the win.
Gonna need a source on your 1000x. I can find 27.9x the potential, per unit mass. I think my point still stands: they’re taking a problem and merely converting it into a different form of the problem, and calling it a solution.
- how’s that help?
