This is really good! The GHG factor of methane is many times as high as CO2, so even capturing and burning the gas from landfills without utilizing the energy reduces the climate impact by maybe 20x. And when you use it to replace fossil gas, it really makes a difference.
Yeah it is good. Capturing and using methane is way better than letting it get into the atmosphere. Consider this too: Methane has a life cycle of about 12.5 years. When you compare CH4 to CO2 over a 20 year period ("GWP20"),
methane's impact is 84-87x that of CO2. According to the EPA:
CH4 emitted today lasts about a decade on average, which is much less time than CO2. But CH4 also absorbs much more energy than CO2. The net effect of the shorter lifetime and higher energy absorption is reflected in the GWP.
...
Just like the 100-year GWP is based on the energy absorbed by a gas over 100 years, the 20-year GWP is based on the energy absorbed over 20 years.
...
for CH4, which has a short lifetime, the 100-year GWP of 28–36 is much less than the 20-year GWP of 84–87.
-
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials#Learn%20whyThis is why I'm fighting so hard to reduce animal agriculture. The 1.5 billion head of cattle on this planet account for 35-40% of anthropogenic methane emissions (FAO). When people say animal ag only accounts for ~15% of GHG, they are using GWP100, not GWP20. Using GWP20yr, it's
arguable that animal ag contributes 50% of global warming GHGs.
If we weren't in such a dire predicament, we could have the luxury of using GWP100. But what we do in the next 20 years matters. We don't want to undercount the impact of methane.
Ruminant cattle in North America produce between 50-110kg of methane every year per head. Dairy cattle are on the high end. And that's not even accounting for manure methane emissions that can be another ~20kg or so (more for dairy).(Livestock's Long Shadow. PDF (FAO))
There are 1.5 billion head of cattle on the planet.
(
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e.pdf)
Given that CH4 packs all its punch within 20 years, and that this punch is 85x stronger than CO2, I don't see why we wouldn't be doing everything in our power to stop consuming beef and dairy, and supporting programs to transition cattle ranchers and dairy farmers to low carbon businesses - for example they could ...
- grow vegetables to sell to local humans (esp those living in food deserts),
(
https://youtu.be/yBKnG9Y0owQ?t=3152 ),
- build wind or solar farms (for land that can't be cultivated)
- enroll in CRP - the federal Conservation Reserve Program - that pays farmers to re-wild their land. For land that can be reforested - this would further mitigate global warming.
(just to name a few options).
I'm working with Renee of
Rowdy Girl Sanctuary to come up with such a transition program in
my pitch to our DC reps so they can support putting an end to federal subsidies for animal ag.
Don't get me wrong - we absolutely need carbon taxes, and measures to transition to low carbon / no carbon energy sources. I am on my bike every day and not in a car because I know this. We need to transition our energy sources ASAP. But we can't afford to ignore animal ag. We
also must address the problem of eating animals. Just focusing on one high carbon emission source (fossil fuels) is unlikely to save us.
3x a day, every day, it's within our power to lower our carbon impact by choosing low carbon food options. There's so many plant based foods to choose from - and they ALL contain protein (and fiber - there's 0 fiber in meat and dairy) - why wouldn't we choose plant based options? Have you heard of anyone being hospitalized in the western world for protein deficiency? Probably not. We're obsessed with protein, and for no really good reasons. In any case, if you think you need oodles of protein for some reason - nuts, legumes and even the humble potato have plenty of protein.
Vegan options don't need to be equivalent to animal based foods in taste and texture, they only need be good enough. We're saving the planet for our children after all. Now's not the time to be a pansy about food taste pleasure. Besides, once you start choosing WFPB options , your body starts craving these, and these become the new YUM.
At the very least, seeking out plant based alternatives for beef and dairy will lower your impact the most. And consider that 250g of black beans have the same amount of protein as 100g of beef - and bonus - you get 22g of fiber, and loads of phytonutrients, folate, iron and calcium, along with other minerals. And they're cheap. Good all around for us mustachians.
Dairy isn't a health food, it's a marketing campaign. Paid for with US tax-payer's tax dollars through check off programs and advertisements. It contains cholesterol, saturated fats, estrogen, and pus. Yes pus. Mastitis is a real problem in the dairy industry as each dairy cow is milked for 22k lbs of milk a year ( 100 years ago, the typical cow produced ~4k lbs). Here, enjoy these (not so) fun facts from our USDA.
If you want ideas for recipes or WFPB eating, join our throw down the gauntlet challenge here:
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/throw-down-the-gauntlet/go-whole-food-plant-based-(wfpb)-in-2019This is a long post, I know -
TL;DR - please find plant based alternatives to beef and dairy to reduce methane emissions - as methane is a GHG that is 4x more powerful in its global warming than most calculations assume - putting animal ag on par with fossil fuel usage in terms of its culpability for warming our planet.