Farmers might pay for bovine gas emissions

There are students at a college or Univ. doing research on this at this time. Boy we could use that technology to heat older peoples homes, their energy costs would decrease. (You know those old jokes about old farts)

Seriously tho' digestive systems change with age and techniquely older people get "gas' more often and even may avoid cruciferous foods because of it.
The pix reminds me of college day parties...aaaahhh.

Wow I swear I see this exact same story pop up on current at least once a month.

That being said this is a ridiculous issue for several reasons. First off cows are not coal fire electric plants. Their “emissions” have always been a part of the natural cycle and the only way this natural process could become a problem is when humans decide their energy demands trump food requirements.

As Slovelett remarked we should be harnessing methane from cows instead of taxing farmers. The benefits of such a tax would never mitigate the effects of the problem in itself. While on the other hand if the government provided incentives for farmers to utilize anaerobic digesters we would not only see a greater reduction of methane into the environment, the other ecological issues concerning manure would also managed.

For those who haven’t heard, anaerobic digestion is the process of taking animal, or human manure, fermenting it, stripping the methane from it and then burning the methane in an electric generator. The only byproduct of this process, besides a cleaner burning source of electricity that is, is organic fertilizer.

So why do people celebrate a cow tax that would drive up the price of meat, which would have a greater impact on the poor, when we could strengthen the farming sector (and possibly reduce the “necessity” for farm based subsides)?

Check out http://www.mnproject.org/e-haubenschildfarm.html if you want more information on anaerobic digestion.

@Maggiekortchmar -- great story, and congrats for being featured in the UK!

I hope you don't mind, but your headline was getting cut off in the featured module, so I shortened it slightly.

Here is your original:

"Farmers may wind up paying for gas produced by their cows"

I went with "bovine," but could easily stick with "cow." Let me know if you have questions!

thanks!
mario

Maybe we should all be taxed every time we let one, and that money can fund research in "clean cow" technology.

I don't think is is something that is actually being proposed (or even considered beyond a few suggestions).

From the linked article:

"... John Millett, a spokesman for EPA's air and radiation division, said there has been an oversimplification of the EPA's document 'to the point of distortion.'
'EPA is not proposing any type of tax on livestock,' he said.
The EPA briefly mentions 'raising livestock' in its report on ways to regulate greehnouse gases under the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Paul Schlegel, director of public policy for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said it determined the possible fees that could be imposed by using Agriculture Department statistics on the amount of greenhouse gases that come from livestock and applied it to the EPA's permitting rules."

To me, this sounds as though the the farm lobby is making it up (or at least severely stretching the truth).

That said, though I generally favor progressive taxes, this doesn't seem like it would do anything other than make beef more expensive.

A better idea might be to harness the gas and use it to produce energy. Disgusting, yes. But it would probably be good for the environment and could put more money in farmers' pockets. (I think this is actually being done on a small scale on some farms, though I don't know how efficient it is.)

I like cows that shart fire!

Sucks for the average farmer. They'll have to kill off extra cattle resulting in a huge market flood of unwanted meat sold at a low price, then meat will be hard to come by and cost the consumer a huge amount.

And just to let ya'll know, most people are omnivores and meat is one the bars represented on the food pyramid you're taught in elementary school. It's natural to eat meat.

This is because all the damn vegetarians want us to be like them...the meat eater has to pay is what this should say. You know the farmer will pass that fee on to the consumer. Friggin environmentalists.

This is a bullshit tax and global warming is being used against as for Rich people to get richer.. we don't need any more damn taxes.. seriously.. think of all the taxes we pay.

My god would you people stop already. Man caused global warming is a myth propagated by self serving idiots like Al Gore. The Earth is a cyclical entity that changes temperatures due to its change in orbit. It happens all of the time and will always happen no matter what creatures roam it.

They're already taxing farmers in New Zealand.

As to making farmers/ranchers pay for destruction of land, etc. as dariusvons, (above) suggets, perhaps that is going a bit far.
Supply and demand. No demand, no supply.
if they continue to feed cows, poultry and pork all the crap they are feeding now, and I can no longer get organic meats, I'll become a vegetarian.
One less person putting a demand on the system.

good, they should also have to pay for the land that gets destroyed and the weeds and invasive plants that get spread around by their cows. and they should have to pay for the water pollution caused by these animals too.

and a great photo.

Interesting, but i think the tax should be place on the meat. The consumer should have to pay it, not the farmer. the farmer is responding to demand.