this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
709 points (97.2% liked)
Greentext
4377 readers
1758 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Zero emissions? I know people find it ha ha funny, but farts legitimately contain methane and other green house gassses.
Cows for example are a large contributor of GHG
plus if we had as many horses as we did cars we would be living in a horse shit apocalypse.
Compress into brick, then build tower. Now you also have tower.
I generously donate my castle composed entirely out of horse shit to you kind sir.
Only you can solve the housing crisis
Foreever gratefull I am
And it'll be built like a shit-brick house
We don't need more Trump towers thx
Yep before the automobile streets were covered in horseshit.
This is complete bs.
Tldr: cows in sheds eating corn is the problem, cows eating natural grass actually sequester more carbon than an empty field.
Long answer: Photosynthesis can only get carbon from the atmosphere. This carbon is then turned into plant material in grass. This grass is then eaten by the cow. A small portion of this grass will be converted into methane and other byproducts in the cow's digestive tracks. Some will be turned to energy for the cow and a vast majority will be shit out as raw unprocessed material. This raw unprocessed material, i.e. cow shit, this will last in the environment sequestering more carbon for longer time than just grass sitting there by itself. A grazed paddock will grow more grass than a non-grazed paddock because the cows are eating the fucking grass. i.e. more carbon from the environment is getting sequestered in the grass and the cow shit.
The only reason that cows get such a bad wrap is that variouse other factors are being counted that really shouldnt be under cows. Deforestation to grow plants to feed livestock, the transportation of meat, livestock feed etc etc.
A properly managed grass fed beef (like what we have here in australia) actually has a net negative effect on ghg. The factory farmed beef eating corn in a shed thats never seen a blade of grass is whats actually causing the ghg seen in the reports.
We have already seen this narrarive been used to strongarm small farmers grazing cattle while the multinational farms get away with fucking the environment cos they can afford the cost of beurocracy.
We are all just 3 warm meals away from anarchy thats something we should do well to remember.
Ps. Its not "cow flatulence" its "enteric fermentation" (burps) cow farts just makes a better headline.
Edit: formatting
tract
rap
various
I think you should've put TL;DR in the beginning, otherwise it looked like you're arguing cows don't fart, when you were actually about net effect.
I never thought about it from this side, but it makes sense, and seems like another way big corporations fuck the world up.
Good shout.
Its a classic case of simple answer to a complex problem that nobody really thinks about cos it sounds vaguely reasonable in a headline.
I can't believe my eyes, someone that isn't spouting the usual bullshit about cows and GHG on Lemmy.
I'll be gobsmacked.
If you think a horse has the environmental impact of an automobile, I have a bridge to sell you
Horses aren't cows
Source on point 2 ?
I, uh, errr, uhhhhh.....
Motions vaguely at the four-legged animals
They're just different, trust me, okay????
Horse is the male, cow is the female. Just like dogs and cats.
White cows make normal milk, brown cows make chocolate milk. That’s just science
And if you're fancy, you'll find red cows that make strawberry milk.
I dunno, I'll have to do my own research on this one, my third cousin's dog walkers nephew's barber said he read a tweet declaring they were actually the same animal, just one ate more as a youth and has an accent due to the weight.
I mean you're not wrong but no matter how small an impact it's still not ZERO emissions, so the guy you're replying to is technically correct.
Ah yes, good ole technically correct, the weakest and most schlubby shade of correct, whatever would we do without it?
Actually, it's the best kind of correct. But hey, don't let all that butt hurt bother you. I hear there's a cream for that.
I love that I agreed with you and you STILL felt aggrieved, lol.
Jokes on you, clown, I'm never butt-hurt, only butt-turned-on!
Disdaining the "technically correct" pedants is freeing, try it sometime, you might like it ;)
Alright, I've decided we're besties now. Good exchange, buddy. Good exchange. :3
Seriously though, I'm smiling.
<3 Based and Horsepilled!
Look at how much calories a horse needs per day, and then look at how much CO2 gets emitted to produce said food. Even the amount of CO2 a horse exhales per day is already significant.
At what point reading my comment did you come up with this?
Ok, no cow riding.