Opinion 
 Blogs 
 Jack Waterford 
 What stinks about the methane debate 

What stinks about the methane debate

The original tale, circa 1975 in Private Eye involved the President of Nigeria, though I have since heard the same joke told of President George W. Bush in modern times. In any event, the president, whoever he is, is making a state visit to London, and, having called on the Queen then goes with her in the state coach towards Westminster. As they are about to set off, one of the coach horses issues a very loud fart. There is a silence while people pretend to have heard nothing. The president is silently heaving with laughter, but biting his lips. The Queen perceives this as deep embarrassment, and, with her well-known way of seeking to relax people, says to the president: ''I'm so terribly sorry about that noise.''

The president gallantly responds, ''Madam, I thought it was the horse.''

Perhaps these days she would be receiving a fine from the Greater London Environmental Protection Agency, though it seems unlikely that the new Lord Mayor, Boris Johnson, who always looks as if he likes a good fart, would have anything to do with it. Boris's predecessor, Red Ken Livingstone, would, no doubt, have done the citizen's arrest himself.

The poor old horse couldn't help it, of course, but like many of our other introduced stock is a substantial methane factory. A pony, 'tis said, burps or farts about 17 cubic metres of methane a year, a saddle horse about 25 cubic metres, and a draught horse about 43. As I calculate it, though chemistry was never my strong point, a cubic metre of methane weighs about 720 grams, so the horse's contribution to the atmosphere is between 12 and 31kg of methane.

Sheep and goats seem to be about the same as ponies, while cows, it seems are good for about eight times as much, at the top end, about 180 cubic metres of methane a year. That's about 130kg weight of methane.

Another way ruminant haters put this prodigious flatulence is that a cow produces about 30 litres of methane per kilogram of milk produced. A grass-fed lamb on a butcher's slab has produced methane in its lifetime at the rate of about 1160 litres a year for every kilogram it weighs (about 60 litres if it has been artificially fed indoors), and a 40-month-old beef steer about 1040 litres for every kilogram of meat produced say 425,000 litres for a reasonable size one. (The calculation, apparently, makes some allowance for the mother's co-contribution). That's about 43 cubic metres of methane at standard temperature and pressure, weighing, say, 30kg.

I emphasise the weight, which I think is reasonably modest, because ruminant haters, vegetarians and greenhouse gas worriers tend to over-emphasise the cubic metreage, sometimes, it seems to me, raising the spectre of the whole planet suffocating in a methane haze.

Australia, for example, usually has about 100 million sheep (quite a few less at the moment, thanks to the drought), and talking of their annual contribution invites one to think of 1700 million cubic metres of methane, which appears to be quite a lot. The more so when one adds the 4.2billion cubic metres of methane from the 26 million cattle, and the output of a million other domestic animals, for say the astounding six billion cubic metres of methane a year. Hell, spread evenly around the continent, the vile gas would be 0.8 of a millimetre deep (in gaseous, not liquid form of course). The weight alone - 4.3 million tonnes - must be forcing the land to subside, as opposed to the sea falling.

Heavens, by weight, that is about the same as the total amount of soil moved around while we were building the New Parliament House. About a fifth of what we hope to be this year's wheat crop.

Yet apparently all of this fart gas amounts to 11 per cent of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.

Two Australia ecologists, writing in an international journal Conservation Letters, have estimated that reducing the herd of agricultural stock by about a third could lower Australian greenhouse gas emissions by about 16 ''megatonnes'' by 2020. This would amount to 3 per cent of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.

A megatonne, suggesting a million tonnes, is strictly reserved for the explosive equivalent of a million tonnes of TNT, but perhaps this is appropriate in the circumstances.

They suggest that we could achieve this by switching over to eating the national symbol. Kangaroos have negligible methane production, apparently and, Wilson and Edwards say, raising the kangaroo herd to about 175 million (perhaps multiplying the existing herd by five) would make up for the red meat taken out of production. Besides, some will say, roo meat is better for you than beef, lamb or mutton. Perhaps even better than horse and goat.

Heaven knows what Canberra's vegetarians and animal liberationists would think. They had conniptions when we slaughtered a few hundred roos in Belconnen, and, while no doubt opposed to the eating of any animal, seem to be especially upset by the eating of anything thought to be especially warm, cuddly or symbolic.

Perhaps it would be better if we shifted to eating whale meat, which I understand to be quite plentiful and nutritious.

Neither roo nor whale will do for me, I'm afraid. I do not mind the occasional piece of roo, but it is no substitute for proper red meat, say seven kilograms a week worth. If that involves the production of 7280 litres of methane a week, it's a sacrifice the planet may have to bear. My guess is that we could sustain our meat supply by reducing our use of air-conditioning by 5 per cent - a sacrifice I am willing to share in.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
You don't need to eat meat at all. You know that. What are you afraid of by not eating meat? That you might lose your baritone voice? Hairs might fall from your chest? Nonsense man! Pure nonsense!
Posted by Paul Neri, 2/10/2008 5:44:02 PM
There is nothing erudite about this article. It's time people such as Jack Waterford stopped being 'smart' and started being clever. The environment is in trouble and we are the only chance for its recovery. Meat is a very inefficient way of feeding the population, even disregarding the problem of methane production. No-one need become a vegetarian if they don't want to, we could all just reduce our meat intake. Our health would benefit at the same time.
Posted by R Symons, 2/10/2008 10:51:59 PM
Paul Neri, the main thing I'm afraid of losing if I stop eating meat is my sense of humour - a common affliction amongst the vegetarians and grim eco-warriors.
Posted by Tony, 3/10/2008 6:43:03 AM
Pigs, Jack, what about pigs? and Chickens and ducks? Gad, the list goes on and on. But hey, this makes a change from laying guilt trips on smokers who contribute to pollution. How about some of your amazing arithmetic on what we'd get if no-one smoked. Then we might all be able to have another pork chop without guilt, more duck a l'orange. more chorizo, more more more.....
Posted by terry, 3/10/2008 8:36:32 AM
A ruminants level of methane production is intrinsically linked to it's diet. Browsing ruminants produce far less than methane than grazing ruminants do. The nearby Kosciusko NP has quite a few browsing ruminants, namely deer, lurking within its borders that NSW DECC in their wisdom regularly send up a helicopter gunship to cull. Of course meat from culled animals is left to rot and the helicopter spits out tonnes of C02, but according to the wisdom of DECC (Department of Environment and CLIMATE CHANGE) the present situation is far preferable to hunters walking into the park and carrying out meat which will be eaten instead of methane producing beef. But why should logic overide ideologically based policy? It certainly didn't have a hope of doing so at Belconnen where the 'roos were buried rather than eaten in order to appease the vocal animal rights minority.
Posted by Colin Mortimer, 3/10/2008 1:56:35 PM
SOrry Jack, If you continued with your arithmetic you would find you need a lot more turning off of your airconditioner than that. I would seriously ask you to investigate the greenhouse gas problem properly and then you would not be so flippant. You would find that you need to design your dwelling so that you wouldn't need your airconditioner and you would also need to reduce your beef production. The present situation is simply unsustainable Robert
Posted by robert, 3/10/2008 3:28:09 PM
Putting Jack Waterford in charge of a Blog is like putting a librarian in charge of the Stock Exchange!
Posted by Paul Neri, 3/10/2008 5:59:26 PM
The thought of eating kangaroo is obscene. I accidentally took a mouthful of a k sanga once at a bbq (not being told what it was) and it was the most revolting thing I've ever tasted. Frankly would rather reduce my meat consumption (beef, pork or chicken) to v.small amounts and eat more salads/veg which is far healthier anyway. Is this another promotion by the meat industry courtesy of scientists they pay to tell us what they want us to hear? They've already crippled kangaroo populations through commercialisation and now expect an increase in the population to swing people across from other meats. They've got rocks in their heads.
Posted by Felix, 3/10/2008 7:08:33 PM
As my Great Great Great Grandfather said on emigrating to Australia: "A meal is not a meal, without meat." Eat some skippy a day, and keep the vegans away.
Posted by John H, 3/10/2008 8:43:57 PM
Would be as effective as suggesting we should eat eat dogs and cats. No thanks. Despite the hard sell by the k meat industry, I agree that there are better things we do with respect to climate change. Eating less meat is a better idea still and far healthier to include more veg, salads and fruit in ones diet than meat. Much of the beef and cattle raised here is exported so they could easily just stop exports altogether and reduce the number of cow and sheep burps and farts that way.
Posted by Mary, 3/10/2008 11:41:13 PM
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >
Jack Waterford
Erudite observations from the Editor-at-Large of The Canberra Times.

MOST POPULAR

Yourguide to Your Toyota
James Bond Happy Hour at Flint - click now
 
Red Hot Deals at Eurobodalla! click now
 
 
Click here to read See Canberra online!
 
University of Canberra - click here
 
Ready, Set. Drive!
 
Classifieds
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...