Now if they could only provide a solution for Mannian emissions, they’d really have something. It does seem better though than the Bovine Fish Oil Methane Cure and certainly less ridiculous than Climate idiocy at the Monterey Bay Aquarium – cow with a gas mask.
From Penn State press: Unusual feed supplement could ease greenhouse gassy cows
University Park, Pa. — Cow belches, a major source of greenhouse gases, could be decreased by an unusual feed supplement developed by a Penn State dairy scientist.
In a series of laboratory experiments and a live animal test, an oregano-based supplement not only decreased methane emissions in dairy cows by 40 percent, but also improved milk production, according to Alexander Hristov, an associate professor of dairy nutrition.
The natural methane-reduction supplement could lead to a cleaner environment and more productive dairy operations.
“Cattle are actually a major producer of methane gas and methane is a significant greenhouse gas,” Hristov said. “In fact, worldwide, livestock emits 37 percent of anthropogenic methane.”
Anthropegenic methane is methane produced by human activities, such as agriculture.
Compared to carbon dioxide, methane has 23 times the potential to create global warming, Hristov said. The Environmental Protection Agency bases the global warming potential of methane on the gas’s absorption of infrared radiation, the spectral location of its absorbing wavelengths and the length of time methane remains in the atmosphere.
Methane production is a natural part of the digestive process of cows and other ruminants, such as bison, sheep and goats. When the cow digests food, bacteria in the rumen, the largest of the four-chambered stomach, break the material down intro nutrients in a fermentation process. Two of the byproducts of this fermentation are carbon dioxide and methane.
“Any cut in the methane emissions would be beneficial,” Hristov said.
Experiments revealed another benefit of the gas-reducing supplement. It increased daily milk production by nearly three pounds of milk for each cow during the trials. The researcher anticipated the higher milk productivity from the herd.
“Since methane production is an energy loss for the animal, this isn’t really a surprise,” Hristov said. “If you decrease energy loss, the cows can use that energy for other processes, such as making milk.”
Hristov said that finding a natural solution for methane reduction in cattle has taken him approximately six years. Natural methane reduction measures are preferable to current treatments, such as feed antibiotics.
Hristov first screened hundreds of essential oils, plants and various compounds in the laboratory before arriving at oregano as a possible solution. During the experiments, oregano consistently reduced methane without demonstrating any negative effects.
Following the laboratory experiments, Hristov conducted an experiment to study the effects of oregano on lactating cows at Penn State’s dairy barns. He is currently conducting follow-up animal trials to verify the early findings and to further isolate specific compounds involved in the suppression of methane.
Hristov said that some compounds that are found in oregano, including carvacrol, geraniol and thymol, seem to play a more significant role in methane suppression. Identifying the active compounds is important because pure compounds are easier to produce commercially and more economical for farmers to use.
“If the follow-up trials are successful, we will keep trying to identify the active compounds in oregano to produce purer products,” said Hristov.
Hristov has filed a provisional patent for this work.
John from CA says:
September 7, 2010 at 6:06 pm
sorry Anthony, last sentence should read:
A whole Grade A udderance when the Mannian cash cow runs dry.
If they add red wine to that oregano supplement, I just might be convinced to stop whining about warmers. The meat will already be marinated and the wine supplement will cause the milk volume to double (it did me when I was nursing).
Having been around dairy ops some, what does the Oregano do to the flavor of the milk?
Oregano is a good natural antibiotic, as I understand? Might make great Mozzarella?…
Bah, this topic is older than the hills! Producers have used the antibiotic Monensin for years to inhibit methane production & boost feed conversion rates.
Methane production is counterproductive in animal husbandry, since the methane represents feed energy that has been lost & otherwise would have gone towards contributing to the animal’s growth. The AGW broo-hah is only very recent, see:
http://jas.fass.org/cgi/reprint/73/8/2483.pdf
Various growth-boosting nutraceuticals have been suggested over the years, but I’ve never heard of any that actually worked. I guess I better dust off my old grad-school notebooks…a cow is, after all, just a walking fermenter.
I can already foresee the next logical step: The USDA requiring oregano enrichment of milk supplied in the school lunch programs (there will already be some oregano in the milk anyway). Hey, it could have a beneficial side effect — quieter classrooms.
>”Problem is, they are no less gassy, nor more numerous, than the buffalo once were.”
Let’s check that (the numbers part) …estimated bison population of precolumbian north america ~ 50,000,000
Current estimated number of cows:
96,669,000 cows in US
13,945,000 cows in Cannada
That’s more than twice as many cows (now) than there ever were bison in their home range of Cannada and the US.
Here are three counties that never had bison or buffalo, but they now have this many cows:
Brazil: 187,087,000
Argentina: 51,062,000
Australia: 29,202,000
That’s roughly 7.5 times more cows than there ever were bison in 5 countries alone.
http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/NorthAmerica/Facts/fact-bison.cfm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle
Mann overboard!
Has anybody asked the cows (and bulls) how they feel about this idea? It just may be important in terms of reproduction – a bovine aphrodisiac perhaps. Suppose they succeed in reducing methane and it leads to a dramatic drop in herd sizes. The cost of steak and burgers would necessarily skyrocket! And it would impact milk as well. And ice cream. Little childrens ice cream. These people are monsters, I tell you! Monsters!
Plus, the cheese made from the cow’s milk makes a very tasty al fredo sauce.
Anthony:
You’ll have to start the “Stupidest AGW Idea of the Week” post. The University of Calgary (shooting silica nano particles into space) and the University of Pennsylvania (preventing bovine flatulence) are in the running this week.
Where do they come up with this stuff? It would be sad if they were serious. That’s IT! We’re all being pranked by acedemia.
Pamela Gray says:
September 7, 2010 at 5:53 pm
You have to consider that the people who are proposing such measures probably have never been to a farm, and think food comes from magic factories that supply the supermarkets.
There used to be a lot more termites and locusts, and in terms of biomass I’d guess comparable to cattle today.
#
Pamela Gray says:
September 7, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Problem is, they are no less gassy, nor more numerous, than the buffalo once were. So no, they are not a major source of increased methane production.
#
But the buffalo produced good methane. Man derives benefit from cows, so it is bad methane. We are just an evil species that perverts everything we touch so that once natural processes, blessed by Gaia, become twisted and destructive when enslaved to serve mankind. They should have been covering this in your re-education classes, or have you been ditching?
On a serious note, any idea how much methane is produced by the average wetland? Its been awhile since I played with estuaries, but I seem to remember that they produced a lot, along with a bit of hydrogen sulphide.
“… an oregano-based supplement…”
I fear there is an infomercial to follow …
.
Rice paddies are likely the source of the increase in methane. And it still constitutes such a minor percentage of the atmosphere that it could increase a hundred times and be of no or little consequence. There are some things that just do not bear concern.
Pound for pound, 1 bison bull or cow equals two bovine bulls or cows. As for forage, a bison will eat just about anything that pokes out of the ground, to the ground, while cows are far more selective and will not eat down to the dirt. If you put an equal number of cows in one pasture, and Amercian bison in the other, trust me, the bison will out eat and out f*rt the domestic cow plus will jump the fence and eat what the cow will not. So let’s not get into cows being such a drag on the environment, K? For those of you who get your stats out of books instead of live where bison are raised, you are getting information completely colored by whatever view is being sold at the time.
There is no statistical difference between current methane levels produced by bovines, compared to what bison blew out of their behind at their peak numbers. And anybody who says different absolutely cannot have been raised on a farm.
I remember when the Universities were studying and applying patents for adding animal protein supplements to cow feed. We all know how that turned out. Yes, the cows were bigger and fatter. Trouble was they were “madder” too. Why not just let cows eat grass? Why do we need 3000 lb cows that don’t fart and squirt milk by the bucket loads? It just seems that whenever we try to outdo mother nature, she bites us in the ass.
Bovine flatulance:
a breath of fresh dairy-aire.
Yuba, are you telling us that Central and South America had no ruminates at the peak of the North American bison population? By the way, bison ranged into northern Mexico.
Actually more cow methane is released in their burps than in their farts.
Now where could I find some stats from “where bison are raised?” And how can I be sure *they* are not being colored by whatever is being sold at the time? And how does being raised on a farm endow one with statistically significant knowledge of the volume of pre-Columbian bison methane (gross total)?
Well I am reminded and thankful for those here at WUWT who have made every heifer-t to warn us that a grand minimum may be upon us and “chew cud imagine a situation where it is udderly freisian out.” (tallbloke)
Oh no Pamela I am not. I am merely pointing out that your original statement: “Problem is, they are no less gassy, nor more numerous, than the buffalo once were. So no, they are not a major source of increased methane production.” Is in error and is off by at least a factor of three (even using your fudge factor of 1 bison=2 cattle).
Since you are moving your goalposts now to ruminants, please look at how many of them have been domesticated. If you want to argue that there are the same number now that there were predomestication, go ahead – but please cite more substantial evidence “raised with bulls” to back up your story. Please also include how much land has been cleared in the last couple centuries for rangeland and also the impact of irrigation has had on growing fodder in your explanation.
Yuba Yollabolly
September 7, 2010 at 8:11 pm
The digestion of bison and cattle are identical. The amount of methane produced is directly proportional to the amount of food they digest. So an animal that consumes twice as much forage, will produce twice as much methane. Free ranging animals also consume more then their pastured brethren because of the courser nature of their diet. Knowledge of cattle is directly applicable to bison. Also it does not matter what end the methane issues from. It was produced by the same process. It is just funnier to talk about cow farts. BTW, bison are raised for meat.
The process that produces methane in a cow is the same that produces methane in a wetland. There is a hell of a lot more vegetation being digested by bacteria in wetlands then inside of cows.
Now that milk is a hazardous substance, will the cost of the new super containment unit needed for the extra milk production be offset by the carbon credits for lower bovine emissions?
pat
September 7, 2010 at 7:32 pm
Rice paddies are likely the source of the increase in methane. And it still constitutes such a minor percentage of the atmosphere that it could increase a hundred times and be of no or little consequence. There are some things that just do not bear concern.
#
It makes me cry to think of all of that land in the Sacramento delta that once produced natural methane, now producing evil anthropogenic methane from rice production.