No word in yet from the Easter Bunny…
Scrambling for climate change solutions
Eggshell membrane can absorb 7 times its weight in carbon dioxide
The food industry generates a lot of waste products, but one of these, eggshells, could help combat climate change, according to research published in the International Journal of Global Warming this month.
Basab Chaudhuri of the University of Calcutta and colleagues have demonstrated that the membrane that lines an eggshell can absorb almost seven times its own weight of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The carbon dioxide thus trapped could be stored in this form until energy-effective methods of using the gas could be found that would not compound the environmental problems associated with carbon emissions. Carbon dioxide is widely used in the chemical industry for the preparation of a wide range of products as well as in some settings as an alternative to toxic solvents. It might also one day be possible to efficiently convert trapped carbon dioxide into a clean fuel.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been rising since the mid-nineteenth century when fossil fuels – coal, oil, and gas – first began fuelling the industrial revolution. The rise in average global temperatures seen in recent decades is due mainly to the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. In 2005, carbon dioxide levels were more than a third higher than they had been prior to the industrial revolution; rising from 280 parts per million by volume of gas to 381 ppm. As of October 2010, the concentration is 388 ppm. To put these numbers into perspective, almost 300 billion tonnes of carbon have been released into the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels and cement production since 1751, but half of this carbon has been released since the mid-1970s.
The Calcutta team explains that eggshell comprises three layers, a cuticle on the outer surface, a spongy calcium-containing middle layer and inner layer. The second and third layers are composed of protein fibers bonded to calcium carbonate. The membrane is just below the shell and is about 100 micrometers thick. Separating the membrane from the cuticle is currently not an efficient process. But, given that India alone consumes 1.6 million tonnes of eggs each year, there is certainly an incentive for improving on this situation in order to use the membrane material in climate change amelioration.
Chaudhuri and colleagues have demonstrated that a weak acid can be used to separate the membrane from the shell for use as a carbon dioxide adsorbant. The researchers point out that a mechanical separation method would be needed to make the process viable on an industrial scale. However, Chaudhuri also muses that we could all help reduce CO2 levels by exposing our egg membranes to the air after eating our eggs.
“Utilisation of eggshell membrane as an adsorbent for carbon dioxide” in Int. J. Global Warming, 2010, 2, 252-261
Eat more eggs and bury the shells. Would that do the trick? Science is a wonderful thing.
I always wondered about this possibility (not about eggs, but about the prospect of finding a method for absorbing CO2 as fast as it’s created).
What would the warmists say about it? Would they say “Whew! Now we can drill/mine/refine/drive/fly/burn until our heart’s content.” or would they continue to push for the reductions in CO2 production? It would certainly separate the religious from the agnostics.
Now is the time for all vegans to do their part to save the world by eating more eggs — as long as it’s free-range chicken, of course.
Hm. Looks like the recently founded journal may be a bit short of contributions.
Well there you go. Just expose your egg shells to the air and suck up CO2. Why are we spending billions of dollars to figure out ways of sequestering CO2 under ground? At an amazing ability to absorb 7 times its weight in CO2, how much of these egg shell membranes will we need? Given 300 billion tons of CO2 excess, or is it just the 150 billion tons since 1970 that we need to fear, we would need a paltry 20 or so billion tons of the membrane material.
To put these numbers into perspective, they say, and then immediately put them completely out of perspective.
This is either satire (the name of the “journal” seems to be a hint), or evidence that human stupidity is indeed endless.
Did the corn/ethanol lobby miss a payment?
If everyone on the planet just stopped breathing it would be far more effective than trying to seperate out eggshell liners to use as CO2 sinks.
Bonus! There’d be no one left to care about CAGW. ;o)
Seriously, how long could one expect the CO2 to remain sequestered in the liners? Wouldn’t the the workers breathing on the liners as they seperate the liners from the eggs use up the CO2 storage capacity of the liners?
they’re going to suck all the CO2 out of the atmosphere and we’ll all die of starvation
What about all those chickens needed to produce the extra eggs? Won’t they produce lots of extra CO2 (breathing)? Will there be a shortage of eggs ( and higher prices ) for food and vaccine production? Will we now be required to “recycle” the membranes from our breakfast?
So many questions, so little time. 😉
Why is there an international journal of global warming? Hard to be objective about GW if that’s the name of your business.
This will work great, until we compost the egg shells and then boom. Back where we started from.
Seriously how much energy would it take to store those membranes until disposal?
Hey,
quit trying to mess with my plant fertilizer. Especially in India they should know not to mess with their food supply!! If any of these schemes worked they would lose several percent of their food supply. Anyone want to explain to the people starving or paying more for their food why they are doing it??
How much CO2 does a chicken generate to produce an egg? How much CO2 and CH4 do we produce having eaten an egg?
That’s what Nature does all the time. Have you wondered why are there so many gigantic deposits of calcite (calcium carbonate, lime, marble) all over the world?…..”Elementary my dear Watson!”
Welcome back to primary school, global warmers!
I am really trying to find the right comment for this… but nothing is quite right.
John Kehr
The Inconvenient Skeptic
Eggs from headless chickens perhaps?
🙂
The first correct use of “comprises” I’ve seen in months!
[REPLY – Yes, people will insist on saying “comprised of” (or “by”). ~ Evan]
As Father Jack would say “ar**”
http://www.fathertedonline.ukf.net/whois.htm
which problems? Oh, carbon, they mean soot…
Now, that’s an interesting concept. [/sarc] Looks somehow like a perpetual…
Unfotunately, the rise of temperatures only happen in the climate models, nature doesn’t participate.
Am I walking on eggshells if I tentatively suggest that Basab Chaudhuri may be yet another Indian in search of the Golden IPCC chaairmanship? Just a thought. Or he may just end up with egg on his face. Either way, it’s an eggstraordinary article.
What utter, foetid dingos’ kidneys!
Good grief, this has to be one of the most ridiculous recommendations ever made. How much does one of these membranes weigh (and is dry weight or wet weight the right weight)?
Let’s be generous and call it 1 gram. How far did I commute today? Let’s be really generous and call it one mile, it’s only off by a factor of 45 or so. I get about 30 mpg when the car is warmed up, so that’s 1/30 gallon (please excuse the ridiculous American units, but this post doesn’t deserve better). A gallon is about 6 pounds, so that 1 mile trip burns 1/5 pound of fuel, a pound is 454 grams, so I burned about 95 grams of fuel. Oh dear, I forget what amount of CO2 that is. Gotta be more than 95, call it 98 because it’s a round number – i.e. 98/7 = 14 egg membranes.
So I need to eat 14 eggs for each mile I drive.
This post belongs under ridiculae!
It would make a lot more sense to engineer hens and/or their feed to make thicker egg shells.
Why do you think you have to throw this trash at us: “The rise in average global temperatures seen in recent decades is due mainly to the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. In 2005, carbon dioxide levels were more than a third higher than they had been prior to the industrial revolution; rising from 280 parts per million by volume of gas to 381 ppm. As of October 2010, the concentration is 388 ppm. To put these numbers into perspective, almost 300 billion tonnes of carbon have been released into the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels and cement production since 1751, but half of this carbon has been released since the mid-1970s.” I will put these numbers into perspective for you: carbon dioxide is not the cause of any warming in recent decades. The only warming that occurred within the last thirty years started in 1998, raised global temperature by a third of a degree in four years, and then stopped. The eighties and the nineties that preceded it were a period of oscillating temperatures, not of rising temperatures as temperature charts from NOAA, NASA, and the Met Office indicate. How do I know this? Because we have satellite records that prove it. The oscillations are not some noise or artifact but are real and record alternating El Nino and La Nina periods that have a global climate influence. There were five such El Nino peaks in a twenty year period with cool La Nina valleys in between. The warming we are told about began in the late seventies and Hansen testified in 1988 that the warming was here and that carbon dioxide was the cause. That testimony was false. The temperature curves we are shown have been falsified by raising up the bottoms of cool La Nina periods and this way giving the curve an upward slope that they call the “late twentieth century warming.” NASA and the Met Office, that is. NOAA simply threw out the La Nina periods entirely, all to pretend that a greenhouse effect is here. The greenhouse effect can’t even warm the Arctic which is melting because of warm water carried north by currents, not because of some magical “arctic amplification” that does not exist. And global warming does not exist. Ferenc Miskolczi’s work explains why this is so. Using NOAA database of weather balloon observations that goes back to 1948 he was able to show that the optical thickness of the atmosphere in the infrared where carbon dioxide absorbs had been constant for 61 years and had a value of 1.87. This means that addition of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere for all these years had no influence on the transparency of the atmosphere to heat radiation from below or the optical thickness would have increased, and this did not happen. You can also put it this way: the supposed greenhouse absorption signature of carbon dioxide is simply missing. This is an empirical observation, not some theory, and it overrides any calculations from theory. It looks like the good old Arrhenius theory needs to be updated to accommodate physical reality.
Finally a way to habitate Mars. Marvin the martian has a whole jar of martian eggs!
Junk science is full of stupid ideas and stupid assertions. This certainly fits.
@simplseekeraftertruth Don’t make fun of Mike the headless chicken. http://www.miketheheadlesschicken.org/index.php Just an eggsistential statement, that’s all.
This is not good news for people in the UK!
The local councils will now issue a new little plastic box (made in China)
for disposal off egg shells, which, if found to contain anything other than
egg shells, will result in a hefty £2,000 fine.
The “International Journal of Global Warming” … what an old-fashioned name it is.
“Global Journal of Catastrophic Climate Disruption (CCD)” or so would be more appropriate nowadays.
So what were the causes of the varying levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere before our voiceboxes were sophisticated enough to pronounce “Rajendra Pachauri”? All these mammoths with their internal combustion engines?
there is certainly an incentive for improving on this situation in order to use the membrane material in climate change amelioration.
Cash for clunkers, anyone? How about using diesel fuel to shine floodlights on solar panels to produce subsidized electricity from solar panels?
Now all eggs will be processed into powder at a central facility so the membranes can be dried and saved until someone finds a use for CO2. Did residents of the Stone Age stockpile stones because they had too many or too few? Did the Stone Age end because there were too many stones or too few?
To ameliorate climate change? What climate change? Who decides what climate to try to achieve with the storing or release of the stockpiled egg shells?
Silly. Silly. Silly.
Enneagram says:
October 26, 2010 at 8:46 am
“That’s what Nature does all the time. Have you wondered why are there so many gigantic deposits of calcite (calcium carbonate, lime, marble) all over the world?…..”Elementary my dear Watson!”
Welcome back to primary school, global warmers!”
======================================================
Amen to that! They have the uncanny ability to complicate even the most simplest concepts.
Sigh…..
Doesn’t anybody check to see if the numbers make any sense before they do a press release? Although the membrane properties of eggshells are probably very useful and interesting in many areas (health, medicine), it is ridiculous in the context of global warming.
Per the International Egg Commission (IEC), there are 4.9 billion egg laying hens in the world, maximum of 300 eggs per hen per year.
4.9×10^9 x 300 = 1.47×10^12 eggs/year in the whole world.
Surface area of an egg is about 112 cm^2.
thickness of the membrane per these researchers is 100 micrometer.
This works out to a membrane volume per egg of: .069 in^3
Assume the density of the membrane is the same as flesh, 1.4 g/cc, which is .052 lb/in^3
So the total weight of eggshell membrane IN THE WORLD (per year) is:
1.47×10^12 x .069 x .052 = 5.27 x 10^9 lb
Amount of CO2 that can be absorbed is 7x this, or 36.9 x 10^9 lbs (16.7 x 10^6 metric tons).
World output of CO2 per year (per Wikipedia): 29.3 x 10^9 metric tons
Percent of CO2 that can be absorbed if every egg membrane in the world absorbed 7x its weight in CO2: 16.7 x 10^6 / 29.3 x 10^9 = .06%.
So if we utilize 100% of the eggs in the world, and equal the lab results of 7x absorption, we can offset the CO2 output of Lithuania.
What a bloody waste of time and money!
Any good scientist would find out if the assumptions of their work – the BASIC assumptions – were true or not.
Assuming CO2 needs to be sequestered truly makes an ass out of them
The publishing of this article says more about the lack of scientific objectivity of the journal than it does about the scientific incompetence of the writers. The first question they should have asked is “How does this compare with existing natural removal processes via the Arctic Ocean, rain, and trees?” Even if you had enough egg shell membranes to continually feed all the newly designed smoke stack filters, would it make any differance in the total amount being removed from the atmosphere? This is a question that AGWers are not inclined to answer nor agenda driven journals are not inclined to ask.
International Journal of Global Warming is a legitimate publication of an outlet known as Inderscience Publicatons.
Maybe only usefull after fossil fuels run out and by then better alternatives to wind and solar could emerge. See here and here.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !
What choice do you have after you have cracked the egg open? Anything to apply for research funds into something we are already doing. Damned eggheads!
“Chaudhuri also muses that we could all help reduce CO2 levels by exposing our egg membranes to the air after eating our eggs”
Um, egg shells are porous. linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/003456877090099X
Why does anyone need to do anything? The shells will absorb an equilibrium amount of CO2 within a week anyway. In fact, how did they do their measurements? Did they first remove absorbed CO2 before measuring the uptake? Almost certainly the separation process they discuss will generate more CO2 than absorbed.
Hey – does this wind up getting counted as peer review research supporting the AGW hypothesis? Yerch.
Also – The article is online, yours for only $45.55 plus tax. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ind/ijgw/2010/00000002/00000003/art00005 . I wonder how many eggs $45.55 would buy in India.
They couldn’t even get the abstract clean:
6824 mg/g? Why not 6.824g/g? could they really measure the amount of CO2, err, COCO2 to four places? How about the membrane? Was it dry or wet? (Oh – I asked that already.)
Question: How can you make carbon dioxide into a fuel?
Answer: You can’t! Carbon dioxide is the most oxidised form of carbon. All the available chemical energy has been stripped out! Sheesh!!
If you really wanted to convert carbon dioxide into fuel I have a great idea: I will Patent as soon as I can get round to it. In the meantime, I am proposing myself to the Nobel Prize Co0mmittee.
What you do is to leave the carbon dioxide it in the air, thereby saving squillions of dollars spent on absorbing it onto Giga tonnes of egg shells spread over the Earth’s surface. (Talk about walking on eggshells …)
And then – here comes the clever bit – let it fertilise the growth of plants! The plants have a clever process of converting the Sun’s energy into a neatly packaged form of energy called wood, cellulose, whatever. It can even be used to grow food so saving the World’s starving millions.
Isn’t that worth a Nobel Prize?
Arno Arrak says: October 26, 2010 at 9:12 am
“Why do you think you have to throw this trash at us:”
“I will put these numbers into perspective for you: carbon dioxide is not the cause of any warming in recent decades. How do I know this? Because we have satellite records that prove it.
The warming we are told about began in the late seventies and Hansen testified in 1988 that the warming was here and that carbon dioxide was the cause. That testimony was false.
Ferenc Miskolczi’s work explains why this is so. …Addition of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere for all these years had no influence on the transparency of the atmosphere to heat radiation from below or the optical thickness would have increased, and this did not happen.
This is an empirical observation, not some theory, and it overrides any calculations from theory. It looks like the good old Arrhenius theory needs to be updated to accommodate physical reality.
===================================================================
Thanks Arno Arrak for your clear and concise summary of the situation. It dispenses with a lot of ‘gum bashing’
Doug
This proves that the spread of veganism is the root cause for AGW. 😉
Don’t let some of the AGW faithful see this. They’ll think … if one chicken egg does X, then one dinosaur egg will do 1000X. So, the next thing we’ll be seeing is a rush to build dinosaur farms. No need to worry about unintended consequences. 😉
“”” Nuke says:
October 26, 2010 at 8:06 am
Now is the time for all vegans to do their part to save the world by eating more eggs — as long as it’s free-range chicken, of course. “””
I just got back from having my annual stick for the flu shot now featuring H1N1, and who knows what other health scare scams.
I guess vegans can’t do flu shots because of the eggs. I wonder if H1N1 is on the endangered species list along with Smallpox.
I estimate an acorn can absorb 500,000 times its own weight of carbon dioxide
(from 20 grams to 10 tonnes), but I’m not a climatamologist.
John Kehr says:
October 26, 2010 at 8:49 am
I am really trying to find the right comment for this… but nothing is quite right.
May I help you?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cojones
🙂
Larry Chickola says:
October 26, 2010 at 9:31 am
“Percent of CO2 that can be absorbed if every egg membrane in the world absorbed 7x its weight in CO2: 16.7 x 10^6 / 29.3 x 10^9 = .06%.
So if we utilize 100% of the eggs in the world, and equal the lab results of 7x absorption, we can offset the CO2 output of Lithuania.”
Just create genetically manipulated chickens that lay eggs that consist entirely of eggshell membrane, and you’re set. Or give them a genetic switch that activates above 100 deg F; so that they would automatically produce incredible amounts of eggshell membrane when it’s hot. This way, you would introduce a negative feedback and we don’t have to care for anything.
Enneagram says:
October 26, 2010 at 11:46 am
John Kehr says:
October 26, 2010 at 8:49 am
I am really trying to find the right comment for this… but nothing is quite right.
May I help you?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cojones
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
¿Por qué no los huevos?
Sleepalot says:
October 26, 2010 at 11:41 am
I estimate an acorn can absorb 500,000 times its own weight of carbon dioxide
(from 20 grams to 10 tonnes), but I’m not a climatamologist.
You’re probably not far off, it would be a pretty big oak tree, but …
Let me guess, this has to be one of those ponzi journals where you have to PAY $800 – $1500 to get your name in a “peer” review journal (where nothing gets reviewed except the signature on your cheque).
If it wasn’t late October I’d be checking if we were near April Fools’ day. But what passes for science these days is becoming a year round joke.
Seriously, this has to be someone having a laugh after smoking too much hash.
Someone should tell Patchi that this would be a good lead into his next novel – both IPCC 5 and the bodice ripper 2.
Isn’t it time to take carbonated beverages off the shelves. They’re forever leaking into the atmosphere. Maybe an egg shell filter on the cap would save the planet?
This would probably mean war between the CO2 contingent and PETA.
Great calculations, Larry Chickola. They’re going into the archive.
Sorry to blog-whore but E.M. Smith’s post (complete with calculations) on the CO2 sequestration of trees puts a lot of this into perspective. It certainly opened my eyes.
I really, really hope this whole thing is a piss take. I’m expecting talking white rabbits and playing cards to come by any minute now.
We are being dragged into the next Little Ice Age with the start of the present Grand Solar Minimum, and scientists are examining egg shells to sequester a trace gas that has nothing to say about where the climate is heading.
When is this nonsense going to stop? With the passing of each worsening winter!
Climate mitigation is built on eggshells (fragile) in the same manner that Green Energy flirts with perpetual motion.
Cannabis sativa is a weed that grows rapidly and is easily cultivated. Instead of focusing on egg shells as a sequestration medium, I suggest one more popular, and far more practical.
The growth of this carbon sequestration medium by individuals should be encouraged on a vast scale. Carbon is held captive, stopping dreaded Global Warming in its tracks.
In the event, as AGWers are known to advocate, they were right, then we’ve done a good thing. If the planet suddenly, and contrary to AGW theory ( we all know THAT’S not possible..) starts cooling, then the people could begin to burn off supplies of the plant to stimulate warming. The spin-off benefits of that would be unprecedented in human history! The economy would feel an almost instant stimulus.
…..Starting with pizza sales…
So which was first again? The chicken or the egg? I’m not being sarcastic, this is science. I got it figured this way. They say that birds are direct descendents of dinasaurs. Now the dinasaurs died because the earth cooled off. So musta been all the eggs being laid by all the chickens that cooled it off by sucking all the CO2 out of the atmosphere. But the dinos laid eggs too, so maybe their eggs didn’t suck CO2 like the chicken eggs did. Puts the phrase ‘go suck an egg’ in a new perspective.
Now that said, I saw several people comment that the amount of co2 released to get the gooky stuff which COMPRISES (see, I was paying attention) the inner layers would be more than what gets sucked up. Probably so, but if you’re gonna jump all over the warmistas over the consequences of the strategy, then I propose you let an old farm boy do the talkin’.
YOUR EGGS MUST COME FROM THE STORE ALL NICE AND CLEAN AND THATS WHY YOU MORONS DONT SEEM TO BE AWARE THAT CHICKENS SH*T LIKE YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE AND THAT STENCH FROM THE CHICKEN KOOP IS METHANE.
The journal or irreproducible results?
Re John Kehr says:
October 26, 2010 at 8:49 am
Yes John, sometimes the logic neurons just freeze in protest.
They forgot about feed backs, could we not adhere the egg shells to our roofs and increase the albedo? This idea gets better all the time, I need another $75,000 to study it, if you please.
So, do modern egg membranes have more CO2 in them
than those of 150 years ago ?
Can the difference, if any, be measured ?
Are egg membranes a possible proxy for CO2 levels ?
Inquiring minds want to know…
Would Chudhuri be related to Pachauri?
This must give rise to a variant on the “why did the chicken cross the road” joke but I can’t think of one right now. Can someone help me out?
I wonder how many chicken breaths produce the CO2 content of a single eggshell?
Two things not mentioned:
The shells themselves are carbonate and sequester a heck of a lot more co2.
The membranes are not prevented from sucking up ambient co2 now so they are already doing this work.
Now the real deal missed by these guys with white lab coats and horn-rimmed glasses (this costume and a PhD doesn’t always make a scientist IMO) is that it is likely such a material may be synthesizable – hey we may be able to cool flue gas and pass it through pipes filled with hairy or wooly stuff made of this compound. Puhlease you mitigation scientists, swallow pride and pass your mit research to an engineer for veting, costing and developing the idea to something potentially useful.
Oh, never leave your eggshells unbroken in the cup,
But think of us poor sailormen and always break them up!
For witches come and steal them and sail away to sea,
And make life a misery for mariners like me.
Why did the frog cross the road?
He was stapled to a chicken.
Why was he stapled to a chicken?
It was an experiment.
What kind of experiment?
A climate experiment.
What did they find out?
The results were inconclusive but initial indications are pointing to a direct correlation between global warming and a rising incidence of chickens crossing roads both with and without frogs stapled to them that is worse than we thought. The matter is urgent, the stakes high, funding for more study is needed immediately.
How much funding?
How much you got?
To study what?
We now know why the frog crossed the road, but we don’t know yet why the chicken crossed the road but one of the important clues is to determine which came first the chicken or the egg.
This will help solve global warming?
(short silence) Yes.
Odd, looked like you were going to burst out laughing for a moment.
I uhm… just had a frog in my throat.
OK. Here’s $4million.
(short silence) Unbelievable.
What? That your getting $4million to study chickens and eggs?
(short silence indicative of another “frog”) Uhm… no, just it can’t be done for $4million, we’ll need $8million. And PETA is all over use so we’ll need $20million for a new computer lab to simulate the chickens and the frogs so we don’t have to use real ones.
Won’t that call the results into question?
Well maybe, but we thought we could build a new building across the road and then the chicken would already be across the road even the simulated chicken and we could eliminate that from the equation. Say $100 million? Its urgent…
Jacob Neilson says: October 27, 2010 at 4:46 am
“why did the chicken cross the road”
Chickens, understanding that in a non-well mixed atsmosphere, the highest concentration of CO2 is close to the ground on busy highways, therefore an egg laid while crossing would significantly reduce fossil fuel combustion produced deadly CO2, the answer becomes:
To lay an egg.
Don’t eggs have a lot of sulfur in them? And when they rot we get hydrogen sulfide, or maybe when they get digested we get hydrogen sulfide. That’s noticeable pollution, or perhaps nosable pollution.
We need a better way to absorb CO2, (or adsorb, same sequestering result). I therefore recommend we go back to whitewashing our Stevenson screens, since whitewash, as we learned here (and didn’t learn from Tom Sawyer) cures by taking in CO2 from the atmosphere. And rather than painting our roofs white as Dr Chu suggests, we whitewash them. That would kill two (absorb CO2 and reflect radiation) birds (chickens) with one stone.
I love elegant solutions.
Wait a second.
Dinosaurs laid eggs.
BIG eggs. Sucked up a lot of CO2.
Then they died. Didn’t lay any more eggs. Stopped sucking up CO2.
For that matter, stopped putting OUT CO2, too.
Where’s Jurassic Park when you need it?
If you want really big eggs, don’t raise chickens, become an ostrich farmer. Feed a lot more people, too.
And think of the drumstick you could get at KFO (Kentucky Fried Ostrich).
Larry Chickola says:
October 26, 2010 at 9:31 am (Edit)
Sigh…..
Doesn’t anybody check to see if the numbers make any sense before they do a press release? Although the membrane properties of eggshells are probably very useful and interesting in many areas (health, medicine), it is ridiculous in the context of global warming.
Per the International Egg Commission (IEC), there are 4.9 billion egg laying hens in the world, maximum of 300 eggs per hen per year.,
Thank you. A credible, edible, analysis. 8<) Eggactly on target.