Blame rice for global warming!? ‘Rice is to blame for around 10% of global emissions of methane’ – ‘Rice cannot be ignored’

From Climate Depot

AFP: “Rice is to blame for around 10 percent of global emissions of methane, a gas that over two decades, traps about 80 times as much heat as carbon dioxide. Scientists say that if the world wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, rice cannot be ignored.”

Climate Crackpots Blame Global Warming on Rice – “Now it is firmly ensconced among the climate change cult that eating meat is killing the planet and you must ‘eat ze bugs’, the same people have a new target, rice.”


Climate Depot’s Marc Morano comment: “The big picture is this: This isn’t necessarily about shutting down rice production. This is about the climate agenda coming from the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, academia,the corporate world, identifying every facet of modern society as being a climate ‘problem’ that needs managing and thus a takeover.  So whether we’re talking about transportation, whether it’s airlines, whether it’s gas-powered cars, whether it’s eating meat, whether it’s high-yield agriculture, it’s all allegedly creating a ‘climate emergency’ and thus global elites want to take over and ‘manage’ them. They are looking for a managerial revolution. They want to put themselves in charge of saving the planet and thus put themselves in charge of all aspects of modern society.”

By: Admin – Climate Depot

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano comment: The big picture is this: This isn’t necessarily about shutting down rice production. This is about the climate agenda coming from the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, academia,the corporate world, identifying every facet of modern society as being a climate ‘problem’ that needs managing and thus a takeover.  So whether we’re talking about transportation, whether it’s airlines, whether it’s gas-powered cars, whether it’s eating meat, whether it’s high-yield agriculture, it’s all allegedly creating a ‘climate emergency’ and thus global elites want to take over and ‘manage’ them. They are looking for a managerial revolution. They want to put themselves in charge of saving the planet and thus put themselves in charge of all aspects of modern society.

Self-appointed earth saviors seek to manage every aspect of our lives to save us from the ‘climate catastrophe.’ So it’s not that they want to ban rice eating, but they’re claiming that rice production contributes to the ‘climate crisis’. The climate agenda demand that rice production has to be forever altered and turned over to a corporate government collusion to ‘fix’ the problems with rice agriculture. Of course, these globalist plans mean that you need big agribusiness corporations which have sold out to the climate agenda to manage rice production, and this means small farmers and agrarian countries are going to be at the mercy of corporate agriculture, taking over more and more of food production.

Every aspect of modern society is untenable due to our ‘climate crisis.’  It includes limiting freedom of travel, home thermostat controls, restrictions on your appliances, limiting the ability to eat meat, and bans on gas-powered cars. They’re doing all of this without a vote of democracy. A corporate government collusion that uses the climate agenda to manage every aspect of modern society.

They’re collapsing our current system, they’re collapsing our energy, our food, our transportation, and they’re collapsing our free speech, and they’re putting themselves in charge because they are claiming we can’t leave rice production as is, or that we need to radically alter livestock practices and agriculture and transportation or we are doomed.

If we don’t hand over the keys of modern society over to this small group of managers, we are led to believe that people left to their own devices will literally create a climate crisis, create inequity and racism, and in order to save the Earth, climate bureaucrats need to be in charge of everything because they believe we live in a finite world, and everything has to be managed.

We are told we must consent to live in a technocracy where we will be ruled by experts who know better than us. So they’re going to tell nations where rice is a fundamental food that they can’t have agriculture the way they’ve done it for thousands of years because the climate can’t handle it. And therefore, big corporate agribusiness, in collusion with governments and international organizations, are going to come over and basically regulate the small and medium-sized farms out of existence. We’re seeing this attempt happening in real-time in the Netherlands. They’re killing up to 12,000 family-run, generational farms with net zero climate rules on on fertilizers. And big agribusiness will inevitably take over in this big corporate takeover of farms. See:The Great Food Reset has begun – Net Zero restrictions on farms designed ‘to squeeze small farmers from the market, allowing them to be bought out by multinational agribusiness giants’

See: JOHN LEWIS-STEMPEL in Unherd: About 70% of global farmland is owned by 1% of “farmers”. Agri-business now rules the roost. Four companies — Cargill, Archer Daniel Midland, Bunge and Louis Dreyfus — control 90% of the global grain trade. Similarly, four companies — ChemChina, Corteva, Bayer and BASF — control 66% of the world’s agricultural chemicals. These businesses are hardly renowned for their care of the environment. Likewise, politicians. The post-Second World War intensification of agriculture, promoted in the West by national governments and the nascent EU as a path to food security, has starved the soil and exhausted crops.

Morano: The climate agenda cannot handle a decentralized world. They need to control the means of production, the distribution of food, and control of the movement of people.

It’s basically what the ruling classes have done for generations: Those in charge always come up with a reason why the rest of us cannot be free, why the rest of us cannot make these choices for ourselves. And the reason du jour is the climate crisis is forcing them to literally transform our modern way of life.

They are actively collapsing our energy, food, and transportation. They’re pushing insect-eating as an alternative source of protein. And this is the United Nations doing this. It’s the World Economic Forum doing government.  Bill Gates, America’s number one farmland owner in the U.S. has publicly stated that his goal is to get the entire Western world off of eating livestock meat and instead eating his billions of dollars invested in lab-grown meat made in steel vats and literally printed from 3d printer. See:Your Future Meals Could Come From A 3D Printer ‘to combat climate-related food insecurity’, Researchers Say – ‘Food paste is squeezed through a syringe’ into 3D printer

TheGreat Food Reset: ‘Lab-grown meat’ harvested in ‘massive steel vats’ edges closer to fed approval & U.S. dinner plates – As EU approves human consumption of worms & crickets

Morano: This is our future — if we allow it.  First, they came for your energy, then your transportation, then your meat and high-yield agriculture, and now they’re coming after rice production. The climate agenda just keeps expanding its reach and is moving rapidly to gain control of global food production so that they can manage it in a ‘climate friendly’ way. And many of the people pushing these policies believe they are altruistic. They actually think they’re saving the planet by doing this, and they are preventing the rest of us — the unwashed masses from destroying the planet.


Climate science shock: Methane’s unexpected cooling impact unveiled


5 23 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 20, 2023 6:16 am

Let’s put Bill Gates on the John the Baptist diet (locusts).

Let everyone else eat rice, or whatever grows in their part of the world.

Joao Martins
Reply to  SteveZ56
April 20, 2023 7:12 am

Are you proposing to use Bill G. as an hyperparasite for Biological Pest Control of locust swarms? It would be an extension of his hyperparasite activities.

(hyperparasite: NOT newspeak, it is a scientific concept. If you are not familiar with it, check Wikipedia, its article is fairly accurate).

Reply to  SteveZ56
April 20, 2023 7:17 am

Unfortunately, I’m afraid it will eventually need to go so far as the platter.

Tom Halla
April 20, 2023 6:20 am

But, but, but, think of all those termites?

Joao Martins
Reply to  Tom Halla
April 20, 2023 7:20 am

And you think right! They are a bunch of irresponsible climate aggressors who don’t think about the welfare of their generations to come! What kind of rotten planet are they preparing to let to those innocent maggots which are not yet hatched?

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Tom Halla
April 20, 2023 11:12 am

I bet cockroaches are the most nutritious insect!

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 20, 2023 1:38 pm

THe main cockroach (with apologies to the real cockroaches) is a guy called Guterres. Would you like to eat him? Uggggh!

Henry Pool
April 20, 2023 6:21 am

Actually I dispute that CH4 is a gh gas. According to Lillesand and Kiefer (1994) the emission spectrum of earth starts discretely at around 9 um.

3. Electromagnetic Spectrum | The Nature of Geographic Information (

comment image

Henry Pool
Reply to  Henry Pool
April 20, 2023 6:23 am

So, the IR of CH4 shows only absorption at 3 to 8 um.
It means that more CH4 cools the atmosphere by reflecting more sunlight.

It doesnot add up
April 20, 2023 6:22 am

So how do we stop it?

Reply to  It doesnot add up
April 20, 2023 9:04 am

Pay Asians not to plant it or eat it while piling on more U.S. debt to pay for it.

It doesnot add up
Reply to  ResourceGuy
April 20, 2023 10:03 am

I meant how do we stop this attempt at world government.

Reply to  It doesnot add up
April 20, 2023 10:48 am

I gave the John Kerry response—from the private jet set.

Reply to  It doesnot add up
April 20, 2023 11:47 am

WEF and the UN are great places to stop it, since that’s where it originates from.

Reply to  doonman
April 20, 2023 6:54 pm

Defund them all at once?

Dr. Bob
April 20, 2023 6:26 am

The first fact in the first paragraph is a lie. The GWP of Methane is shown as 27-30 in EPA documents, not 80. This is just pushing the limits of credibility at every turn.
And I doubt that the IR spectrum used to estimate the GWP of methane was done in a gas mixture representing the atmosphere but was done in vitro, in glassware in a lab with no other interfering gases.

Steve Case
Reply to  Dr. Bob
April 20, 2023 7:11 am

“The GWP of Methane is shown as 27-30 in EPA documents …”

So what? How much is methane on course to run up global temperature?

Reply to  Dr. Bob
April 20, 2023 8:50 am

Whether 80 or 30 is irrelevant as CO2 is over a thousand times more prevalent and CH4 oxides to water and CO2 in time anyway.

Reply to  mkelly
April 21, 2023 9:03 am

To be picky, 408 ppm/1.8ppm = 227 times as prevalent, still makes your point.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
April 21, 2023 9:49 am

Yep, misread million as billion. 1.8 ppm

Mark BLR
Reply to  Dr. Bob
April 20, 2023 8:53 am

The first fact in the first paragraph is a lie. The GWP of Methane is shown as 27-30 in EPA documents, not 80.

It isn’t “a lie”, they are using IPCC (GWP-20) numbers instead of EPA (GWP-100 ?) ones.

See the copy of Table 7.15 from the AR6 WG-I assessment report attached below (from page 1017 of the final / approved report released in May 2022).

Note that the GWP of “non-fossil” CH4 molecules rising from rice paddies (or seeping from the seafloor, or escaping from melting permafrost, or …) is different from the GWP of “fossil” CH4 molecules leaking from gas pipelines …

NB : The justification for this is given at the end of section (on page 1014) :

For biogenic methane the soil uptake and removal of partially oxidized products is equivalent to a sink of atmospheric CO2 of 0.7 ± 0.7 kg per kg methane. The contributions of this oxidation effect to the methane metric values allow for the time delay in the oxidation of methane. Methane from fossil fuel sources has therefore slightly higher emissions metric values than those from biogenic sources (high confidence). The CO2 can already be included in carbon emissions totals (Muñoz and Schmidt, 2016) so care needs to be taken when applying the fossil correction to avoid double counting.

NB : For me “biogenic” ≠ “non-fossil”. E.g. the aforementioned “seafloor” seepage comes from CH4 that was “biogenic” a few hundred million years ago, but is nevertheless now considered to be “a fossil fuel”.

Reply to  Mark BLR
April 20, 2023 10:34 am

The root source of that table (and still best description) is likely table 2.14 of
The important number is really radiative efficiency which on this table is CH4/CO2 ratio of 41. This is bullshit. Referring back to IPCC table 2.14, the ratio is 26.4 which can be confirmed by Hitran.
Evidence of heavy green thumbs and cognitive bias on the scales….

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  Dr. Bob
April 20, 2023 9:16 am

As the IR spectrum of methane is entirely covered by that of water vapour I’m going with a GWP of zero.

Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
April 21, 2023 8:09 am

Yes, it really doesn’t matter much if CH4 has 26 times the radiative efficiency of CO2 in those bands where water vapor or CO2 was already absorbing 100% of the IR. However, the bands don’t entirely overlap (mostly but not quite). At the 8 micron band on the edge of the atmospheric window where water vapor only absorbs about 50% of the IR, and CH4 competes with Nitrogen oxides, we find the culprit usually named by Carbogeddonists….

April 20, 2023 6:32 am

I don’t understand why the Warmist propaganda has been so effective?

The recent study published in The Lancet shows 4.6 million excess deaths per year due to cold, versus only 489,000 due to heat.

Cold kills over 12,000 people per day. The deaths due to hurricanes and tornadoes are inconsequential compared to that figure.*** It is like an ER doctor admits a patient in critical condition due to three stab wounds and elects to treat their ingrown toenail first.

(***Of course these hurricane and tornado deaths actually appear to be decreasing as CO2 increases.)

Further, 25,000 people per day starve to death. The atmosphere is far below the optimal CO2 content to maximize the yields of rice, wheat, and maize (corn).

Why do the Warmists want the desperately poor people around the world to live short, brutish lives? They even signal their virtue over it, when I think it is clearly an atrocity.

Their propaganda is just that good!

Reply to  pillageidiot
April 20, 2023 7:07 am

I don’t know that the propaganda is that good, it’s just that pervasive. No matter where you turn, that’s what you hear. You have to actively seek out alternative viewpoints – seeing them shared widely (usually by politicians and often hedged) is rare.

When you only hear one position, it’s easy to buy into it.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Tony_G
April 20, 2023 11:20 am

“When you only hear one position, it’s easy to buy into it.”

Very true. I happen to be an extremely skeptical person. Yet, living here in Woke-achusetts I never heard any skepticism of AGW. I never knew it existed so I too just assumed it was a fact. A friend pointed me to this site and a few others. It’s obvious to me that the skeptics make far more sense than the alarmists. I’m quite embarrassed that being such a born skeptic I had been brainwashed. This state is hell bent on net zero. I think it’s the old Puritan fear of witches that has arisen again- this time fear of climate catastrophe.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Tony_G
April 21, 2023 4:33 am


Yes. It’s everywhere. Millions of people have been brainwashed into believing bad things about CO2, even though there is no objective evidence showing CO2 has any adverse effect on the Earth’s climate. No evidence. Yet millions believe. They believe in a distortion of reality and fear for their lives as a result.

It has gotten to the point of Mass Hysteria.

The good news is the Earth’s climate is not in crisis, no matter what the Climate Crackpots say. Eventually people, even hysterical people, will see that. Let’s hope that happens before the hysteria causes the destruction of Western Civilization.

More Soylent Green!
Reply to  pillageidiot
April 20, 2023 8:49 am

Climate alarmist propaganda works on the same people that create it. These people expect to be put in charge of solving this imaginary problem. Fortunately the man on the street is not buying it.

Reply to  pillageidiot
April 20, 2023 11:51 am

Death count and longevity are poor proxies for anything.

Dave O.
April 20, 2023 6:35 am

The bottom line is that humans are the cause of all the problems with the climate and mass starvation is the only thing that will save us. Logical?

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Dave O.
April 20, 2023 11:21 am

we’ll have to destroy the planet to save it /sarc

Reply to  Dave O.
April 20, 2023 5:33 pm

Remember that WE are the carbon they want to reduce.

Steve Case
April 20, 2023 7:03 am

“…methane…traps about 80 times as much heat as carbon dioxide.”

So what? Hens will stop laying? Climate science never finishes the statement.
Methane is a greenhouse gas so it’s implied that it will cause a lot of global warming, but how much by when is ignored. The press and policy makers never bother to ask.

Business as usual best guess is less than 0.05°C by 2100. If anyone says it’s significantly more than that, they need to show their work.

Reply to  Steve Case
April 20, 2023 11:54 am

They also need to explain why 0.05°C by 2100 would be bad.

Steve Case
Reply to  KevinM
April 20, 2023 11:59 am

Climate science needs to explain why a warmer world is a problem.

old cocky
Reply to  Steve Case
April 20, 2023 3:24 pm

The claim in the paper is that their projected methane increase will give a temperature rise of around 0.8 degrees C

old cocky
Reply to  old cocky
April 20, 2023 5:39 pm

The paper assumes a 90% increase in annual beef consumption by 2100, and a 70% increase in overall “animal products”, and that the world’s population will increase by 25% from 8 billion to 10 billion.

There didn’t appear to be any investigation into where we were going to graze all the extra cattle.

The SI did have some interesting figures on the amount of CO2, CH4 and N2O per kg of each type of produce. I can’t vouch for its accuracy.

old cocky
Reply to  old cocky
April 20, 2023 8:32 pm

Digging into it a little further,
beef produces 1.2kg CH4/kg
mutton produces 0.55kg CH4/kg
pig meat produces 0.083 kg CH4/kg
poultry produces 0.014 kg CH4/kg

On that basis, even with a 25% increase in population by 2100, switching from beef to ham, bacon, pork and poultry would reduce agricultural CH4 emissions to lower than current levels.

Crickets and mealworms vs chicken curry or bacon? Let me think about that.

Reply to  old cocky
April 21, 2023 8:55 am

But the grass they consume (or don’t consume because say, you eliminate grazing animals) pretty well all ends up as CO2 or CH4 in the atmosphere (by decaying) regardless of the efficiency of the animal’s digestive tract, and our digestive tract as well, so phuuutt…it gets down to how much fossil fuel the farmer uses in husbandry of the animals, and how much food farmers have to grow to keep urban dwellers from pillaging the countryside.

old cocky
Reply to  DMacKenzie
April 21, 2023 1:21 pm

Oh, do grazing ruminants eat grass?

That doesn’t seem to factor into the paper, or the amount of land required for grazing twice as many livestock.

Steve Case
Reply to  old cocky
April 20, 2023 8:53 pm

What’s the “SI” ?

old cocky
Reply to  Steve Case
April 20, 2023 9:19 pm

The Supplementary Information for the Ivanovich et al paper.

Sorry, I thought there was a link to it in the head post.

Steve Case
Reply to  old cocky
April 20, 2023 8:52 pm

The claim in the paper

What paper? A linky pooh and quote would be great.

old cocky
Reply to  Steve Case
April 20, 2023 9:16 pm

The “Nature Climate Change” paper which Marc Morano was writing about –

Steve Case
Reply to  old cocky
April 21, 2023 4:38 am

Thanks for the link. I didn’t find the 0.8°C you quoted
in your post above. I did see figure 2 that looked like
~0.54°C by 2100 for CH4. Which is probably exaggerated by a factor of ten.

old cocky
Reply to  Steve Case
April 21, 2023 1:38 pm

I must have misread Figure 1.
Yeah, Figure 2 shows around 0.5

The N2O increase is fun as well. We must be going to grow a couple of orders of magnitude more crops.

Reply to  Steve Case
April 21, 2023 11:42 am

Steve, at some point someone on the alarmist side needs to explain what that 80 number means.

CO2 is said to account for about 4 C of the warming so shouldn’t CH4 account for 320 C. Or CO2 accounts for 3.7 w/m2 more energy so does methane mean 296 w/m2 more energy? What exactly do they mean?

The statement on its merits doesn’t make any sense. Make them explain is the only answer I think.

Steve Case
Reply to  mkelly
April 21, 2023 6:14 pm

IPCC AR5 Chapter 8 Executive Summary Page 710 Says: 

The Global Warming Potential (GWP) is defined as the time-integrated RF [radiative forcing] due to a pulse emission of a given component, relative to a pulse emission of an equal mass of CO2

You have to wrap your head around what that means. Methane is increasing about 7 ppb every year. By 2100 it will have increased about 500 ppb or about 0.5ppm. At first glance you would think that means an equal mass of CO2 would be 0.5 ppm but it isn’t because ppm is by volume not mass. So you have to figure out the mass.

From your 11th grade chemistry you know that the gram formula weight of Methane, CH4, is 16 and for CO2 it’s 44. So an equal mass of CO2 would be (16/44) x 0.5 = 0.18… So if CO2 were to increase from the current 420 ppm to 420.18 ppm., How much warming would that cause? Figure that out (comes to nearly nothing) and multiply that by the GWP of 86. Comes to about 0.04°C by 2100.

Yes, it’s that convoluted and is the reason that it persists without being thoroughly debunked.

Reply to  Steve Case
April 22, 2023 7:02 am

Thanks Steve I appreciate the information.

April 20, 2023 7:34 am

This is not-so-slowly coming down to, “The problem is us,” The solution is to get rid of all the humans … except for the rare examples that will continue to bow down to and worship Gaia.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  rovingbroker
April 20, 2023 11:23 am

and the very wealthy regardless of what they believe

the new Doctor of Theology Thunberg will lead the bowing and praying to Gaia

April 20, 2023 7:37 am

So drain all the peat bogs and wetlands. They emit methane too.

Last edited 1 month ago by decnine
John Oliver
April 20, 2023 7:49 am

Everyday I just have to shake my head- so much of this ignores the highly complex integrated and intertwined nature of the “ climate” as a whole system. Not to mention the fact that through out the entire paleo climate history -life survives and continues and thrives EXCEPT in a plunging ice age scenario. If the climate and life were that fragile we would not be here. Start worrying about true existential threats like the Biden Administration and just about every democrat in the United States.

Reply to  John Oliver
April 20, 2023 11:58 am

Doing well until you wandered into worrying about an 80 y/o almost done with his term. Is the game based on pulling in benefit and pushing out cost to crush the next guy?

Reply to  KevinM
April 20, 2023 5:38 pm

If you think Biden is in charge of anything I suggest you look closer. I doubt he can even control his bowels.

April 20, 2023 8:18 am

Get on the Dreamtime grass seeds-
Bruce Pascoe’s Black Duck Foods charity a ‘no lose’ entity (

Good luck to enterprising Bruce raking it in and satisfying consumer demand but you have to worry about the size of his market segment. It used to be called unfair trading fleecing kids and retards but you lose touch in retirement.

April 20, 2023 8:35 am

It seems that the same people who think it is not OK to eat food grown with artificial chemicals are also the ones who think it is OK to eat food made comletely out of artificial chemicals….WUWT???

April 20, 2023 8:40 am

From all of the evidence, it is clear that the major contributors to the (so called) climate crisis are the UN, deluded politicians and over-virtuous billionaires.
So the simple solution is to eradicate these parasites and their supporters and we can all get back to normal.

Problem solved!

Reply to  Shytot
April 20, 2023 4:55 pm

Start mass producing guillotines?
Who will decide who is on which end of the blade?

Reply to  AndyHce
April 21, 2023 12:58 am

I’m happy to make that call – they are more or less doing it to us right now,
Maybe hanging would be more efficient and more eco friendly than making guillotines?

More Soylent Green!
April 20, 2023 8:56 am

I’m reminded of all the man-made famines in North Korea and other planned economies, like in the former USSR. Experts in Marxism or Soviet theory were put in charge of agricultural production.

The resulting catastrophes were completely predictable. Millions of deaths didn’t stop the central planners from trying again and again because they knew they were smarter than those who tried and failed previously.

April 20, 2023 9:09 am
April 20, 2023 9:31 am

Whoever is asserting this fear of rice production is a racist Asian xenophobe! /s

April 20, 2023 9:47 am

Methane has two absorption peaks in the range 2.5 – 100 micrometres (as shown in Henry Pool’s post) but when the black body curve (Planck’s equation) is considered, there is only one that results in atmospheric absorption.

Compared with Carbon Dioxide, the absorption is small. Alarmists promote Methane on the basis of comparing it’s ‘per molecule’ or ‘per ppmv’ effect without considering the fact that there are only one or two molecules per million of Methane, whereas there are 400 molecules per million of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere.

If they considered instead the effect of a doubling of Methane compared with a doubling of Carbon Dioxide (which is what the rest of Climastrology is based on), they would see that Methane has about 0.13 times the effect of Carbon Dioxide.

A more complete explanation is here:

Much the same applies to Nitrous Oxide.

MMGraph2-Planck spectrum absorption CH4.jpg
Bill S
Reply to  Cyan
April 20, 2023 12:34 pm

To communicate with the general public, concentrations should never be stated in parts per million. CO2 at 400 ppm sounds like a big number because most people will mentally compare 400 to their car payment to judge whether or not it is number big enough to worry about.

When asked, most people think that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is north of 10%.

As this group knows, 400 ppm is .04%, a tiny percentage. Methane at 2 ppm is .0002%, an even more trivial number.

We should always talk in percentage terms. CO2 in the Atmosphere reaches a new high of .0043% is a much less scary headline than CO2 reaches a new high of 430 ppm.

April 20, 2023 9:47 am

SpaceX just put a lot of CH4 into the upper atmosphere with the planned disintegration of the Big A** Rocket this morning. Would have been great to have been there.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  rbabcock
April 21, 2023 4:46 am

I saw a story yesterday where it said an SUV parked apparently too close to the launch pad, was destroyed during the launch.

April 20, 2023 9:49 am

As I lie awake at night, terrified of the coming global conflagration, rice is high on my blame list.

Reply to  Shoki
April 20, 2023 12:17 pm

To calm your climate anxiety, you should lie awake at night stroking your cockroaches !!

Reply to  1saveenergy
April 20, 2023 4:03 pm

Before I eat them?

Reply to  Shoki
April 20, 2023 5:12 pm

think of the legend of Kobe beef

Rud Istvan
April 20, 2023 9:59 am

The demonization of GHG methane (beef, dairy, rice) is not going to end well for the alarmists. While it is true that in the lab methane is a GHG about 80 times more potent than CO2 in dry air, it is NOT true in the real world. And that is not a small demonization problem.
The average atmospheric specific humidity is about 2% (range near zero to about 4). So water vapor is many thousands of times more abundant than methane, and the water vapor IR absorption bands completely overlap those of methane. The only very small effect of methane is after it decomposes into water vapor and CO2, via the added CO2.

Chris Nisbet
April 20, 2023 12:06 pm

I think I get it.
– Don’t travel.
– Don’t eat meat.
– Don’t eat rice.
– Actually, don’t farm at all.
– Don’t question authority.
– Get used to intermittent, expensive, electricity.

If we do all that the world _might_ avoid warming the planet by a little bit, which would be a good thing, apparently.

We _really_ need to stop voting for people who would inflict this upon us, while we’re still allowed to vote. It’s already pretty difficult to find people to vote for who don’t want to do this to us (in NZ, at least), so let’s hope voters start doing the right thing soon.

Reply to  Chris Nisbet
April 20, 2023 5:19 pm

Whoever gets near to wielding any real power either conforms to the practices of the reining power structure, which is widely active to ensure the benefits of the powerful, or the entire political structure comes down on them with both feet and a club.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  AndyHce
April 21, 2023 4:48 am

That sounds familiar.

Reply to  Chris Nisbet
April 20, 2023 5:49 pm

The problem is neither the UN nor the WEF are voted in.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  eastbaylarry
April 21, 2023 4:55 am

Speaking of the WEF:

“The WEF has a radical worldview that rejects the principles America was founded on. I’m not interested in being a ‘global citizen.’ I’m an American.”

The WEF was established in 1971 by German mechanical engineer Klaus Schwab, 85.

Schwab, who is bald and has a thick German accent, is often referenced cartoonishly by critics who see him as a James Bond villain who wants to take over the world.

Last year, Schwab was slammed for appearing to boast about how he has “penetrated the cabinets” of many countries, singling out Canada and Argentina among many.

His detractors claim he has warned people that they may have next to nothing in the future, will eat bugs and they “will be happy.”

end excerpt

April 20, 2023 2:26 pm

The photo is probably dry land rice which would pose no problem at all .
The problem in the eyes of the greens is that the rice paddies emit methane to the atmosphere.
Methane is a trace gas at under 2 parts per million in the atmosphere and it is constantly breaking down within ten years into water vapour and CO2.
Methane is not a problem and never will be a problem as it is under 2 parts per million in the atmosphere .Water vapour is 25% of the atmosphere which equates to 2500 parts per million completely overpowering any effect from methane .
Water vapour can reach over 4% which is 40,000cparts per million.
If any one here can argue that methane could ever be a problem please bring some facts that can prove that methane at 2 ppm can have any influence on climate when water vapour can get as high as forty thousand parts per million .

John in Oz
April 20, 2023 4:06 pm

Let’s ban all meat and rice eating to save the climate! More reason to eat Bill Gates-funded lab-grown meat & eat insects?!

Bill is large enough to feed several families for a few days.

He is obviously eating more than his fair share of bugs

Edward Katz
April 20, 2023 5:56 pm

Like many other harebrained suggestions from Leftist sources, this one will be promptly ignored.

Douglas Proctor
April 20, 2023 6:05 pm

Rice is a mainstay of Asian food. If the Green Lords think Asian governments are going to reduce rice cultivation as the Dutch are doing to their agriculture, the GLs are gonna be corrected in a nanosecond.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Douglas Proctor
April 21, 2023 7:26 am

Yep, rice is a staple food for more than 50% of the world’s population and every year about a further 51m rice consumers are added to the total.

Geoffrey Williams
April 20, 2023 7:11 pm

So ‘rice’ produces 10% of methane. If we add up all the %’s of methane produced by all the various they claim then we would be well over 500% ! !

old cocky
Reply to  Geoffrey Williams
April 20, 2023 7:43 pm

I think that’s either 10% of methane attributable to human activities, or 10% of that attributed to agriculture/horticulture/aquaculture, or perhaps it’s 10% of that attributed to food production.

April 20, 2023 7:50 pm

Total BS. Tell over half the world’s population they are being negligent by eating rice won’t go over well.

Tom Abbott
April 21, 2023 3:42 am

From the article: “Climate Crackpots Blame Global Warming on Rice”

That’s the headline to use, right there!

Climate Crackpots. Ain’t it the truth!

Methane emissions can be ignored as inconsequential to the warming of the climate. That doesn’t stop these Climate Crackpots from rolling out this methane lie on a regular basis.

I don’t want Climate Crackpots/Totalitarians controlling what I eat.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tom Abbott
Tom Abbott
April 21, 2023 3:52 am

From the article: “AFP: “Rice is to blame for around 10 percent of global emissions of methane, a gas that over two decades, traps about 80 times as much heat as carbon dioxide.”

Oh, yeah? How much heat does carbon dioxide trap?

Answer: They don’t have a clue, as nobody knows this answer. After over 50 years of looking. Climate Crackpots are making claims they can’t back up with facts.

The Real Engineer
April 21, 2023 7:14 am

More killing people. At least 40% of the worlds population eats rice as a staple foodstuff. No rice then…?

April 21, 2023 7:32 am

Yet UC Riverside published a stride showing that methane reflects incoming short wave radiation.

April 21, 2023 8:04 am

Geez are we talking about farting again?

Only the ‘noble’ merit the right to fart

  • Wild Beasts
  • The chosen and the altered

It’s like reincarnation….I keep working on “MY” karma so that I might be allowed to once again be farter in the world.. Oh I wish, I could return as a Canadian Goose they are so wonderfully foul. (Tongue firmly in cheek.)

Who cares about rice… let the rice growers worry about the Radical Dystopian Honor Society….the noble farters of the world..

I can’t grow rice well in PA but I do grow over 150 lbs of pintos, kidney, and soldier beans.

Julian Flood
April 22, 2023 9:27 am

Not rice. Termites.

Save the planet. Eliminate termites.


old cocky
Reply to  Julian Flood
April 22, 2023 4:07 pm

If we farm termites for human consumption, do we have to account for the methane produced by the termite farms?

April 22, 2023 4:42 pm

Defund the UN and WEF — with extreme prejudice.

April 22, 2023 5:12 pm

These people are absolutely crazy. First they went after the fertilizer, then they went after the tractors, now they are going after our food.

This is not going to end up well.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights