(PhysOrg.com) -- In an attempt to understand the extent of cow flatulence on global warming, scientists in Argentina are strapping plastic bags to the backs of cows to capture their emissions.
Argentina has more than 55 million cows, making it a leading producer of beef. In the study, the scientists were surprised to discover that a standard 550-kg cow produces between 800 to 1,000 liters of emissions, including methane, each day.
Further, methane - which is also released from landfills, coal mines and leaking gas pipes - is 23 times more effective than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere.
"When we got the first results, we were surprised," said Guillermo Berra, a researcher at the National Institute of Agricultural Technology in Argentina. "Thirty percent of Argentina´s (total greenhouse) emissions could be generated by cattle."
In their study, the researchers attached balloon-like plastic packs to the backs of at least 10 cows. A tube running to the animals´ stomachs collected the gas inside the backpacks, which were then hung from the roof of the corral for analysis.
The Argentine researchers say that the slow digestive system of the cows causes them to produce these large amounts of methane. Now, the scientists are performing trials of new diets designed to improve the cows´ digestion and reduce global warming. By feeding cows clover and alfalfa instead of grain, "you can reduce methane emissions by 25 percent," according to Silvia Valtorta of the National Council of Scientific and Technical Investigations.
via: Reuters
Explore further:
Here's how what you buy affects the environment

aussiecarter
3.1 / 5 (16) Jul 11, 2008TJ_alberta
3.3 / 5 (9) Jul 11, 2008This is not a new subject but a fascinating one, for example: "Farmers in Estonia received their first "Cow Fart" tax demand on Monday. Following the issues of global warming, Estonia cited that a single cow produces 350 L of methane gas and 1500 L of carbon dioxide a day from flatulence and burping."
http://www.capeco...?blog=94
And for the other side, see also: http://digg.com/e...ol_Earth
brianN
4.8 / 5 (5) Jul 11, 20087 years refers to its half life.
kombizz
3.5 / 5 (10) Jul 12, 2008Sparkygravity
4.4 / 5 (8) Jul 12, 2008nilbud
3.7 / 5 (10) Jul 12, 2008aussiecarter
1.9 / 5 (7) Jul 12, 2008http://www.ted.co...eat.html
brianN
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 12, 2008zevkirsh
2.6 / 5 (12) Jul 12, 2008ridiculous. the problem is clear cutting land to make it into pastures for grazing cows. that's the problem. not how much ass gas they have. global warming alarmists are total morons.
datajanitor
3.2 / 5 (5) Jul 12, 2008jburchel
2.7 / 5 (12) Jul 12, 2008Seriously though... what a stupid article, just another of many along this lame vein... Please somebody invent a "fair and balanced" science news site so I can finally dump PhysOrg like I dumped CNN so long ago.
Durbonator
3.9 / 5 (7) Jul 12, 2008Erik
3.7 / 5 (6) Jul 13, 2008PresstoDigitate
5 / 5 (8) Jul 13, 2008p1ll
3 / 5 (4) Jul 13, 2008Star_Gazer
3.7 / 5 (6) Jul 13, 2008barkster
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 13, 2008Mayday
3.3 / 5 (7) Jul 13, 2008jeffsaunders
4 / 5 (5) Jul 13, 2008Furthermore if the cattle were in fact grazing as cattle like to do they would produce significantly less gas than the artcle attributes to ALL cattle.
The way this article and manny others like it appear in newspapers we will soon see demands for the extermination off all cattle, wilderbeast, elephants in fact all grazing animals so they can stop producing methane gas.
Then I wonder what all those grasses will do if they are not eaten. Will that methan gas not be produced by rotting vegetation?
Is it fact the cow or the bacteria that produce the gas? Yes it is bacteria so do not bacteria exist everywhere? perhaps they are a little slower when not in the controlled environment of the gut but they do function anyway.
sardion2000
1 / 5 (5) Jul 13, 2008humanist
2 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2008aussiecarter
3 / 5 (5) Jul 13, 20081. bag is for science research not long term global warming reduction technology
2. 1000L per cow per day of methane is significant
mocaorca
5 / 5 (4) Jul 14, 2008jburchel
3 / 5 (6) Jul 14, 2008Egnite
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 14, 2008Minnaloushe
3 / 5 (6) Jul 14, 2008I think some of the purveyors of the more extreme varieties of man-made global warming domm scenarios have confused (or ignored) the scientific criterion requiring repeatability, and have instead substituted mere rhetorical repetition.
As for me, you can say that PI is equal to 3 as passionately and as often as you like, but it'll still be 3.1414926....
Minnaloushe
2.8 / 5 (6) Jul 14, 2008Gee. Are we all going to have to buy carbon cedits to eat baked beans? Maybe a monitoring sensor up the old wazoo (wonder if Al Gore would step up as a test subject...)? I'm afraid the millenarian crypto-faith that is the belief in apocalyptic global warming is just being used as the latest excuse for power-players to bring about more and more totalitarianism, both political and economic. Every age has had its own eschatological frenzies and fanatics -- undisputed masters of the contra-real who should avoid serious discourse.
I think some of the purveyors of the more extreme varieties of man-made global warming doom scenarios have confused (or ignored) the scientific criterion requiring repeatability, and have instead substituted mere rhetorical repetition.
As for me, you can say that PI is equal to 3 as passionately and as often as you like, but it'll still be 3.1414926....
General_Haberdashery
3.5 / 5 (4) Jul 14, 2008Mercury_01
4.5 / 5 (2) Jul 14, 2008Ridgerunner
5 / 5 (3) Jul 15, 2008Has anyone computed how big that bag would have to be, and how many days of emissions until the cows lifted off? :)
OdinsAcolyte
4.7 / 5 (3) Jul 16, 2008I am sure the politicians and the tribe of attorneys from whence they came produce more gas than anything else. I would like to install fart pipelines in Washington D.C.; can I get a grant?
nilbud
1 / 5 (1) Jul 19, 2008Argentina
vlam67
5 / 5 (2) Jul 21, 2008chaffman
not rated yet Jul 09, 2009