carbon farming pitfalls

[harm_less]

Article explains well the science behind methane and agriculture.
More animals require more plants to feed them which in turn absorb more co2.
https://www.ruralnewsgroup.co.nz/rural-n...dis-credit

Leo Cooney in that article is essentially stating that methane is synonymous with carbon dioxide which is totally false. Methane is a hydrocarbon (CH4) is the simplest fossil fuel chain molecule that is primary component of natural gas. It is in the order of 32x more damaging as a greenhouse gas which Leo seems happy to ignore.

Also his idea that CO2 can be absorbed by the sea ignores the fact that this process acidifies the oceans and together with rising atmospheric and ocean temperatures is largely responsible for coral death which is hugely damaging to the oceanic food chains. The magnitude of CO2 and methane emissions is well beyond the volumes that can be absorbed by natural factors in the same way that livestock urine levels combined with nitrogenous fertilizers totally overwhelm the ability for soil biology to absorb this substance. The problematic factor in both cases is the rate of discharge in high intensity farming operations which are urgently in need of revising their practices or we risk damaging our waterways, atmosphere and international standing as a 'clean green' producer to the point that our offshore markets will cease to exist.

Claiming that livestock numbers can 'consume' the effects of rising CO2 levels is ignorant at best. Leo Cooney should stick to supporting highway construction and light aircraft activities and leave environmental science matters to those who are expert in the field.