News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Labeling Beef ‘Low Carbon’ Could Open Premium Market for Wyoming Ranchers. Parent comment

Re:Labeling Beef ‘Low Carbon’ Could Open Premium Market for ... by hn8305823 on Friday September 08, 2023 @10:44AM (#37434146)
2.4% by weight or 2.4% of total global warming potential? Methane has a GWP of 30 (CO2=1).

> and if the rancher uses any anti-methane feed additives

If this effort reduces methane emissions in any meaningful way then it's useful.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Labeling Beef ‘Low Carbon’ Could Open Premium Market for ... by polski-g on Friday September 08, 2023 @10:47AM (#37434194)
Are there computations for calories-produced per GWP?

How does beef fare compared to something like turkey?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Labeling Beef ‘Low Carbon’ Could Open Premium Market for ... by hnhg on Friday September 08, 2023 @10:57AM (#37434335)
There is a lot to explore here (emissions per calorie, protein content, etc): https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-kcal-poore
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Labeling Beef ‘Low Carbon’ Could Open Premium Market for ... by hn8305823 on Friday September 08, 2023 @10:55AM (#37434313)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas_emissions

> Ruminant cattle for beef and dairy rank high in greenhouse-gas emissions; monogastric, or pigs and poultry-related foods, are low.

I think it's all about the methane, for which cattle are notorious.

[ Parent | on HN ]