THREAD: Will a large reduction of cattle herds (e.g. in a country like Ireland) significantly reduce warming? The short answer is no. That’s because not all GHGs are equal, nor should they be treated that way. I’ll break it down below. 1/7
Methane from cattle (CH4) is a flow gas, staying in the atmosphere for about one decade & being destroyed at approx the rate it’s emitted. Carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuels is a stock gas, which stockpiles in the atmosphere indefinitely. 2/7 
Because methane is a flow gas w/ a 10-year lifespan, reducing herd size will give you a ONE TIME cooling effect. But you still have the stock gas – i.e. CO2 from fossil fuels – adding warming and dwarfing any cooling effects from methane reductions. 3/6
faifarms.com/podcasts/rumin…
faifarms.com/podcasts/rumin…
Think of it like this: You have a checking account. & a credit card. You spend as much as you put into the checking acct. But the credit card stockpiles debt. Even if you save extra money in checking, you still have growing debt on your credit card & not really saving any. 4/6
Reducing methane, like saving money, is something we want to do. And at @UCDavis, we’re researching just that with feed additives and manure technologies. But it’s a stop gap at best if we want to reduce warming over the long term. 5/6
clear.ucdavis.edu/news/role-cows…
clear.ucdavis.edu/news/role-cows…
Ending ruminant livestock would reduce 2030 warming by a mere 1/10 of one degree. This is minimal compared to the warming contributions of fossil fuel. Despite efforts to reduce livestock methane, if we don’t address CO2 from fossil fuels, we’re still in a whole lot of trouble.
