~0.35%. That’s the annual methane reduction needed for agriculture CH4 to be #ClimateNeutral. Reduce ~5% annually, we can neutralize all additional warming from ag CH4 since the '80s. WE CAN DO THIS!

More on @CGIARclimate & @nature_org paper ⬇️ 1/
GWP* vs GWP100 better describes how #methane emissions impact the climate. Using GWP100 overestimates the warming impact of constant CH4 emissions by 3-4 times.

AND GWP100 misses climate benefits with decreasing emissions.

AND undersells warming when CH4 emissions rise.

Why is GWP* important? From the paper: GWP* emphasizes CH4 reductions can only contribute meaningfully to limiting climate change, as long as CO2 hits net-zero.

GWP* shows the true benefits w/ CH4 cuts. Making the work farmers/ranchers are doing to cut CH4 more significant. 3/
Reducing methane from enteric fermentation and manure in #beef and #dairy (which we are studying at @UCDavis in the @CLEARCenter) are two critical strategies to achieve #ClimateNeutrality with significant co-benefits.
Some feed additives have shown increased production efficiency in #dairy cows in addition to their #methane mitigation benefits. Improved 🐂 grazing management ⬆️ the carbon sequestration potential of rangeland in addition to ecological benefits.
Manure management tech like anaerobic digesters (w/ proper market) are the most carbon-negative fuel for transportation. Anaerobic digestion & composting lessen reliance on inorganic fertilizers & increase soil carbon sequestration. All of these can earn producers additional 💰6/
I have long said that #ClimateNeutrality is possible for the U.S. #beef and #dairy industries. Climate neutrality is a next zero warming contribution, similar to the impact of net-zero carbon emissions.
What is even more exciting is the potential to achieve a net cooling effect by harnessing ruminant animals’ place in the biogenic carbon cycle. Aggressively reducing CH4 will pull carbon from the atmosphere resulting in cooling.
FYI: Here’s a great explainer on the biogenic carbon cycle from Dr. @samjwerth:…
Getting CH4’s warming impact right is not greenwashing. The paper says: Rather than undermine the attention and importance given to CH4 up until now, GWP* underscores the importance of making meaningful reductions in CH4 emissions as soon as possible to meet climate targets. 10/
In fact, more so than GWP100, GWP* shows that increasing methane emissions will increase warming.

From the white paper: A 1.5% annual increase in CH4 emissions leads to climate impacts 40% greater when using GWP* vs. GWP100.

Reaching #climateneutrality in the livestock sector is more attainable than we previously understood & that doesn’t at all take away from the fact that reducing CH4 will help fight climate change. It reinforces that.

Please, read the paper here:


• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Frank Mitloehner

Frank Mitloehner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GHGGuru

25 Mar
THREAD: The growing popularity of meat alternatives has not affected animal-sourced meat sales. Promoting plant-based alternatives as a recipe for #climatechange solutions is dangerously misleading and distracting.… 1/
While it may be true that meat alternatives are seeing a rise in sales, what the @guardian fails to provide is – and this is typical of the plant-based agenda – CONTEXT. Did you know that meat sales are actually at a record high? Up by 20%!… 2/
It should be noted, the pandemic has changed our eating habits with many opting to cook at home rather than eat out. It’s possible we may see a dip in meat sales as life gets back to normal, but this doesn't mean the end of meat is near. For reference: 3/
Read 9 tweets
13 Feb
NEW BLOG/THREAD: It’s clear the firehose of misinformation around livestock’s impact on climate is ramping up. When I see misleading headlines on perceived credible media, it disappoints. My new blog brings context that is often missing from this convo.… 1/
This headline for an @latimes column is not only incorrect, but the context within this article lacks any weight to make a real argument supporting the statement. The author says most emissions from agriculture stems from animal ag – that’s inaccurate.… 2/
One fact I’m ALWAYS upfront about is this: There ARE climate impacts from animal ag. They tend to be overblown, but reducing them can absolutely help in our fight against climate change. Swapping burgers is not the climate savior some tend to believe. 3/
Read 14 tweets
4 Feb

Accounting correctly for methane’s short-lived nature isn’t greenwashing, it’s science. This great paper reinforces what we at @UCDavisCLEAR have been saying – agriculture methane warms differently than fossil CO2. 1/
We need to rethink methane from ag, because it doesn’t warm like fossil CO2. Methane persists in the air for 12 years before most is removed. CO2 lasts for 1000 years, building up and warming long after it’s emitted. Here's a deep dive into ag CH4: 2/…
If you haven’t seen it you, you should watch the CLEAR Center’s video on #rethinkingmethane, goes into more detail about how methane warms: 3/
Read 8 tweets
1 Feb
An interesting take by the @WSJ on balancing a healthy diet and a healthy planet. It’s becoming clear that animal-sourced foods can be part of a human-health solution. But it misses that animal protein can also be part of a healthy planet. 1/…
Animal-sourced foods can be a #climatechange solution. I invite @garytaubes to check out resources on the incredible strides the dairy and beef industry are making toward sustainability. The California dairy industry is on its way to climate neutrality: 2/…
Here's more on that topic by the @WWF: 3/…
Read 7 tweets
5 Dec 20
THREAD: Could eliminating meat from our diet be a simple solution to curbing our climate crisis? You may have heard the saying, ‘nothing good comes easy’. Well, yes. It’s not that simple – #climatechange has no easy solutions. My new blog explains. 1/
I want to start by stressing this: I have no beef with what you eat, whether that be a plant-based burger, one grown in a lab, or the old-fashioned kind from a cow – because that is your choice. 2/
As a scientist at the intersection of livestock & the environment, I work to reduce the environmental impact of animal protein for those who choose to eat it. It’s my duty to provide you with facts & resources around this subject so you can make the right decisions for you. 3/
Read 15 tweets
16 Oct 20
NEW BLOG + THREAD: 'Reduce your carbon footprint' is a propaganda buzz phrase. Plain and simple. The idea of changing individual actions in hope of positively impacting the planet is part of a PR campaign by the fossil fuel industry. LINK: 1/
This @mashable article by @SkepticalRanger begins by describing a 1971 TV PSA some of you may remember. The ad shows a Native American man mourning Earth, which is now littered with trash and plastic pollution. It aims to touch on your emotions. 2/…
Who do you think sponsored that PSA? The beverage industry. The group responsible for the plastic pollution itself. The blame however, is thrown on the consumer. It’s been some time, so here's that PSA: 3/
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!