It is easy for libtard activists to say cow farts are destroying the planet. It will not be so easy to replace all the benefits humans enjoy from using the by-products of cows.

They are not only taking away our hamburgers and nutritionally vital milk for our children, but also important products used daily.

This includes clothing, medicine, chemicals to improve tires, materials for insulation, and yes, even footballs!

See below:

http://www.cattle-empire.net/blog/123/many-uses-cow-beef-products

The Many Uses of a Cow - Beef By-Products

A by-product is something produced in the course of making the main product.

In the beef industry, the main product we produce is beef—the hamburgers, steaks and roast beef we enjoy eating. A beef by-product is something made from a cow besides the beef we eat. To illustrate, an 1150 pound market steer yields approximately 500 pounds of beef. Nearly all of the remaining weight is recovered as by-products.

There are three categories of by-products to determine the items made with the rest of the animal: EDIBLE, INEDIBLE and MEDICINAL.

Edible By-Products are things we can eat.

Some edible beef by-products are fairly well known such as variety meats. The nutritious value of liver, kidneys, brains, tripe, sweetbreads, and tongue has been acknowledged for quite a while. Other important edible by-products are less well known. Fats yield oleo stock and oleo oil for margarine and shortening. Oleo stearin is used in making chewing gum and certain candies. Gelatin produced from bones and skins is used in marshmallows, ice cream, canned meats, and gelatin desserts. Intestines may provide natural sausage casings.

Inedible By-Products are things we cannot eat.

You probably use at least one item containing inedible beef by-products every day. For example, you probably know that the beef hide is used to make leather, but did you know that the hide also supplies felt and other textiles? It provides a base for many ointments, binders for plaster and asphalt, and a base for the insulation material used to cool and heat your house. In addition, “camel hair” artists’ brushes are not really made from camel hair but from the fine hair found in the ears and tails of beef cattle. Footballs, which used to be called “pigskins,” are also generally produced from cattle hide.

Industrial oils and lubricants, tallow for tanning, soaps, lipsticks, face and hand creams, some medicines, and ingredients for explosives are produced from the inedible fats from beef. Fatty acids are used in the production of chemicals, biodegradable detergents, pesticides, and flotation agents. One fatty acid is used to make automobile tires run cooler and, therefore last longer.

Bones, horns, and hooves also supply important by-products. These include buttons, bone china, piano keys, glues, fertilizer, and gelatin for photographic film, paper, wallpaper, sandpaper, combs, toothbrushes, and violin string.

https://www.extension.iastate.edu/sites/www.extension.iastate.edu/files/allamakee/Lesson1Activity4Dairy_By_Products.pdf

>>5360297

missed this section

Medicinal By-Products are things used by your doctor.

More than 100 individual drugs performing such important and varied functions as helping to make childbirth safer, settling an upset stomach, preventing blood clots in the circulatory system, controlling anemia, relieving some symptoms of hay fever and asthma, and helping babies digest milk include beef by-products. Insulin is perhaps the best-known pharmaceutical derived from cattle. There are 5 million diabetic people in the United States, and 1.25 million of them require insulin daily. It takes the pancreases from 26 cattle to provide enough insulin to keep one diabetic person alive for a year.

Through genetic engineering techniques and research developments, many of the drugs produced from cattle are now being chemically produced in a laboratory, often less expensively than recovery from animal organs.

Most of the material used for surgical sutures is derived from the intestines of meat animals.

This description of cattle by-products is by no means complete. In fact, new uses are discovered almost daily. But we hope that now when you hear “Where’s the beef?” you will think:

• It is in hospitals and drug stores.

• It is helping your car run better and your clothes get cleaner.

• It is in sporting goods, photographic equipment, and art supply shops.

• It is in firecrackers on the Fourth of July.

• It is in your garden keeping down insect infestations.

• It is in soap for washing your face

We really enjoyed spending our day with the area kids teaching them about what we do at Cattle Empire, we hope you were able to learn something as well!

>>5360297

In Nature, insects, particularly termites produce more methane than cows. Libtard activists will not condemn insects, because philosophically speaking they are more akin to destructive insects, like termites than they are to beneficial animals like cows.

https://www.foothillsforage.com/single-post/2017/05/16/Do-Cows-Produce-the-Most-Methane

By weight, no cattle do not produce the most methane. Insects do. There are a variety of insects, that also have methanogens in their digestive tracts, that produce methane. (Methanogens are bacteria in the digestive tract that produce methane via fermentation also known as methanogenesis). Cockroaches, termites, centipedes and various arthropods all produce methane as noted in this study from 1994 “Methane production in terrestrial arthropods.” Roughly 200 to 300 hundred cockroaches emit as much methane as a head of cattle.

If you look back at articles from the early 1980’s on termites, based on laboratory (in vitro) experiments, many scientists thought termites could be responsible for up to 30% of global methane emissions. However when the termites were looked at in their natural environments (in situ), the methane produced via methanogenesis in termites digestive tracts was more than offset by methanotrophs in the the soils and degrading materials of the environments that the termites lived in. Methanotrophs are bacteria that digest atmospheric methane (methane oxidation).

Now the problem with so much of the discussion with cattle and methane is that there is no discussion of context. The way enteric emissions (essentially burps) have been measured with cattle is either through masks, SF6 tracers, or chambers. This means the cattle’s emissions are measured out of the context of where the cattle live.

In healthy well managed pastures, cattle help build organic soil matter that stores more carbon via photosynthesis (carbon is pumped by plants roots into the soil in exchange for soil nutrients) and due to the land not being disturbed. When soil is cultivated, that is tilled, soil releases carbon into the atmosphere and thus doesn’t retain as much carbon. Synthetic fertilizers also reduce the soils capacity to retain carbon. When there is more soil carbon, soils retain more water. There are various numbers that show that for every 1% increase in soil carbon, every acre of 6″ deep soil holds any where from 10,000 to 27,000 more gallons of water. Now when soils retain more water, aren’t tilled, and are continuously covered with plants (as is the case with grassland ecosystems used for grazing), soil ecosystems are healthier and contain more soil bacteria including the methanotrophs listed above. Just like with termites, in intact ecosystems, methanotrophs in grasslands being grazed offset the methane created by methanogens via methanogenesis in ruminants (cattle, bison, sheep, goats, yak, wildebeast, etc) rumen. Yes research has indicated that grazing increases methanotrophic activity.

So when looking at methane, and ghg's in general, you can't just look at numbers, you have to look at the entire ecosystem context.

For example, peat bogs emit a lot of CH4, but they also sequester a lot of carbon. Same thing with tropical forests. The trees in the forest are a huge source of methane, but they also sequester a huge amount of carbon; more than enough carbon to offset all the methane these trees produce. No one is suggesting draining peat bogs or tearing down forests because of methane emissions. As previously noted, many different types of insects also produce enteric CH4 via methanogenesis. There are billions of these insects. But they too serve an ecological function, so no point in eradicating all insects. (What would birds eat?).

So same thing with wild ruminants. These animals were in intact functioning ecosystems where all the enteric CH4 was offset via carbon sequestration and methane oxidation. Part of the problem with domestic ruminants are feedlots and poor grazing management. With feedlots, this takes the ruminants out of the ecosystem context. With poor grazing, that also reduces the effectiveness of the ecosystem offsets.

But , as this research from India notes, the biggest problem with messing up the context for where ruminants use to roam is tillage, bare ground and synthetic inputs for Ag production (especially industrial Ag production for commodity crops as well as tilled organic for annual production) since these methods and inputs destroys the capacity of the soils in these ecosystems to function as GHG sinks for both carbon AND methane.

By: Stephen Zwick, Cornell University

>>5360396

Most methane is produced by decaying debris from natural sources such as wetlands, rivers and streams, gas hydrates on the ocean floor, and melting permafrost. Termites, surprisingly, are the second largest source of global methane emissions. Next comes the extraction and burning of fossil fuels for electricity and transportation. Then way down the list cows.

But really all of these are variations of the same thing, the decay of organic material in anaerobic conditions.

>>5360447

Looks like we need to ban hydroelectric dams, rice, composting, and so on.

https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/6-surprising-sources-of-methane

Hydroelectric dams: A risk and an opportunity

The 8,000 hydroelectric dams in the U.S. generate a huge amount of sustainable electricity, but they also produce methane. How? It's all part of the process to create a dam in the first place.

When a dam is built, the area behind the dam is flooded by water that can no longer travel where it used to flow. That leaves a potentially huge amount of vegetable matter — plants and trees that use to exist in the open air — rotting beneath the surface of the water. Rotting vegetation produces methane, and in normal situations that methane would escape into the atmosphere in incremental doses. But the rotting plants behind a dam store up their methane in the mud. When the supply of water lowers behind a dam, all of that stored-up methane can suddenly be released.

The amount of methane a dam could release varies depending on where and how the dam was built. A 2005 study published in the journal Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change found that the Curuá-Una dam in Pará, Brazil, actually released three-and-a-half times more methane than an oil-based power plant generating the same amount of electricity. A study this year by a doctoral student at Washington State University found the mud behind one dam in Washington released 36 times more methane than normal when water levels were low.

The Arctic's growing methane problem

Just as methane is escaping from the mud behind dams, the gas is escaping from underneath Arctic ice and permafrost due to global warming. A study published this May in the journal Nature Geoscience found that methane gas, which had been trapped under the ice, is now escaping into the atmosphere as the Arctic region heats up. This, in turn, could speed up further warming.

Ocean microbes: A new discovery in methane

As much as 4 percent of the planet's methane comes from the ocean, and a study published in August finally may have figured out how it gets there in the first place. According to scientists from the University of Illinois and Institute for Genomic Biology, the ocean-based microbe Nitrosopumilus maritimus produces methane through a complex biochemical process the researchers referred to as "weird chemistry." It was a totally unexpected discovery for two reasons. One, the researchers were actually looking for clues to create new antibiotics. And two, all other microbes known to produce methane can't tolerate oxygen, which is found in both the air and water.

Composting: It has its downsides

Home or business composting is a great way to get rid of organic waste such as yard trimmings and food scraps and transform them into something useful. But it's not without its downside: The act of composting produces both carbon dioxide and methane. According to an EPA report (pdf), the amount of material composted in the U.S. from 1990 to 2010 increased 392 percent and methane emissions from composting have increased about the same percentage.

Rice: You're soaking in it

Rice may be one of the biggest food staples around the world, but its cultivation produced the third-highest levels of methane from all agricultural processes in 2010, according to an EPA report (pdf).

Rice is grown in flooded fields, a situation that depletes the soil of oxygen. Soils that are anaerobic (lacking oxygen) allow the bacteria that produce methane from decomposing organic matter to thrive. Some of this methane then bubbles to the surface, but most of it is diffused back into the atmosphere through the rice plants themselves.

Semiconductors: You're using one right now

Guess what: the device you're using to read this article was manufactured with the help of methane. Specifically, the semiconductors in computers and mobile devices are produced using several different methane gases, including trifluoromethane, perfluoromethane and perfluoroethane. Some of this gas escapes in the waste process. According to an EPA report (pdf), the total of all of these gases released in 2010 was the equivalent of 5.4 teragrams of carbon dioxide.