The New Zealand Herald published an article I wrote in response to statements made during the Paris Climate talks by our world leaders and some opinion piece writers that were inaccurate.
While the article was primarily for that purpose I did manage to mention biological emissions. The Herald also put up a link to our website and we have had a lot of hits on the website as a result.
Slowly they start to listen.
I am having problems getting onto the NZH website. Here is what i wanted to say there:
There is indeed much misunderstanding about livestock methane emissions. It is an accepted fact that a constant number of livestock at a constant level of production and a constant level of feed conversion efficiency do not alter the atmospheric concentration of methane. By definition of the UNFCCC, if there is no change in concentration there is no global warming/cooling. The only way livestock can increase warming is by an increase in numbers. If all the farmers in the world doubled their livestock numbers the global temperature change would be no more than 0.05 degrees. If the IPCC has overstated climate sensitivity, which is looking increasingly likely, this figure would be even less.
The notion that almost half our emissions come from livestock is totally flawed, as they count all the methane emitted by our livestock, not the net emissions from increased numbers. They also appear to make no allowance for the carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere to make the methane in the first place. Remember global warming potentials are based on comparing a kilogram of one gas with another. But one kilogram of carbon dioxide makes only 364 grams of methane.