Paper exposed to the figure of pseudoscience on farmers after the methane war – What about Watt?

Vijay Jayaraj

Methane emissions have become the focus of climate debate, triggering ridiculous agricultural regulations that have negatively impacted agricultural communities around the world. The target of abuse is ruminants, including cattle and sheep, which produce methane (CH4) through intestinal fermentation, a natural digestive process that converts grass into protein-rich meat and milk for human consumption.

Even my family’s farmers in India may be a possible target for agricultural attacks on the Netherlands, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and many other countries.

Efforts to reduce emissions include forcing farmers to abandon their area and pay high climate taxes. Dairy farmers are asked to feed cows a supplement, which is the product name for bovaer to inhibit methane production.

Some major supermarkets in the UK (such as Tesco, Morrison and Aldi) have purchased milk from medicinal cows. Although a small number of consumers boycott the milk, most people have no choice but to buy it.

Is this regulation of agricultural methane emissions reasonable? According to the latest reports from two physicists, William Happer and Princeton University and Toronto York University, the title is “Methane and Climate.”

The latest paper was first published in 2020 by the Coalition of Carbon Dioxide (CO2 Coalition), which meticulously dismantled the general narrative that methane emissions from agriculture are a threat to the planet. By carefully analyzing the physical properties of methane and its interaction with the Earth's atmosphere, the authors demonstrate that methane's warming potential is negligible.

The science behind the limited impact of methane

The core of the two professors' analysis is comparing the radiation forcing of methane and carbon dioxide. Radiation forcing is the difference in net heat radiation from the earth to the space through a transparent atmosphere, while smaller radiation passes through the same atmosphere as the originally-same as the greenhouse gases. In other words, it is used to understand how greenhouse gases in the atmosphere stop some heat radiation from escaping the earth into outer space.

Using radiation transfer calculations, the authors investigated the contribution of methane to the greenhouse effect. They found that another atmospheric molecule would result in about 30 times higher than another carbon dioxide molecule.

This is because the greenhouse warming of relatively abundant CO2 is more “saturated” than methane. At higher concentrations, the same molecules are obtained in the way of each other and do not warm as effectively as lower concentrations. However, the concentration of methane in the atmosphere is about 300 times slower than that in carbon dioxide, so the annual warming of methane is about 1/10 of CO2.

Methane is quite common with the main molecules that make up natural gas and is a by-product of various natural processes, including the attenuation of organic materials in swamps and forests. However, its relative presence in the atmosphere is small, and its warming potential is ultimately irrelevant.

This is in stark contrast to the apocalyptic warnings issued by some politicians and media. As often described, methane is far from a “super pollutant” but emerges from secondary players in the climate system.

Call for rational policy

So, what is the way forward? Decision makers should be combined with the best science. These findings clearly show that climate models are often used to demonstrate that methane regulations exaggerate their effects.

By ignoring the subtle interactions between methane, water vapor and other atmospheric components, climate models create distorted images of climate change, which provides for unnecessary panic and unwise policies.

Farmers are not the villains of climate stories. They are essential stewards on land that feeds billions of dollars. Punitive measures that undermine their livelihoods are not only unfair, but dangerously counterproductive.

For farmers around the world and farmers of billions of products, this study offers hope in the irrational or even immoral methane war. It is time to reject the scapegoat of agriculture and accept wise policies that recognize the essential role of farmers in feeding the planet.

The public should demand stricter, more honest and more humble people in the complex science of climate change. It is time to avoid top-down regulations of political institutions like the United Nations that advance the agenda with scary rather than strict scientific methods.

The comment was originally posted American thinker February 3, 2024.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Assistant company₂ allianceArlington, Virginia. he He holds a Master of Environmental Science from the University of East Anglia and a Bachelor of Science in Energy Management from Robert Gordon University in the UK, and a Bachelor of Engineering from Anna University in India.

Related