TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Australia to produce seaweed cattle feed that reduces methane emissions by 80%

475 点作者 indysigners超过 4 年前

23 条评论

seanwilson超过 4 年前
How much could this reduce the total environmental food print of cattle? I.e. including all the energy used to grow the crops they eat, the deforestation to make room for the crops + cattle, the waste the cows produce.<p>Animal farming creates vast damage because of how inefficient it is and seaweed won&#x27;t address how much feed cows need or that the world is eating more and more meat as countries get richer:<p>&gt; The energy efficiency of meat and dairy production is defined as the percentage of energy (caloric) inputs as feed effectively converted to animal product. An efficiency of 25% would mean 25% of calories in animal feed inputs were effectively converted to animal product; the remaining 75% would be lost during conversion.<p>&gt; Whole milk: 24%<p>&gt; Beef: 1.9%<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ourworldindata.org&#x2F;grapher&#x2F;energy-efficiency-of-meat-and-dairy-production" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ourworldindata.org&#x2F;grapher&#x2F;energy-efficiency-of-meat...</a><p>All improvements are good, but I&#x27;d like to know if this is more than a distraction to make people feel better about continuing to demand products they know are damaging the environment (e.g. Amazon deforestation).<p>Industrial farmed animals aren&#x27;t eating grass, they&#x27;re eating crops like soy. If you find soy milk and soy-based meat alternatives decent for example, consider eating those directly instead of products from soy-fed cows - it&#x27;ll be vastly better for the environment with seaweed or not.
评论 #24577696 未加载
评论 #24577387 未加载
评论 #24577399 未加载
评论 #24577006 未加载
评论 #24576598 未加载
评论 #24580595 未加载
评论 #24577578 未加载
评论 #24576775 未加载
评论 #24578832 未加载
评论 #24576519 未加载
评论 #24580720 未加载
评论 #24580059 未加载
评论 #24577929 未加载
评论 #24592811 未加载
评论 #24579417 未加载
评论 #24579476 未加载
评论 #24584858 未加载
评论 #24576952 未加载
评论 #24577812 未加载
评论 #24578256 未加载
headmelted超过 4 年前
Worth noting that methane is up to <i>84 times</i> as damaging as CO2 in the atmosphere upon release. (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.edf.org&#x2F;climate&#x2F;methane-other-important-greenhouse-gas" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.edf.org&#x2F;climate&#x2F;methane-other-important-greenhou...</a>)<p>That means that (ironically I guess) this has the potential to be just about the biggest bang-for-buck weapon we have against climate change in the next decade.<p>I don&#x27;t envy the researchers having to explain it to their kids later though.<p>&quot;What&#x27;d you do in the great climate war mom?&quot;<p>&quot;I made cow farts less stinky.&quot;<p>&quot;But seriously what did you do?&quot;<p><i>groan</i>
评论 #24578883 未加载
评论 #24576342 未加载
评论 #24578509 未加载
评论 #24576375 未加载
评论 #24576895 未加载
评论 #24576647 未加载
bamboozled超过 4 年前
This is a small and positive win it seems, why do many disgruntled ?<p>People get very passionate about our food source being the cause for climate change but really, what about the real ultimate more severe causes?<p>Fracking, mining, burning coal and oil ? Nuclear and renewables makes these things obsolete, but we still need food.<p>Edit: Want to add I’m fully onboard with the east less meat crowd and minimising deforestation, but I can’t help feel we should focus on the bigger, more high value targets first? Worrying about food production feels more like a distraction ?
评论 #24579827 未加载
评论 #24579724 未加载
评论 #24579678 未加载
hexbinencoded超过 4 年前
How is this any different from hybrid vehicles still burning FF? Yes, it makes it slightly better, but eating certain protein sources is a choice, whereas transportation infrastructure is an economically-limited choice.<p>Animal ag still causes:<p>- climate change<p>- inefficient allocation of calories and fresh water<p>- water, air, and ground pollution (lakes of poo, runoff into rivers)<p>- pandemic and other zoonotic disease accelerated evolution (many animals in close proximity, including humans and occasionally wild animals)<p>- increased food prices<p>- usual also including animal welfare and cruelty<p>It seems like putting a happy face on coal, smoking, asbestos, or DDT
评论 #24578511 未加载
评论 #24578510 未加载
评论 #24581809 未加载
评论 #24580193 未加载
评论 #24579416 未加载
评论 #24578396 未加载
czottmann超过 4 年前
That&#x27;s great and all, but it&#x27;s fighting <i>symptoms</i>, not the underlying problem.<p>The underlying problem isn&#x27;t cows emitting methane, the problem is too many people indoctrinated with the idea of eating all the animals, all the time. The amount of land, energy and ressources in general spent on producing way too many animals for eating is unreasonable.
评论 #24577404 未加载
评论 #24577159 未加载
评论 #24577114 未加载
评论 #24580230 未加载
pvaldes超过 4 年前
I still think that there is a simple explanation for the &#x27;reduction in methane&#x27; effect, and that the plan has some severe loopholes<p>Raising cattle in a regular diet of seaweed for its entire life and expecting it to grow correctly is still uncharted territory. Are we pushing cow metabolism to the brink of famine?<p>Wild seaweeds are harvested and sold for several purposes:<p>1) To make agar-agar. A substance that is used (among other purposes) as a gut filler without calories in slimming diets and treatments for obesity.<p>2) As source of medical compounds. Seaweed, specially the red ones, have evolved a battery of chemical weapons to survive its many grazers. They are used to make antibiotics<p>So, the lack of methane emission... is maybe because the gut microorganisms that released methane have been killed after giving the cattle a cocktail of antibiotics?.<p>The problem is that cattle needs special gut microorganisms for surviving. They can not process cellulose into sugar without it. How can be (competitively) raised a cow that can not eat plants anymore? In a diet of fish or meat?<p>This is a serious point that should be explored, in my opinion. If this cows don&#x27;t grow muscle fast enough (and will produce milk with a funny flavor), all the project is doomed from the start.<p>On the other hand there is an environmental impact to take in mind, seaweed is related with fisheries and marine production. Kelp grows really fast, but I had seen experiments removing other species of brown seaweed in some tidal rocks and it seems that it takes decades to return.<p>As seaweed has an economical value, either the farmers buy it at a higher price, or import if from the country that cultures million tons of seaweed each year (China). They could have problems to assure enough cheap seaweed for the cattle.<p>The cow meat raised in seaweed would be more expensive and with more waste and fuel consumption. Would increase also the dependency of third countries and external policies (that sometimes are not specially nature friendly), and wouldn&#x27;t be so much sustainable as we think.
评论 #24577562 未加载
评论 #24577198 未加载
评论 #24577346 未加载
评论 #24577962 未加载
评论 #24581859 未加载
leipert超过 4 年前
Discussed last year hacker news: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=20711498" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=20711498</a><p>I was very skeptical whether this is scalable as up to two percent of the cows feed needs to be replaced with the sea weed and we simply do not produce sea weed at scale yet: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=20713552" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=20713552</a><p>The TL;DR was: in order to supply 1.5 billion cows with the seaweed we might need up to 291.000 metric tons of algae per day. ~ 106 Million metric tons per year.<p>In 2014 the world wide Aquatic Plants (which include ALL Macro-Algae) production was around 27 Million tons [0].<p>I would argue that the most effective way to reduce cattle emissions is to get rid of cattle. (Which is hard, I love beef and cheese).<p>Maybe “seaweed beef and dairy” will be a premium product but I doubt it will solve the problem on scale.<p>[0]: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fao.org&#x2F;3&#x2F;a-i5555e.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fao.org&#x2F;3&#x2F;a-i5555e.pdf</a>, page 24, table 7
评论 #24576490 未加载
评论 #24576534 未加载
评论 #24576516 未加载
评论 #24576489 未加载
评论 #24578703 未加载
dkdbejwi383超过 4 年前
If we stop eating the bastards we can reduce it by close to 100%
评论 #24577163 未加载
jxramos超过 4 年前
Does methane have any known biological function out in the wild, perhaps with microbes putting it to use? It&#x27;s hard to imagine such a large quantity of energy going unused by some organism out there. Is it pretty stable at room temperature and would just sit around forever? What became of all the methane all the various livestock have produced through the millennia?
评论 #24582473 未加载
aaron695超过 4 年前
Messing with the rumen will either increase or decrease the productivity.<p>Methane is high in calories so it should intuitively increase the productivity, which they currently think is true but unproven -<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;research.csiro.au&#x2F;futurefeed&#x2F;faq&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;research.csiro.au&#x2F;futurefeed&#x2F;faq&#x2F;</a><p>It also should increase productivity on all ruminants in theory.<p>I like this bit -<p>&quot;While analysing the gas samples using gas chromatography (GC) there was a repeating scenario of a 10-20% methane reduction, until suddenly one sample showed no methane! At first it was assumed that there was a problem with the GC so the test was repeated, and when the same result was replicated we had our moment of discovery. Those results have reproduced on every subsequent test and the red seaweed Asparagopsis is the star performer.&quot;
dkrudy超过 4 年前
Hold up its the disgusting things we&#x27;re feeding cattle that&#x27;s contributing to their immense environmental impact? HUH. Maybe someday we&#x27;ll realize that raising them in feedlots on 100% processed packaged food <i>made from</i> <i>things like</i> how they forage in nature is most of the problem as well, and if you raise them in distributed networks so they interact with their ecosystem instead of trampling it, and then not have to ship them 1000 miles to consumers, their emissions, and environmental impact DROPS. Maybe then we&#x27;ll start putting the chain together, and realize that its not beef itself, but rather the high fat, low vitamin, amalgamation of beef we now usually consume, due to these practices is what is ACTUALLY unhealthy for us to eat.
评论 #24577888 未加载
评论 #24577840 未加载
评论 #24577757 未加载
jonplackett超过 4 年前
Where does the methane go then? Is it never formed in the first place or does it get &#x27;locked in&#x27; somehow?
评论 #24578853 未加载
sparrc超过 4 年前
The article says they secured $13 million in funding. This is chump change compared to the size of the Australian beef industry.<p>Hard to imagine that they are actually planning to roll this out on a large scale with that level of investment.
valgor超过 4 年前
It is amazing the levels people go to in order to make something evil less evil. Just stop eating cow and drinking milk! Get some tofu and oatmilk. Many problems are solved, not just the methane emissions problem.
评论 #24584757 未加载
bwb超过 4 年前
This is so awesome, I&#x27;ve been waiting to see if this would make it into commercial feed. This could be a big help if it can quickly become more of a standard.
shafyy超过 4 年前
Of course Big Meat and Big Dairy love pushing this narrative. These kind of &quot;solution&quot; let&#x27;s them continue do what they are doing without fundamentally solving the problem.<p>It&#x27;s like making more efficient internal combution engines. Sure, it&#x27;s marginally better, but what it really does is distract from the real problem, which is: Burning fossil fuels. And the same is true for this seaweed cattle.<p>And this is assuming that it does really reduce methane emissions by 80%, which I wouldn&#x27;t believe until it has been empirically demonstrated on a large scale.
happyjack超过 4 年前
I own Scottish Highlanders and with our regenerative grazing plans (we are grad fed AND finished), we are a net carbon sink.
ajharrison超过 4 年前
The problem in the world now is that we have long gone past eating for survival, we now eat for desire.<p>Anyways, go vegan.
评论 #24580295 未加载
HashingtheCode超过 4 年前
This is akin to Germany going 100% green power with zero carbon emissions while China is building a new coal power station every other week.<p>It&#x27;s good, but in terms of global impact it means very little
emmelaich超过 4 年前
But will the milk and steak taste different?
sharker8超过 4 年前
Honest question: can humans eat it?
twowatches超过 4 年前
I wonder which part of the seabed they will destroy in order to grow the seaweed? A reef, perhaps?
daniellarusso超过 4 年前
What about not feeding them corn?<p>Does grass make as much cow farts?
评论 #24580317 未加载