South Australian Farmer John Michelmore (pictured) writes:
The impact of methane on global warming and the sources of methane have now attracted the general medias attention.
Cattle have been singled as responsible for a large proportion of methane emissions world wide, and now results in the call for a reduction in the worlds cattle herd.
It appears probable that emissions permits (taxation) are under consideration for Australian livestock producing methane in their digestive tracts.

This series of articles on methane attempts to explain the science behind methane in the atmosphere and whether a tax on methane emissions in Australia will have any impact on global warming.
It is imperative that Australians understand global warming and the potential risks to our economy from an ill conceived emissions trading scheme based on inconclusive science and unlikely to be adopted by other major methane emitters.
Australia’s methane emissions barely rate as a percentage of global emissions. Therefore reducing Australia’s methane emissions will have insignificant impact on our climate unless the major emitters also reduce methane emissions; assuming we can actually control atmospheric methane.
Can we as Australian’s afford to be the first to set an example and take the economic consequences of an emissions trading scheme probably not adopted by the major methane producers; India, China, Europe, Africa and the United States?
We still haven’t learnt from our Free Trade experiences of the past, where our manufacturing industries have been decimated by free trade that no other country adopted. How are China, Africa and India expected to control their methane emissions when farmers are at most subsistence, and have little choice about their food production methods?
Methane is produced and consumed by a number of pathways in the world environment. Production occurs naturally from a number of sources and also results from human activities (called anthropogenic methane).
The overriding question is whether an economic accounting system is valid for methane, and what actual level of methane production can be related to human activities.
The current level of methane in the atmosphere (1750 parts per billion) accounts for about 20% of the “heating factor” created by the gases that could result in global warming. There has been an increase in methane in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution from a peak historical level of about 750 parts per billion.
There is no doubt the incidence of solar radiation on the earth, and the resultant increase in temperature can drive both carbon dioxide and methane level increases in the atmosphere. However the reverse also applies and no theory really adequately explains current levels of methane and carbon dioxide levels because of the complex scientific issues involved.
There are numerous feed back loops that impact methane levels.
The question is whether the human race can control what is happening to our environment?
The overriding question is: - Does the Australian Government expect that we can influence the major human induced methane emissions in other countries by example, and in the process push the Australian economy further into recession?
Maybe Dr Brendan Nelson was correct in his idea to move in line with major green house gas emitters.
………………………………………………………………………….
Have Your say!
Related Posts
- Emissions Trading Schemes in Aust & NZ will have Zero impact on Global Emissions.
- IPCC Scandalous Deception on Livestock Emissions Exposed
- Scientists Baffled By World Wide Increase In Methane - As It Contadicts the Global Warming Theory.
- ABARE Chiefs Warn Australian Agriculture is Doomed Under Emissions Trading Scheme
- Fart Tax “on the nose” for Australian Beef Export

STOP NEWS FLASH
GREENHOUSE GARNUTS GREENPAPER IS DEAD..
I LOVE THE SOUND OF SHREDDERS IN KLIMATE KEVVIES KARBON KAVE Whrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
ANU REPORTS 8/8/08
160 % OF OUR EMMISSIONS ARE CAPTURED EACH YEAR BY THE FORESTS JUST IN SOUTH EAST AUSTRALIA…
NO TAX REQUIRED JUST A WHOLE BAG OF CREDITS TO COLLECT AND WE HAVENT COUNTED ALL THE TREES YET….
GIVE me MY KARBON KREDITS KLIMATE K E V V I E
there are 6 billion walking talking breathing farters just north, east and west of us and they are breathing my oxygen from my trees x 21 million for free tax them klimate kevvie so i can spend it on new technology take some days off and employ a guest gardener and maid…just like the sand and oil jockeys bloated with cash
No rational person can support any governmental action whcih threatens to reduce the world supply of edible protein.
Queenslander Viv Forbes explains very eloquently in his essay ‘All Cows are Green” at http://michaeldarby.net/Cows.pdf
Blessings to beef and sheep producers!
Michael Darby
http://epress.anu.edu.au/green_carbon_citation.html
ANU SAYS STOP WORRYING WERE OVER QUOTA BOYS
2 X 80% = 160% AND THATS JUST THE LITTLE OL TREES IN THE “FORESTS” OF SE AUSTRALIA….
WE HAVE MORE TREES PER CAPITA THAN ANYWHERE ELSE
GIVE ME MY KARBON KREDIT KARD
IT HAS BEEN SAID A TARGET IS AROUND $40 A CO2 TON STORED ANNUALLY,
YOUR OWED THOUSANDS EVERY YEAR I RECKON..
BUT HANG ON ALL THE NATIONAL PARKS, LEASED LAND, AND CROWN COMMON WEALTH LAND PARKS AND EITHER SIDE OF EVERY ROAD AND RIVER HAS TREES…AND THIS IS A NATIONAL ASSET;
SAY WE USE 2500 TON EACH AND WE ARE TAKING IN TRIPLE OVER WHAT WE SPEND IE 7500 TON PA X $40 = $30,000 X 21 MILLION AUSSIES….
EVERY YEAR…
IT CAN ONLY GET BETTER NOW
Mick,
Do you have a copy of the ANU report? What is in this report could go a long way to undermining the whole carbon accounting scheme as it exists today.
The economic risk to every man, woman and child in Australia from a flawed carbon accounting system is extreme; so we have to raise every issue we can about the credibility and validity of such a scheme.
Incidentally where did your figures above come from in relation to the tonnage of carbon? In the Australian National Greenhouse Accounts, the last reported per capita carbon dioxide emission for 2005 was 27.6 tonnes.