Will Wonders Never Cease …

Helping The Environment 

 

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “Will Wonders Never Cease …

    • Reading the article did put me in mind of modifying cigarettes to make them only half as likely to cause cancer. Yes, it would be beneficial if we could do it, but there’s no substitute for quitting smoking.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Hello Ark. I got a notice on my phone while I was getting my allergy shots that vegetarian alternatives for meat were maybe not healthy for humans. I did not get a chance to read it yet. Have you seen anything like this lately? Have you tried this “impossible burger” meat alternative? I have heard good things about it and I am thinking of ordering some off Amazon. Here where I live you can not get decent alternatives, you have to order them and have the shipped. Hugs

      Like

        • Hello Ark. Not sure, I have not had a chance yet to go back through my notices and look it up. I get so many news notices I can only read about a 3rd of them a day. Normally if it is something real / important then other news agencies pick it up and I get multiple notices, which I did not with this one. Hugs

          Like

  1. or, as some scientists have realized, trees are possibly the answer, since they take in CO2 and exhale Oxygen. If we could stop deforesting everything in sight, it would go a long way to help, and be a lot quicker than breeding sweeter cows. and yeah, vegetarians help too.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. I have a huge problem with this. No one knows what the effect on the environment will be one hundred years from now, or 1000. Humans love playing god, changing nature at every turn. It is much easier to change humans than it is to change nature. We may think we understand the forces of nature, but we are kidding ourselves. Look at all the problems we have already caused. Where are all the bees? What is going to happen to all the plants bees pollinate?Scientists are not gods, they cannot predict all the outcomes of the changes they want to make. I will make one prediction, and I know it will come true. One change is going to affect our planet in ways we will regret as long as we survive. We can make all the good changes we want. It will only take one bad one to destroy our world.
    Chances are we already made it!

    Liked by 1 person

    • It isn’t just bees that pollinate plants, any small insect rooting around in a flower will pick up pollen and transfer it. Butterflies, carpenter bees, even ants and hummingbirds…

      Like

      • True, Judy, but I was using the bees as an exsmple or symbol of all those little guys. This is July, and I have seen but one bee in the yard I am responsible for this year, and no butterflies or wasps. Hardly even any mosquitoes, and they are generally ubiquitous. The yard Is but a small bit of the land around me, but it is representative of the world. Insects are disappearing, which should be impossible.

        Like

    • Cows and other livestock have already been changed by humans over millennia of selective breeding. When, as in the case of Aotearoa New Zealand, the entire economy is based around agricultural exports, especially meat wool and dairy, we have no option but to drastically reduce the production of methane per animal. Changing a nation’s source of income and its associated commercial and social infrastructure, cannot be completed overnight without major social upheaval and draconian intervention by government, so in the short term we’re stuck with an economy based on livestock production.

      If we’re to meet our commitments on reducing the emission of greenhouse gases, we must either cull our livestock population by tens of millions of animals (can you imagine the uproar animal rights activist would create over that) or find ways of reducing their methane and nitrous oxide emissions. About 43 per cent of New Zealand’s greenhouse gases are caused by methane and 11 per cent by nitrous oxide.

      I’m sure we will be able to develop alternative forms of income other than livestock production if the need arises, but given our geographic isolation, and the distance from potential markets, we need to produce products for which customers are prepared to pay a significant premium over the normal price. That type of market takes decades to develop even if we know what might be viable alternatives to livestock.

      Short term (I’m thinking 25 – 50 years) reducing the methane emissions each animal produces is more achievable. Whether it will be through selective breeding, change of livestock diet, change in the gut flora, a vaccination, or something else is yet to be determined, but a number of research projects appear promising. Unless we change our attitude towards genetic modification technology, that option that will remain off the table.

      When you realise that, per capita, we export twice as much as America, and most of that is based on agriculture, you’ll understand that bovine burping is a serious topic in this part of the world.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Cows and other livestock have already been changed by humans over millennia of selective breeding.

        True. Most domesticated animals have been changed dramatically from their natural ancestors — especially the most popular one, the dog. Domesticated animals are already more human artifacts than products of nature. Most of them could hardly survive outside the systems humans have built to exploit them. So it doesn’t make much sense to object to yet further modifications of things which are already the product of massive human modification over millennia.

        More broadly, the option of “just leaving nature alone” expired a long time ago. We’ve already changed the world far too much for that. We are controlling this planet now. We can control it wisely or stupidly or negligently, but we can’t stop controlling it. The very concept doesn’t meaningfully exist any more.

        We can’t feed eight billion people by going back to nature, much less accommodate the aspirations of people in underdeveloped countries for a decent material standard of living. Doing that sustainably is going to take more technology and innovation, not less.

        Liked by 3 people

  3. Just like human beings, blame the cows. Hey, we all exhale CO2, which is an enormous amount on a yearly basis. Why not breed people to exhale less CO2 (plus our farts contain methane and hydrogen, which makes them quite flammable, ask any proctologist).

    Liked by 3 people

  4. While methane is a more powerful greenhouse gases and having methane build up in the atmosphere is a concern, cows are only a small contributor of methane overall. My understand that most of the greenhouse effect enhancement from livestock has more to do with transportation over the methane release by cows.

    In general, I’m all for any measure could help, but as mak says there are bigger steps we can take to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and we did those, we won’t need to further engineer the cow.

    Liked by 1 person

Take Some Time To Share Your Thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.