The math goes like this. Australia is trying to figure out how to cut its emissions of greenhouse gases without crippling the economy. Cattle and sheep, by grace of their bodily functions, emit a lot of greenhouse gases—about 11% of Australia’s total emissions, and about two-thirds as much as all the cars and trucks in Australia. Kangaroos don’t, because they have a different digestive system. So if kangaroos replaced part of the cattle herds as a food source, Australia could cut its emissions by 16 million tons, or 3%, ranchers could earn hundreds of millions of dollars—and there’d still be plenty of juicy steaks.
That’s the argument laid out in a new paper arguing for a massive increase in ‘roos—and a cultural shift so that Aussies would feel comfortable grilling their national symbol. Raising kangaroos—whose numbers have been dwindling in recent years—would offer an out for the agricultural sector, which doesn’t have many other ways to cut its emissions. Replacing hard-hoofed cattle and sheep with kangaroos would also help tackle some of Australia’s other environmental problems, like soil erosion, the paper argues. Critics say they’ve struggled for years to preserve kangaroo populations. The plan’s proposed five-fold increase in kangaroos is too ambitious a jump, they say.
As has been reported previously here in NewsBusters, cows are the latest villain in causing global warming due to their natural flatulence. Ariel Schwartz at CleanTechnica.Com explains it a bit less delicately:
Methane from burps and farts of cows and sheep is an often overlooked contributor to global warming, but it accounts for 67% of Australia’s agricultural sector methane emissions. It also contributes 11% of Australia’s total emissions. In contrast, kangaroos barely produce any methane.
What does kangaroo even taste like? And can enough kangaroo meat be exported from Australia to save the planet? Not to worry. Ms. Schwartz explains that there are other non-flatulent alternatives:
Fortunately for those of us living outside of Australia, other countries are embarking on similar projects to reduce methane by farming low-emissions animals. Examples include springbok in South Africa, red deer in the UK, and bison in the United States. With CO2 emissions from other industries showing no signs of slowing down, eating a red deer burger doesn’t sound so bad.
I don't know about eating a red deer burger but your humble correspondent did once partake of a buffalo (bison) burger and it wasn't bad. But is Ms. Schwartz sure that buffalo are low in body "burps?" I have stood downwind from a few buffalo and the odor was, shall we say, overwhelming. Or is it that buffalo just have really bad B.O.?
