Since methane is an extremely potent but short-lived greenhouse gas, cutting methane emissions soon is the strongest lever available to slow global warming in the coming decades. 158 countries, including the U.S., signed the Global Methane Pledge, each committing to cutting their methane emissions 30% by 2030 (known as “30x30”) from 2020 levels.
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110
Leakage of fossil-based methane from gas wells is certainly contributing to methane emissions that are adding carbon to Earth's atmosphere. But biogenic methane and carbon dioxide have been generated for eons of time in saltwater marches and freshwater swamps the world over. These "biogenic" gases do NOT contribute additional carbon to Earth's atmosphere. Biomass is created via photosynthesis year after year, century after century, consuming CO2 from the atmosphere and being converted to biomass; when this biomass dies and decays in swamps, marshes, and on land, the biomass decays and the carbon is simply returned to the atmosphere as CO2, or as CH4 which then is converted back to CO2, all as part of the biogenic carbon cycle. So, food wastes and animal manures are simply part of the biogenic carbon cycle; as the decompose, they are simply returned to the atmosphere, for another round of the biogenic carbon cycle. They do NOT contribute MORE carbon to the atmosphere, and thus, do NOT contribute to climate change. But, if anaerobic digestion (in landfills or industrial vessels) can convert wastes to RNG - which is renewable methane, then the RNG can be used as a renewable fuel, instead of burning fossil based natural gas. That is why RNG is a "renewable" fuel - the AD fermentation generates as much, or more, CO2 as methane, but neither is ADDING carbon to the atmosphere, just recycling it. Also, when the RNG is burned for fuel, the resulting CO2 from combustion does NOT contribute to climate change; burning RNG to CO2 does NOT add more CO2 to the atmosphere, it just recycles it back to the atmosphere from whence it came. The only CO2 that is ADDING MORE CO2 to the atmosphere is the burning of FOSSEL carbon, as coal, fossiel natural gas, and petroleum. Let's understand the difference between FOSSIL Carbon and Biogenic Carbon. It is the FOSSIL source of the carbon that is driving climate change, NOT the burning of Biogenic carbon sources. As scientists, let's stop spreading mis-information! There is a very important difference between FOSSIL and BIOGENIC Carbon!!!! Thanks for listening. Kirk Cobb - retired Biofuels Process Design Engineer 651-894-2664; White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110