Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (174072)	12/28/2008 4:55:04 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Respond to of 306849

actually they're probably carbon 'negative'.... think of all the fertilizer :)

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (174072)	12/28/2008 5:14:52 PM
From: coug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I believe Jorj, that animals such as bovines take carbon, that is sequestered in vegetation and is so tied up so that does not create any greenhouse gasses themselves and turns it into methane which is a nortorious green house gas.. It's not the carbon per se, it's the form or carbon compound it is in.. Some plants will emit some carbon, I believe, only if they become saturated with CO2 by green house gasses.. Also in places like the Amazon, where great rainforests are, they act as "carbon sinks" taking out CO2 and sequestering it in the plant.. Now when they are slashed and burned to raise cattle..A triple negative to the environment is achieved, removal of the lungs, releasing CO2 while burning and replacing it with a species that continually emits methane..:( Anyway that's my thoughts..