> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294032,00.html

For those who are link-click challenged.

    "Researchers in Norway claim a grown moose can produce 2,100 kilos 
of
methane a year, equivalent to the amount of CO2 caused by an
8,077-mile car trip, ... methane ... considered more harmful to the
environment than carbon dioxide. There are estimated to be more than
100,000 moose in Norway."

That's about 800 million car-miles equivalent PA.
Population of Norway is about 4.5 million.
So that's about ~~~ 200 car-miles/person/year equivalent due to Moose
emissions.
Maybe 500-1000 miles pa per car depending on the Norwegian car:person
ratio.
If the average car travels 10,000 miles pa (a very rough assumption)
then Norwegian Meese may be argued to contribute 5 to 10% of the
amount of GW effect that Norwegian cars do. More if miles pa is lower.
Less if cars per capita are higher.
ie significant but not large wrt car effects. Tackling Meese (could be
painful) and ignoring cars would produce minimal change,. Tackling
cars (even more painful) and ignoring Meese would be more effective.
Ignoring both may yet prove to be of minor consequence in the greater
GW scheme of things. And may not.

All this depends on Methane being in fact equivalent to whatever the
Methane:CO2 ratio is that is currently used. (About 20:1?). Peter? the
other day noted that Methane breakdown in the atmosphere reduces its
long term contributions to putative GW whereas CO2 undergoes no
equivalent time degradation so this high ratio may be suspect.

All the above is taking as accepted holy writ the postulate that CO2
is doing something which Methane does even better.



            Russell 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist