EPA Propose Bovine Flatulence Tax

EPA Proposes “Cow Tax”

The Environmental Protection Agency issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking public comment on whether it is appropriate to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from automobiles under the Clean Air Act. In order to regulate automobile emissions, the EPA would first have to make a finding that all greenhouse gases endanger public health and safety and should be classified as a “pollutant.”

Essentially, the EPA is ruling on whether or not GHG emissions should be classified as endangering public safety. If that finding is made, all GHGs including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide would have to be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

The problem with this approach is that once an endangerment finding is made, other provisions of the Clean Air Act are automatically triggered, creating much broader, costly regulation of other sectors of the economy, including agriculture.

As the proposal stands today, the permit fees would equate to a “tax” of $175 per dairy cow and $87.50 per beef cow.


That’s alota’ moola for cow farts.

Not a great surprise. It will be interesting to see what the Obama administration does about this. That tax will just be added to the cost of food, and no mistake about it. Where’s all the concern for the poor in this?

I’d be interested in seeing the EPA finding that bovine flatus is a significant source of methane.

Sounds like another denier fairy tale to me.

Well, we see a lot of people talk about bovine-produced methane, and I think the OP’s point is that once one defines naturally-occuring gases that are produced in great abundance as “pollutants” there can be untoward results. (And it’s belching, not flatulence that produces it, though it’s more fun to talk about flatulence.)

Ok - flatulence is a just a little more fun to talk about :smiley:
What follows a bovine belch tax? Sheep are belching too.

Apparently, just doing a better job of sealing the natural gas delivery systems would yield better results, in a much shorter time, with no required changes in lifestyles or economic impact (other than 4% greater efficiency in use of methane).

Do that, first.

On the lighter side. LOL

How many cows have anything of value to take for non payment?:rolleyes:

That,s a load of B.S.! sorry, couldn,t resist

You make a conclusion in order to support your rhetorical question. It is folly to assume Obama will support a tax on cow belching. Beyond folly, actually.

Where’s the text of the proposal itself?

Here’s a couple of fun facts to consider:
In 1997 methane from livestock manure was 17 million metric tons. It has steadily increased, mostly because of increases in swine population.

The proportion of hogs rasied on large farms has jumpted from 30 to 50%.

A typical dairy cow makes over 100 pounds of manure per day.

The manure is free (so to speak) natural fertilizer.

As to the big industrial farms most of them have air scrubbers and lots of environmental regulations in place already. They are also the largest beneficiaries of the farm subsidizes. We need both the large industrial farms and the small local family farms to provide for our needs.

Federal farm subsidizes should only go to the small family farms IMHO, this provides green space nearer to the cities and stops urban sprawl. Family farms provide fresher local foods and do not cause the massive transportation costs that are added to our food costs. This would also make the big industrial farming businesses more cost conscious.

They better encourage more cows to produce more methane; it just might put the electrical companies in a bind:




You can find lots more like this if you Google it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.