Is Kangaroo the only animal that does not produce ANY green house gases?
I am a devoted environmentalist and was vegetarian for almost a year because of the impact raising livestock had on the environment.
Now I have decided to become what I like to call "Kangatarian", which means "Vegetarian who eats kangaroo", because kangaroos produce no GHG (Green House Gas). But now I would like to know if there are any OTHER animals that produce NO GHG.
Kangaroos do produce greenhouse gases. Not much, but some. A cow produces 1.84 metric tons of greenhouse gases per year, compared to a kangaroo which produces seven pounds.
Eeww! Sorry, never smell any animal’s gas.
http://www.yisdesign.com
I’m sorry, I was under the impression kangaroo’s farted (and thus release methane). Was I wrong in that assumption.?
Kangatarien……yare we’ll all start eating roos…..but then think about how many roos equates to 1 cow…..about 55 would be my guess…….and about 3 times as long to make kill weight…….roo GHC’s rising ahh…..and think about the poor M’clouds daughters trying to handle a pen full of roos……they have enough trouble with sheep…..dont get me wrong…..there’s a market for roo meat and I know your not 1 of these ENVIROS trying to kill our rural industry…..
CO2 is a green house gas and all animals including kangaroos release it when they exhale.
Most marsupials produce minimal greenhouse gas-that includes Koalas! I think it would be great if Australia could start farming Kangaroos for food, in some areas of the country they are in plague proportions and cost the cattle industry millions of dollars. Also they literally survive on just grass and water(don’t need much water either) and have one of the leanest meats on the planet, reach maturity rapidly and taste good too!
Cats.
Remember it depends on how they’re fed.
If they’re fed with food that is grown with chemicals and farmed using oil-fueled machinery then they will generally be less efficient than eating that food directly.
If they’re grazing animals, then they’re probably better.
All mammals breath, hence all mammals produce CO2. The environazis say that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. So therefore the Kangaroo, which is a mammal, does in fact produce green house gases
EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW disgusting! Who the hell would eat a kangaroo???????? YUCK!
If kangaroo was farmed to the extent that beef cattle and sheep and pigs are for human consumption, then there would be some serious environmental issues to be sure. The kangaroo population in Australia has thrived with all of the grain and other farming that is widespread, and Kangaroo meat is definitely a massive resource that could be utilised and managed to not threaten the species.
The meat is lean and healthy (and no more disgusting than a lamb chop of steak or chicken breast or piece of fish) My family eats kangaroo, bought from a local butcher, on a regular basis. Cooked rare on the barbecue just like a steak, or slow cooked in a casserole.
All animals will produce some greenhouse gases, i guess it is just a question of how much each produces really.
If you are as devoted as you say, which I doubt, you should know that humans produce far more methane gas than a kangaroo, lamb, chicken, or just about any other creature that is not bovine.
So, to save the planet, if you really are concerned about that, all humans should be eliminated.
In other words, s*** or get off the pot.