Conference Session C9
Paper #180
Disclaimer—This paper partially fulfills a writing requirement for first year (freshman) engineering students at the
University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering. This paper is a student, not a professional, paper. This paper is
based on publicly available information and may not provide complete analyses of all relevant data. If this paper is used for
any purpose other than these authors’ partial fulfillment of a writing requirement for first year (freshman) engineering
students at the University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering, the user does so at his or her own risk.
“COW FART BACKPACK”: A LONG SHOT FOR GREEN ENERGY
Courtney Emerson, [email protected], Vidic 2:00, Anna Harvey, [email protected], Mahboobin 4:00
Abstract— The “cow fart backpack” utilizes one of the most
basic natural processes, fermentation, to create a sustainable
energy source. This process, in which microorganisms break
down biodegradable materials and use the biogas product to
be converted into a new form of energy, is used in a methane
collecting backpack created by Argentina’s National Institute
of Agricultural Technology (INTA). The device connects the
cow’s bowels to a light, air-tight backpack that captures their
gas, up to 300 liters per day, to be converted into biofuel. It
utilizes the natural process of anaerobic digestion within
cows to sequester the harmful biogas which would otherwise
be emitted into the atmosphere. The biogas is then taken and
converted into electric or heat energy. While carbon dioxide
is also emitted through this process, the goal is to
considerably decrease the effects of methane gas emissions.
In this paper, the feasibility and effectiveness of the “cow
fart backpack” is investigated. The concern for the
environment is the motivating factor for this study, but the
invention also addresses the need for a reusable and
dependable energy source that can outlast the world’s
dependency on coal and fossil fuels. The biogas created
through this process has the ability to produce both light and
heat energy, aiding countries that do not have such luxuries.
It also has the potential to fully power the farms that these
bovines inhabit. However, this product does not aid the
problem of waste treatment, and would be difficult to
implement on farms throughout the United States.
The methane collection backpack is compared to multiple
alternative applications of both the natural and the
engineered processes of anaerobic digestion in order to
determine the most effective and ultimately most sustainable
solution to the mitigation of methane gas emissions. Though
it may not be the most thorough solution to the problem of
global warming, it has the potential to raise awareness of the
increasing impact of animal agriculture on the environment
and to inspire other innovations for a more sustainable
future.
Key Words—Anaerobic Digestion, Animal agriculture,
Anthropogenic, Bovine enteric fermentation, Carbon
footprint, Greenhouse effect, Methane gas
University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering 1
Submission Date 31.03.2017
THE EFFECTS OF GREENHOUSE GASES
The world is currently in the midst of the largest mass
extinction of species in 65 million years. Ice caps are melting,
causing ocean levels to rise along with the surface
temperature of the Earth [1]. Fifteen of the warmest sixteen
years ever recorded have all happened since 2001 [2]. Using
daily transportation, forgetting to turn off the lights in an
empty room, buying food that is not locally sourced, and not
recycling are all simple actions that threaten the environment
and release greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the atmosphere.
The world transportation sector as well as deforestation for
industrialization are well-known greenhouse gas contributors.
These GHGs are the cause of the rising climate. GHGs
consist of nitrous oxide and other fluorinated gases, but the
most threatening are carbon dioxide and methane gas. When
the sun sends down rays to heat the Earth, they are absorbed,
and the Earth then gives off radiation of its own [3]. These
gases have the intention of returning back into space. When
these GHGs are released into the atmosphere they absorb the
heat from the sun, rather than letting it pass through and exit
the atmosphere.
Climate change as a result of human actions is considered
a major environmental threat to Earth and its inhabitants.
Scientists are becoming increasingly concerned with our
industries’ effect on sustainability and are looking for new,
sustainable energy sources. Converting organic materials into
biofuel using anaerobic digestion is one method being
studied. One application utilizes biogas from organic
materials, specifically, animal waste. Methane gas, released
from cow flatulence and solid waste, has a global warming
potential 86 times that of CO2 on a 20-year time frame.
Although many argue that carbon dioxide is the most
threatening greenhouse gas, the effects of methane gas are
approaching more quickly and will cause much more harm in
the short-term [4]. The anthropogenic carbon footprint, the
amount of carbon compounds created by a particular person
in relation to their lifestyle and consumption of fossil fuels, is
expanding exponentially. Humanity’s largest and most
impactful habit is the consumption of animal products and its
perpetuation of animal agriculture.
Total elimination of GHGs is not possible at this time,
however, a large improvement can be made from limiting the
amount of gas that is released and converting it to energy
Courtney Emerson
Anna Harvey
before it escapes into the atmosphere. Mitigating the effects
of methane gas in the short-term while more long-term and
permanent solutions are developed for CO2 and other gases is
a good start to sustainable energy and a greener planet.
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
The term “anaerobic digestion” refers to both a natural
biological process and an engineered technology. The basis
of the process can be simulated to accomplish a variety of
goals. Most commonly, waste treatment and energy
production. Both cows and humans naturally employ this
mechanism as part of the digestive process. Stomach bacteria
break down food in the absence of oxygen to create a biogas
and harness energy.
Among the many applications of this technology are
anaerobic digestion chambers which mimic the natural
digestive process that occurs within the cow’s stomach by
decomposing biodegradable organic materials in the absence
of oxygen. This produces an organic fertilizer and biogas
consisting of methane, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and traces of
hydrogen sulfide [6]. The biogas product tends to be about
60% methane which can then be burned to generate
electricity and heat, or compressed for vehicle fuel. Inputs
can include “wasted or spoiled food, plant clippings, animal
manure, meat trimmings, and sewage” [7].
Effects of Methane Gas
It is important to make methane treatment a priority over
other greenhouse gases because of its abundance in the
United States alone. A farm of 2,500 cows produces as much
waste as a city of 411,000 people [5]. There is no standard for
efficient waste disposal methods and waste often runs into
watersheds creating ocean dead zones, water contamination
and illnesses. Animal agriculture contributes more to GHG
emissions than the entire world’s transport combined [1].
Emissions for agriculture are projected to increase 80% by
2050, while energy emissions are only projected to increase
by 20% over the next 20 years [2].
ANIMAL AGRICULTURE
The human carbon footprint is affecting the ozone layer at
a growing rate and animal agriculture is responsible for 18%
of greenhouse gas emissions, more than the combined
exhaust from all transportation [1]. The methane released
from cow flatulence and excrement is the number one
contributor.
According to Cowspiracy researchers, “13% of global
greenhouse gas emissions are caused by the transport sector,
whereas a gigantic 51% are from livestock and their
byproducts”[1]. This documentary brings to light the denial
of the main contributor to global warming and calls to action
the fight against methane.
FIGURE 1 [7]
The Process of Anaerobic Digestion
How Methane is Produced
The three stages of anaerobic digestion are the hydrolysis
stage, the acid-producing stage, and the methanogenic stage,
as highlighted in Figure 1 above. The process generates
useful biogas and leaves an effluent, such as the partially
digested liquid manure of a slurry which exits the digester
that can be used as a fertilizer [8]. In the first stage,
extracellular enzymes are produced by microorganisms in the
system to hydrolyze and break the organic materials down
into simple soluble compounds [7]. Then, in the second stage,
acid-forming bacteria convert those carbohydrates, proteins,
alcohols, and fats into volatile acids which are then, in the
third stage, converted into methane and carbon dioxide
biogas by methane-producing bacteria [9].
This process can be applied to various systems to
decompose materials and produce an energy source, but the
focus of this paper will be on anaerobic digestion as it relates
to the waste processing and gas collection of cow excrements
and emissions.
Bovines have four stomach compartments to digest their
food: the rumen, the reticulum, the omasum and the
abomasum [3]. The rumen is the largest compartment and can
hold as much as 500 gallons of ingested substances [3]. The
rumen, the main stomach of the cow, is inhabited by bacteria,
fungi, archaea, protists, and bacteriophages or viruses.
Inside the rumen, the microorganisms’ main function is to
aid in the digestion of the difficult components of plant fibers
and starches in their diet and to produce useful fatty acids.
The wide variety of microbes allow the diet of the cow to be
very diverse. Methanogens that live in the rumen and
contribute to digestion are responsible for producing large
amounts of methane gas in order to reduce the amount of
carbon in the rumen system for fermentation to take
place. Even after digestion, as bovine solid waste
decomposes, traces of methane are released into the
atmosphere. About 6% of what they eat gets lost as methane
gas through enteric emissions of belching and flatulence [3].
This natural process is known as anaerobic digestion.
2
Courtney Emerson
Anna Harvey
THE “COW FART BACKPACK”
enough to implement anaerobic digestion chamber plants,
there are only 15 that do so because alternative cheap energy
prices are already available [6].
Countries that have higher oil and energy prices and
cannot afford the start-up costs of installing a manure digester
could benefit from on-site energy production like the methane
collection backpack. Methane backpack creators state that
“energy obtained from cows would ensure that places not as
evolved would have energy to cook, light their homes and
even manage cars” [11].
INTA’s product is unique because, instead of trying to
remove already existing gas from the atmosphere, it
sequesters it at the source. The backpack also does not hinder
the cow’s ability to produce milk, therefore not impacting the
profitability of cow farming. The methane collection
backpack uses a simpler method than anaerobic digestion by
utilizing the bovine’s natural fermentation and digestion
processes and harnessing the naturally-produced biogases to
be converted into energy.
Because cows perform this process inherently, they are
able to maintain an optimal fermentation temperature of their
bodies, while a biogas plant requires extra energy in winter
months to maintain optimum temperature for digestion (see
Figure 2) [11]. Consequently, the methane collection
backpack would be more advantageous in places affected by
the seasons. However, in areas where the climate remains
constant year round this would not be a deciding factor.
Argentina’s National Institution of Agricultural
Technology (INTA) created a methane collection backpack,
they call the “the cow fart backpack”, that takes advantage of
the natural process of bovine enteric fermentation. The
technology connects a cow’s bowels to a light, air-tight bag
that rests on the cow’s back. To carefully isolate all the
methane, INTA technicians use a thin tube that connects
directly into the side of the bovine’s main stomach to fill the
plastic pack. The prototype can collect up to 300 liters of the
cow’s gas emissions per day to be converted into biofuel
[10]. Because bovine flatulence contains more than methane
alone, the initiative introduces monoethanolamine to extract
the carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide which allows for the
collected methane to be later converted into energy.
Technicians use a bubbling method similar to a purifier, to
filter out other gases, purifying and compressing the gas to
ensure that the final result has a concentration of at least 60%
methane, the minimum concentration necessary for energy
conversion [11]. The bubbles allow more gas surface to be
exposed to the compound so it can then be purified more
effectively. If the concentration is too low, the process is
repeated.
These 300 liters of sequestered bio-methane have the
potential to run a refrigerator at a temperature between 2 and
6 degrees Celsius for a full day [11]. Not only does this
invention respond to the shortage of renewable energy, but it
reduces the amount of methane released into the atmosphere.
The methane is captured directly at its source and
subsequently converted to electricity or heat energy.
INTA: Making a Statement
INTA has stated that the purpose of this product was to
find a way to capture the almost 300 L of methane gas
emitted daily by the average cow via flatulence and belching
and convert it into energy [10]. While they may have
accomplished this task, it is doubtful that the product will
ever be mass produced and implemented in dairy and meat
farms. According to INTA, it is economically and socially
unrealistic. The backpack does, however, have the potential
to provide inspiration for “piggyback” technologies that also
utilize enteric emissions from cows as a means of creating
light and heat energy.
FIGURE 2 [9]
How temperature relates to how the bovines’ rumen
digests
Economical and Practical Considerations
Societal Opposition
The methane collection backpack does not eliminate the
amount of solid waste produced and released into the
environment. In overpopulated areas where waste
management is lacking, the backpack would not be the most
efficient solution. Many rural countries like India face the
problem of odor and storage of cow manure and are in need
of a relatively cheap and lasting solution to the waste disposal
problem [6]. Of 3000 to 4000 farms in the United States large
In 2016, California Governor, Jerry Brown, attempted to
address the problem of methane emissions by signing a
regulation of cow flatulence into legislation to “curb these
dangerous pollutants and thereby protect public health and
slow climate change” [12]. Environmentalists supported this
because they felt that tackling the short-lived pollutant would
3
Courtney Emerson
Anna Harvey
“buy time” to develop more efficient and affordable
technology for long-term reduction of emissions. Republican
opposition of Brown voiced concerns that strict regulations
would hurt the agricultural business. The Director for the
National Federation of Independent Business labeled the
legislation as “a direct assault on California’s dairy industry”,
and that it was a waste to restrict “an arbitrary gas that
dissipates quickly” [12]. Business supporters reacted to this
government implementation with closed fists, naming it a
secretive way for the government to further increase the cost
of doing business in the state of California, a state responsible
for 20% of America’s milk production [13]. This, as well as
the belief that climate change is not a legitimate threat,
inhibits the evolution of inventions to solve the problem.
Because of this backlash, Brown eventually changed his
desired year of action from 2017 to 2024 [12].
Many animal rights activists suggest a turn away from the
consumption of animal products and the mass production of
animals raised for consumption as a whole, rather than
finding ways to limit the negative effects of farming these
animals. An article in The World Magazine argued that
“livestock (like automobiles) are a human invention and
convenience, not part of pre-human times” [14]. People for
the Ethical Treatment of Animals, PETA, are well known for
their battle against the consumption of animals as well as
their use in experiments. Many find the cannula tube that
connects the bovine’s main stomach to the backpack
inhumane, but according to INTA technicians, the cows do
not feel a thing [11].
The many opposing opinions of this technology would
pose problems for widespread implementation of the device,
however the purpose of INTA’s methane collection backpack
may already be served.
development of more practical solutions utilizing anaerobic
digestion technology.
OTHER APPLICATIONS OF THE
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION PROCESS
Methane gas is an unfortunate output of the lifestyle of
humanity and its perpetuation of animal agriculture and many
solutions are being developed to combat and mitigate its
effects. Among these solutions are anaerobic digestion of
cow manure and altered diets for livestock.
Method 1: Manure Digestion
Manure digestion utilizes the process of anaerobic
digestion to break down animal waste and turn it into biogas
and co-products which can be used as an organic fertilizer.
Waste is converted to a slurry containing up to 95% water,
which is then fed into the digester. This process is ideal for
dairy farms where there is a constant supply of manure and
where the biogas can be used directly for heating. In
Pennsylvania alone, dairy cows produce an estimated 5.5
million tons of reclaimable manure every year. In a study
done by the Pennsylvania State University, a report suggests
that, “Given the gas production rate of the Penn State
digester, a net daily biogas output of 40 cubic feet per cow,
Pennsylvania dairy farmers could produce 5 billion cubic feet
of biogas per year” [8]. This is enough to provide about 20%
of all energy used on Pennsylvania dairy farms [8].
Case Studies: Farm Power Northwest and Mason Dixon
Farm
An example of the utilization of anaerobic digestion of
animal wastes to create energy is a company called Farm
Power Northwest, operating at the intersection of sustainable
agriculture and renewable energy. They use an anaerobic
manure digester to harvest methane gas from cow manure,
which is then burned and converted to electricity for sale. The
processed manure, now free of pathogens and odor, is then
able to be sold and used as an organic fertilizer. Farm Power
partners with dairy farms who want to see long-term results
on the 30-year project investment. They build and run a
digester meant to last 30 years, which is typically paid off
after 10 years. This offers farmers a better alternative for
manure management and storage, as well as an extra source
of income, while also benefitting the community. This
company proves that farming can be “both economically
profitable and environmentally sustainable” [15].
Another farm which serves as an operating biogas plant is
the Mason Dixon farm in Adams County, Pennsylvania. This
farm has 3900 cows, producing approximately 45,000 gallons
in volume of manure every day [16]. The manure is
processed in an anaerobic fermentation tank which ultimately
yields about 5 tons of fertilizer per day. This contributes a
A CALL TO ACTION
The creation and development of a technology does not
always resolve a problem directly or right away. Sometimes,
the sole purpose of an innovation is simply to make a
statement, to increase awareness of an issue, or to start a
ripple effect. The methane collection backpack can be viewed
as one such invention. The almost comical and outlandish
concept of a cow wearing a backpack to collect its flatulence
is enough to attract the attention of people everywhere, in
addition to the staggering facts and statistics of the amount of
methane gas released by just one cow each day – up to 300 L.
Multiply this by the 1.5 billion cows on the planet and the
total methane emissions become a relatively large factor in
global warming [1].
The backpack can be seen as a call to action for engineers
and scientists worldwide who are concerned with the harmful
effects of methane gas. Potential for inspiration of new ideas
and solutions to a global problem is perhaps the greatest
impact that the methane collection backpack will have, as
actual implementation of the project would be unlikely.
Drawing attention to such an important issue could spark the
4
Courtney Emerson
Anna Harvey
fairly cost-effective and lasting solution to many
environmental problems associated with other methods of
manure disposal. The process of anaerobic digestion gives the
Mason Dixon farm the ability to limit their contributions to
environmental pollution. It also produces a source of
electricity, which they can sell to utility companies for about
6 cents per kilowatt-hour, and a constant supply of fertilizer
[6]. The benefits of using an anaerobic digester mechanism
outweigh the initial cost and set up and qualify the system to
be considered an effective and viable option for income and
waste management.
temperature to an optimum degree for fermentation by simply
maintaining homeostasis, the manure digester would require a
higher energy input in colder weather to reach the ideal
temperature, which would be more expensive [1]. Depending
on the size of the digester, both processes can produce almost
equal amounts of biogas, about 1200 L per cow each day,
based on the Penn State digester in Figure 3 [8].
Method 2: Altered Diets
Cows in America are generally restricted to a diet of corn,
soy, and grains which, although cost-efficient, can upset the
fermentation process in a cow’s rumen [16]. Cows are often
raised on this kind of diet because it is affordable, abundant,
and helps to fatten them up much more quickly than a natural
pasture grass diet. This increases the levels of methane
produced and, in turn, expelled through the natural anaerobic
digestion process. Altering the cow’s diet may be the solution
to limiting methane production.
Case Study: Stonyfield Greener Cow Program
Stonyfield Farm in Vermont is working with their global
partner, Groupe Danone, the French makers of Dannon
yogurt and Evian bottled water, to naturally decrease global
warming gases caused by bovine enteric emissions [17]. The
idea behind the project is to utilize the natural anaerobic
digestion processes of the cow, beginning with an alteration
of the diet. Scientists working with the group discovered that
in the spring, the cows were healthier and produced more
milk [17]. The connection was drawn to their diet, as spring
grasses are high in Omega-3 fatty acids. Feeding their cows a
diet high in Omega-3 sources, such as alfalfa, flax, and
grasses helps the digestive tract of the cows to function
better, thus producing lower levels of methane gas. Studies
have shown that the number of enteric emissions from the
cows have decreased by up to 18% [18]. The director of the
Stonyfield Greener Cow Program states, “If every US dairy
were to adopt this approach, in less than one year, the amount
of greenhouse emissions we could reduce would be the
equivalent of taking more than half a million cars off the
road!” [18].
FIGURE 3 [9]
The Penn State Digester
“Cow Fart Backpack” vs. Diet Change
Both the methane collection backpack and alterations to
the cow’s diet can minimize the amount of methane being
expelled into the environment directly. They also both utilize
the cow’s natural digestive process to either collect biogas or
to reduce it. While the diet change aims to naturally limit the
amount of methane being produced and ultimately released,
the methane collection backpack harnesses the biogas and
converts it to a useful energy.
Though diet change is a more immediate and perhaps
more plausible adjustment, both methods call for a very
drastic change. Implementation of the methane collection
backpack would likely elicit a wide range of responses from
society, and would probably be received differently in
various countries according to that culture’s “norm”. To have
a significant impact, the diet alteration would have to take
place on a greater scale, though it may not be economical for
farmers to execute because grain-based diets are cheap and
effective in terms of fattening the animals. One study by
Kansas State University found that the ratio of milk
production to feed price is significantly lower when the cows
are fed alfalfa hay than grain-based corn and soy [20].
Additionally, the price per ton of alfalfa in relation to average
grass hay is $110 to $65, according to the University of
Nevada [21]. This makes it difficult from a business
“COW FART BACKPACK” VS.
ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
The common thread between the methane collection
backpack and the manure digester is the process of anaerobic
fermentation. The anaerobic digestion tanks mimic the
natural process of anaerobic digestion taking place in the
cow’s body. Though the cow is able to regulate its body
5
Courtney Emerson
Anna Harvey
perspective to justify switching to higher amounts of alfalfa
and similar feeds although it is healthier for the cows.
Changing the food given to the cows may be viewed as a
more humane approach, and it provides health benefits to the
consumers of the animals. Both solutions are less expensive
and less technical than the manure digesters.
The methane collecting backpack also does not address
the problem that solid wastes poses on the environment. “130
times more animal waste than human waste is produced in the
United States -- 1.4 billion from the meat industry annually”
[22]. The backpack only extracts the gas released from the
bovine’s stomach and not the organic materials. Solid waste
also are a source of methane gas and carbon emissions, when
the waste decomposes it releases these gases into the
atmosphere. Additionally, they can runoff into watersheds
and cause ocean dead zones. Undeveloped countries face the
problem of managing or storing the solid waste and often
times it affects their environment. Animal waste impacts the
environment more so than human waste because human
waste is treated before discharge into the environment while
animal waste is either not treated at all or minimally treated
by storage methods used before disposal [22].
Although INTA’s innovation has sustainable potential, it
is not the final answer to the issue of greenhouse gas
emissions. With the increasing demand for renewable energy
and natural resources in transportation and the business
sectors of the world, it is imperative that the investigation for
more efficient means of green energy production continues.
SUSTAINABILITY
Sustainability is keeping in mind the state of the
environment by furthering technology and investing in the
future of innovations to conserve natural resources while
meeting the needs of the present and providing future
generations with the ability to do the same. Ensuring that the
Earth’s resources can sustain the constantly growing
economy, innovations and lifestyles of humanity is a crucial
reality that must be addressed. Humans are expected to
exceed the 565 gigaton CO2 emissions limit by the year 2030,
even if fossil fuels are eliminated from everyday lifestyle
[20]. In this world of innovation, it is important to spend
money and time on inventions that are going to build on
themselves like the methane collection backpack; this product
relies on a natural occurrence of bovine anaerobic
fermentation and digestion, a process that can always be
depended on. Fossil fuels are not going to supply the amount
energy that we need for much longer. Crude oil reserves are
vanishing at the rate of 4 billion tons each year, and
simultaneously humans are consuming 11 billion tons of
fossil fuel in oils [20].
Sustainability goes hand-in-hand with the objective of the
methane collection backpack, decreasing methane emissions
in order to produce long-term results. However, while the
process of containing methane before it can be released into
the environment and burning it off to create energy mitigates
the short-term effects of methane in the atmosphere, it also
produces excess carbon dioxide that threatens the health of
the Earth in the long-term. Though the methane gas is a more
immediate threat which can be addressed now, this is not a
complete solution to the problem. It can be considered an
improvement because even though other GHGs are being
created, the methane is being captured at its source. Because
there are not a lot of innovations to limit the amount of GHGs
in the atmosphere, this is one step in the right direction.
While the problem of long-term carbon dioxide effects still
exists, technology like the methane collection backpack will
provide some progress while the search for a more permanent
solution is in development.
Therefore, the methane collection backpack is not fully
sustainable because it also contributes to the problem of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Further research and
innovations are necessary to fully diminish the problem of
global warming, but the implementation of the methane
collection backpack could address the problem on a small
scale. Inventing with this long-term mindset is crucial to
making sure what moves technology forward does not set the
environment back.
CLEAN ENERGY: A LITTLE WAYS OFF
With the increase of animal agriculture and cow farming
expected for the coming future, the pressing demand for
solutions to atmospheric damage as a result of methane gas
emissions will become more crucial. Though the methane
collection backpack is a thought-provoking and innovative
approach to the mitigation of methane gas released through
bovine enteric fermentation, the process of manure anaerobic
digestion proves significantly more feasible for both
economic and cultural reasons. The initial installation costs
can be paid off relatively quickly by the income gained by
selling both the electricity and fertilizer produced. The issue
of waste disposal is also met by this technology. Although the
methane collection backpack does diminish the methane
released into the atmosphere, it does not address the growing
problem of odor, water pollution and means of disposal, and
the search for a more complete and sustainable solution must
forge ahead.
SOURCES
[1] K. Andersen, K. Kuhn . Cowspiracy: The Sustainability
Secret. 2014. Accessed 06.23.16.
[2] “Greenhouse Gas Emissions”. United States
Environmental Protection Agency. 2017. Accessed 01.25.17.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhousegases
[3] “Bovine Rumen”. Microbe Wiki. 2011. Accessed
02.28.17.
https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Bovine_Rumen
6
Courtney Emerson
Anna Harvey
[4] D. T. Shindell, G. Faluvegi, D. M. Koch, G. A. Schmidt,
N. Unger, S. E. Bauer. “Improves Attribution of Climate
Forcing to Emissions”. 10.30.09. Accessed 02.24.17.
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/326/5953/716.figuresonly
[5] “Animal Feeding Operations”. United States
Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed 02.25.17.
http://www.epa.gov
[6] J. Chakravarthi. “Biogas and Energy Production from
Cattle Waste”. Energy Conversion Engineering Conference,
1997.
[7] “Frequent Questions”. American Biogas Council.
Accessed
01.08.17.
https://www.americanbiogascouncil.org/biogas_questions.asp
[8] “Renewable and Alternative Energy”. PennState
Extension.
2017.
Accessed
01.08.17.
http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/energy/waste-toenergy/resources/biogas/projects/biogas-from-manure
[9] J. L. Gaddy, E. L. Park, and E. B. Rapp. “Kinetics and
Economics of Anaerobic Digestion of Animal Waste”. Water,
Air, and Soil Pollution 3 (1974) 161-169.
[10] T. Zareva. “This is How You Turn Cow Fart Gas Into
Energy”. Big Think. 2015. Accessed 01.08.17.
http://bigthink.com/design-for-good/this-is-how-you-turncow-fart-gas-into-energy
[11] “Gas from cows can feed a motor”. INTAinforma.
11.11.13.
Accessed
01.10.17.
http://intainforma.inta.gov.ar/?p=19084
[12] “California regulates cow farts”. New York Post.
09.21.2016.
Accessed
02.27.17.
http://nypost.com/2016/09/21/it-will-soon-be-illegal-forcows-to-fart-in-california/
[13] M. Chino. “Burp catching backpack traps and contains
methane gas released by cows”. Inhabitat. 07.25.08. Accessed
02.27.17. http://inhabitat.com/spiffy-backpack-traps-bovinegas/
[14] T. Johnson. “Livestock and Methane: What’s a
consumer to do?” Burlington Free Press. 06.15.14. Accessed
02.27.17.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2014/0
6/15/livestock-methane-consumer/10489267/
[15] K and D Maas. “How A Manure Digester Works”. Farm
Power
Northwest.
Accessed
01.25.17.
http://www.farmpower.com/index.html
[16] A. Kimble-Evans. “Is Pasture Grass the Solution to
Methane from Cows?”. 2011. Accessed 02.22.17.
http://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-andlivestock/raising-cattle/pasture-grass-methane-from-cowszmaz10djzraw
[17] L. Kaufman. “Greening the Herds: A New Diet to Cap
Gas”. The New York Times. 06.04.09. Accessed 02.26.17.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/us/05cows.html
[18] “Stonyfield Farm Takes on Cow Burps with First North
American Program”. PR Newswire. 06.08.09. Accessed
02.26.17.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-
releases/stonyfield-farm-takes-on-cow-burps-with-first-northamerican-program-62045727.html
[19] C. Mullins. B. Bradford. “Is alfalfa hay worth the
price?”.
12.13.10.
Accessed
03.01.17.
http://hoards.com/article-1869-is-alfalfa-hay-worth-the-price.html
[20] R. Goodland, J. Anhang. “Livestock and Climate
Change”.
2009.
Accessed
03.01.17.
http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20C
limate%20Change.pdf
[21] J. Balliette, R. Torell. “Alfalfa for Beef Cows”.
03.23.17.
https://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/files/ag/other/fs9323.p
df]
[22] L. Dyckman. “Anima; Agriculture: Waste Management
Practices”.
03.23.17.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/rc99205.pdf
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
D.O. Okuo, M.A. Waheed, B.O. Bolaji. “Evaluation of
Biogas Yield of Selected Ratios of Cattle, Swine, and Poultry
Wastes”. International Journal of Green Energy. Vol. 13, no.
4. 2016. pp. 366-72
M. Anitha, S.K. Kamarudin, N.S. Shamsul, N.T.Kofli.
“Determination of bio-methanol as intermediate product of
anaerobic co-digestion in animal and agriculture wastes”.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. Vol. 40. Sept. 21
2015. pp. 11791-9
S. Arici, G. Koçar. “The effect of adding maize silage as a
co-substrate for anaerobic animal manure digestion”.
International Journal of Green Energy. Vol. 12. 2015. pp.
453-60
S. F. Mayerle, J. Neiva de Figueiredo. “Designing optimal
supply chains for anaerobic bio-digestion/energy generation
complexes with distributed small farm feedstock sourcing”.
Renewable Energy. Vol. 90. May 2016. pp. 46-54
Y. Fubin, D. Hongmin, J. Chao, T. Xiuping, C.
Yongxing.
“Effects
of
anaerobic
digestion
on
chlortetracycline and oxytetracycline degradation efficiency
for swine manure”. Waste Management. Vol. 56. Oct. 2016.
pp. 540-6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to take this section to thank all of those that
contributed to the words written on these pages, and to those
that contributed to the spirit behind them. Thank you to the
English Writing Center for all of your great feedback, as well
as our chair, Ben for his expertise. Thank you to our co-chair
Lindsay, who went above and beyond, for her patience and
commitment. Thank you to the creators of Cowspiracy for
bringing this problem to light, and for inspiring this paper.
Thank you, Professor Prymus for your feedback and evolving
7
Courtney Emerson
Anna Harvey
us into better writers. And lastly, thank you to the cows.
Sorry we keep eating you.
8