[Pooeypants]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Yes, if they're not a hypocrite.

I'm not quite understanding your logic here, surely that's a fallacy? I mean, does that automatically make Xyzer and Mr Vicchio anti-environmentalists?

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Yes. So, why won't you do as much as you can at your level? You do want the government and corporations to do as much as they can to address the problem, don`t you? Or do you want them to only give it half effort?

For the same reason why I am still using a computer,
You've yet to show me the maths of how much livestock contributes to global warming.

Now, I'm not sure if you can read this (I still have University journal access) but this article outlines the emission culprits.
I shall post some excerpts from it

1. Global Methane Emission 1. Precision of available methods allows estimates of total global methane emission to vary between 400 and 600 Tg yr -1. About 80% of that emission is biogenic, with major contributions by ruminant livestock, wetlands and rice paddies, reflecting the narrow relation between methane emission and population increase. 2. Animal Methane Emission 2a. Methane emission from ruminant livestock amounts to 80 Tg yr -1 -4- 15% (mean value -4- variation coefficient). Problems for a more precise estimation, especially for developing countries carrying the majority of the ruminant population, relate to the characterisation of cattle populations and the correction for intake restriction bias. 2b. Monogastric animals contribute less to methane emission than ruminants. Swine, equine and humans are estimated to produce 1.0, 1.7 and 0.3 Tg yr -1 respectively. Methanogenesis in the hind gut is most likely controlled by a genetic predisposition and may be affected by the presence of non methanogenic hydrogen sinks. 2c. Insects, including termites, may theoretically produce substantial amounts. Estimates vary between 8 and 380 Tg yr -1 . Actual emission is probably determined to a large extent by oxidation of methane. .... 3b. Rice paddies contribute to methane emission by about 60 (+ 40) Tg yr -l' High organic inputs stimulate emission. High emission rates coincide with high rates of water surface flux.

Further more, this paper from 1994 gives a better insight into the problem and even mentions possible solutions;

Modest reductions in methane emissions are possible with current technologies, while maintaining or enhancing productivity. Of most general use, but with particular application to developing countries, is to enhance productivity by improving diet quality, eliminating nutrient deficiencies, and using growth promotants and appropriate genotypes. Enhancing level of productivity decreases the maintenance subsidy and, thus, decreases the obligatory methane emissions from fermentation of the feed associated with animal maintenance. Other additional strategies are available including the increased use of ionophores that will reduce total feed fermented and decreased methane per unit of product. Methane can be reduced with diets containing higher levels of nonstructural carbohydrates through earlier harvesting of higher quality forages or the inclusion of starchy feeds that act to enhance propionic acid and dilute maintenance subsidy. Methane production per unit of animal product formed will also be reduced by any method that will reduce the excess lipid content of meat or milk products. Longer term future technologies may develop methods to alter the microbial population in a way that would provide a hydrogen sink of more usefulness to the animal and less damage to the environment.

So there are alternate methods to reducing livestock emissions.