is an article titled, “Ag Sense: Carbon footprints: Fact vs. fiction.”
The article cites a Cornell study which promotes the use of rbST as salvation to dairy methane. Nowhere in the article is there any mention of rbST.
No one should get too excited about the merits of the study which is based upon skewing and assumptions. The study claims an average of 10 pound gain in milk production per cow from the use of rbST. However, there is no rbST bump in production per cow since rbST adaption. This is spite of Monsanto's claim for number of cows injected.
There is another serious problem with the study. Dropping technology and utilizing a pasture system will not take us back to 1944. I know of one organic Jersey herd with grazing and all home grown grain which pushes 15,000 pounds per cow.
According to some studies a well managed pasture system capture more air pollution per acre, in the Northeast, than an acre of rain forest.
Finally, with today's grain price and milk price, I would like to see the actual data, not assumptions, that rbST pays.