== Cow flatulence/methane and global warming == 

  
 Hello. There needs to be more discussion of the impact of methane on global warming (see http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/30/global-methane-initiative-moves-forward/). Cow flatulence is one main contributor. Could someone add a section on this? I can't seem to add one.    
 :It's covered in the  Feedback section "Human activity since the Industrial Revolution has increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, leading to increased radiative forcing from , methane, tropospheric ozone, CFCs and nitrous oxide. The concentrations of  and methane have increased by 36% and 148% respectively since 1750. These levels are much higher than at any time during the last 800,000 years, the period for which reliable data has been extracted from ice cores." 
 :For more detail see Greenhouse gas#Anthropogenic greenhouse gases. . . ,   
 ::I saw this, but methane/cow flatulence should be given a standalone section. Methane has a higher GWP, and it is growing at a faster rate than CO2.    
 ::: I'm not opposed to discussing methane in more detail somewhere, but I don't think a stand alone section in this article makes sense because we don't have any other gas-specific stand alone sections in this article.  Seems like the greenhouse gas article is a good contender.  I suggest you move this conversation to that talk page.     
 ::::While attributing methane emissions largely to cow flatulence is entertaining, it also appears to be inaccurate. Atmospheric methane covers the topic in more detail, and notes: "Approximately 5% of the methane is released via the flatus, whereas the other 95% is released via eructation." That article could doubtless be improved. As for this overview article, there seems to be no mention of the issue of Global-warming potential which might be useful in explaining the varying significance of different greenhouse gases over time, with methane having much more effect in the short term, but then being removed from the atmosphere in reactions which form carbon dioxide which then has a much longer term effect. . ,   

 :::::  IMO, someone should start the formal merge proposal for the article for Global-warming_potential being merged into the article for Greenhouse gas, and details of GWP should go there.  In addition, there might be some mention that many researchers find GWP an inadequate tool and are calling for a different metric.  See for example [].  For purpose of this article, today I added a sentence including a wiki link to Global-warming_potential in the lede to external forcings subsection.  Does this resolve the matter for this article?