Talk:3-Nitrooxypropanol

Emissions for production of 3-nop?

can anyone find the real emissions for production of 3-nop? Each cow needs to consume approximately 92kg of 3-nop to apparently "save 1ton of carbon" 2A00:23C6:9922:1E00:3B11:1B16:FA62:57DE (talk) 09:51, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't seem accurate. Daily dosing is about 1.4 grams per cow, or about a half kilo per year (this includes non-lactating periods, so it would be less than this.) Each dairy cow emits about 100kg of methane per year, or ~2.5 tons of CO2 equivalent using the 25x multiplier for methane.

So it's more like 0.6kg of 3NOP to avoid a ton of CO2 equivalent emissions. Organic chemical production is not that energy intensive, about 3 tons of CO2 eq. per ton of product. So the 3NOP carbon footprint per cow is very very small - about 1.8kg to save a ton of emissions. 2001:BB6:18E5:8700:CDCB:B9BF:1128:D998 (talk) 13:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reduce/reduction

Methane is produced by REDUCING CO2, a net REDUCTION. --Smokefoot (talk) 13:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long term effects

Is there any data on the long term effects of 3-NOP on humans and the livestock? It is a very simple molecule, there could have been some research on it before. 176.88.39.125 (talk) 18:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The safety studies on 3NOP show that it is fully metabolized in the cow's digestive system - there is no 3NOP in produced milk. 2001:BB6:18E5:8700:CDCB:B9BF:1128:D998 (talk) 12:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Took me about a second to find at least three studies: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2023-24198, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11123540, https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8726 . The bit saying it has not been studied is original research, see Wikipedia:No_original_research. cypher_zero_∅ 10:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Connection to nitroglycerin?

This compound is clearly related to nitroglycerin, which is being produced at scale for human use. Nitroglycerin actually does inhibit methanogenesis[1], so why is this compound preferred? 62.198.169.117 (talk)

Your article is newer than the EFSA approval, so that's one reason. --Artoria 2e5 🌉 15:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]