Burning methane would be part of the natural carbon cycle, so there's not a net increase in CO2.
I doubt that farmers normally do a lot with that.
If it's spread around the field, in manure, then it's fertilizer.
However, a considerable amount of methane is added to the environment in cattle burps.
(Yeah, I thought it interesting too, but with a 4 chamber stomach, the methane is released long before it gets to the end of the digestive tract.)
And, there's not a lot that anyone can do about cows burping.
However, it's not impossible that the Harris ranch feed lot, just east of I-5 has enough manure, in a small enough area, that it would be profitable for them to do something. They really cannot just leave it all there. (If you've driven I-5 between Sacramento and LA, it's not hard to find. Your nose will tell you when you're getting close.)
From an energy efficiency point of view, it is a good thing, using what energy is available to cut costs makes sense, from a anti pollution point of view, not so good, the methane is burnt producing some CO2, however if not burnt it would soon oxididize to CO2 anyway.
Before man came along the American plains had 6 million bison and millions of other herbivores (much more than the cattle we have now) producing tons of methane, it didn't seem to hurt the environment then.
I am a native Californian. I've been in the area many times. I have also read that many farmers have switched to grass, barley feeding and not corn as studies have shown it to help with the burps. Fingers crossed.
"Reducing methane output" is a smokescreen. What the Government and Earth-Worshippers are really trying to do is ban the eating of meat (1st Timothy 4:1-5, KJV). Congress will be "exempt," of course.
I have been reading a little about anaerobic digestion helping with converting methane into energy but wondering if it is being use and how effective they are.
