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)

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)

Reduce/reduction

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

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)

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)

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)

Connection to nitroglycerin?

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

Your article is newer than the EFSA approval, so that's one reason. --Artoria2e5 🌉 15:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

LLM template removed

I have removed the LLM template from the top of the article because I have gone through and vetted all sources, and corrected statements that were not supported by the cited references. However, any editor knowledgeable in this area should go through and check everything again in case I missed anything. This was a difficult case of all references existing and being on-topic, but not quite supporting the statements they were cited for. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 21:29, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Citations

The section “Environmental impact” cites journalists in dairy industry newsletters, not actual scientific studies. “A comprehensive study” is an article about one dairy producer, and “The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has concluded” links to another article.

The statements may be true, but the citations don't back them up. PlusPeter (talk) 15:39, 26 May 2026 (UTC)