I think I am confused because for me carbon neutral refers to energy sources in our grid. What did it take to create the fuel, what was the output of waste and what was the output of energy? It's a balance. Compared to fossil fuels, wind energy, nuclear etc. Theres a plethora of pros and cons, if we look under the "carbon" aspect some energy sources are very carbon neutral. Cows do not provide energy beyond calories, in order to make a cow it requires many carbon emissions. A plant soaks up pure c02 from the atmosphere. Burning it releases that with very little in between. Every time you convert energy waste is released. You want to minimize conversion and maximize efficiency in your energy grid. If carbon is becoming a problem you can compare your sources. Biomass definitely has many cons, so it becomes very confusing to try and argue about environment as a whole or morality, which is what politicians frequently do. It makes people angry and muddies the subject.
Cows contribute to the carbon cycle a certain amount, when do they take carbon away from the cycle? And how much? They should take out almost the same amount of carbon that they contribute from the cycle in order to be neutral.