Articles like this are dumb... This just puts the burdon on everyday people who are doomed to fail if they try. If the entire world turned vegan would it make a difference? Rather, how about some tough legislation against the top polluting companies responsible for climate change... That would mean some politicians would have to refuse a few bribes, tough I know, but any level of effort here will create more results than a world giving up meat
If the entire world turned vegan would it make a difference?
...yes. Plainly and obviously. Most land use would be gone overnight. Deforestation would stop immediately as would the second largest source of methane, one of the largest sources of NO2, and billions of tonnes of CO2 per year (about a quarter of all emissions). No other single initiative other than maybe ending urban driving would come close.
If you're in the global top 50% there is absolutely nothing stopping you from switching to a primarily plant based diet, and if you're in the bottom 50% you probably don't eat enough meat to be a major impact.
I’m not taking a side, I’m just here saying that I have no idea which one of those two options, kill the car or stop eating meat, most people would be more amenable to doing. On its face I think most would rather give up cars but I’m really not sure. Both have a better shot than guns(at least in the US)
We’re so boned
The worst part is neither are even remotely economically viable without massive subsidy. Just redirecting those subsidies to alternatives would solve 75% of emissions overnight.
In both of these cases, and in fact regarding a lot of things, climate activists are going at this TOTALLY FUCKING BACKWARDS.
OF COURSE we're boned, we asked people to actively make their own lives worse. We should have known that was never going to happen.
Whats the actual, practical solution? Science, same as it always has been. Lab grown meat. Electric vehicles & better urban transit. Renewable energy.
The solution is not to make people's lives worse but to design ways that will reduce emissions without requiring any actual sacrifice from everyday people (except higher prices). Because everyday people will not sacrifice. It will never happen.
I wouldn't go as far as say that deforestation would stop since half of it is for products not for animals, like soybeans and palm oil.
"80% of the world's soybean crop is fed to livestock, especially for beef, chicken, egg and dairy production" - WWF
Ok I didn't know that.
Both are used for animal feed, and the vast tracts of no longer needed crop land would displace other demand.
Where are all the crops going to grow if land use and deforestation would disappear overnight?
On the billions of acres no longer needed to grow animal feed for a small minority of global calories and protein.
You're trying to pretend meat isn't over and order of magnitude less efficient than other agriculture and it's just making you look foolish.
So then what happens to all the cattle if this comes to be? Your scenario assumes they all just evaporate into the ether never to be seen again.
The industry kills 90 Billions each year. The IPCC calculates with a decline over 20 years. So maybe people pay next year to only raise and kill 60 Billions and so on.
Farmers already kill them if they have a financial incentive like raising feed prices or falling meat/dairy prices.
Same thing that happens to every generation before them. Projecting your own complete lack of critical thinking or imagination onto others doesn't mean they're actually as stupid as you make them out to be.
Animal products are incredibly harmful to the climate and are inherently wasteful.
Those corporations get their money from people like you.
Yes regulation would be the best to stop them but you know that's not gonna happen any time soon, especially when everyone refuses to change their own habits, politicians aren't gonna force through regulations that get people angry because they want their steaks.
Why do you want to continue to participate in something bad until it's legally not allowed anymore?
Why not do what you can (stop consuming animal products) while also advocating for regulation and political change?
What does holding evil corporations accountable look like if not refusing to give them your money?
Nahhhh, per the people in this thread you are personally responsible for climate change!
If the entire world turned vegan would it make a difference?
Yes, yes it would. About 14.5% of CO2e is from the meat industry, by changing our habits, we would make the world a better place. I'm not saying policy is not the most important factor, but if people are not willing to change their habits, this disaster will not be solved.
Articles like this are dumb... This just puts the burdon on everyday people who are doomed to fail if they try. If the entire world turned vegan would it make a difference? Rather, how about some tough legislation against the top polluting companies responsible for climate change... That would mean some politicians would have to refuse a few bribes, tough I know, but any level of effort here will create more results than a world giving up meat
https://peri.umass.edu/greenhouse-100-polluters-index-current
...yes. Plainly and obviously. Most land use would be gone overnight. Deforestation would stop immediately as would the second largest source of methane, one of the largest sources of NO2, and billions of tonnes of CO2 per year (about a quarter of all emissions). No other single initiative other than maybe ending urban driving would come close.
If you're in the global top 50% there is absolutely nothing stopping you from switching to a primarily plant based diet, and if you're in the bottom 50% you probably don't eat enough meat to be a major impact.
I’m not taking a side, I’m just here saying that I have no idea which one of those two options, kill the car or stop eating meat, most people would be more amenable to doing. On its face I think most would rather give up cars but I’m really not sure. Both have a better shot than guns(at least in the US)
We’re so boned
The worst part is neither are even remotely economically viable without massive subsidy. Just redirecting those subsidies to alternatives would solve 75% of emissions overnight.
In both of these cases, and in fact regarding a lot of things, climate activists are going at this TOTALLY FUCKING BACKWARDS.
OF COURSE we're boned, we asked people to actively make their own lives worse. We should have known that was never going to happen.
Whats the actual, practical solution? Science, same as it always has been. Lab grown meat. Electric vehicles & better urban transit. Renewable energy.
The solution is not to make people's lives worse but to design ways that will reduce emissions without requiring any actual sacrifice from everyday people (except higher prices). Because everyday people will not sacrifice. It will never happen.
I wouldn't go as far as say that deforestation would stop since half of it is for products not for animals, like soybeans and palm oil.
"80% of the world's soybean crop is fed to livestock, especially for beef, chicken, egg and dairy production" - WWF
Ok I didn't know that.
Both are used for animal feed, and the vast tracts of no longer needed crop land would displace other demand.
Where are all the crops going to grow if land use and deforestation would disappear overnight?
On the billions of acres no longer needed to grow animal feed for a small minority of global calories and protein.
You're trying to pretend meat isn't over and order of magnitude less efficient than other agriculture and it's just making you look foolish.
So then what happens to all the cattle if this comes to be? Your scenario assumes they all just evaporate into the ether never to be seen again.
The industry kills 90 Billions each year. The IPCC calculates with a decline over 20 years. So maybe people pay next year to only raise and kill 60 Billions and so on.
Farmers already kill them if they have a financial incentive like raising feed prices or falling meat/dairy prices.
Same thing that happens to every generation before them. Projecting your own complete lack of critical thinking or imagination onto others doesn't mean they're actually as stupid as you make them out to be.
Have a close look at this graph: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use#half-of-the-world-s-habitable-land-is-used-for-agriculture
"livestock takes up most of the world’s agricultural land it only produces 18% of the world’s calories and 37% of total protein"
Animal products are incredibly harmful to the climate and are inherently wasteful.
Those corporations get their money from people like you.
Yes regulation would be the best to stop them but you know that's not gonna happen any time soon, especially when everyone refuses to change their own habits, politicians aren't gonna force through regulations that get people angry because they want their steaks.
Why do you want to continue to participate in something bad until it's legally not allowed anymore?
Why not do what you can (stop consuming animal products) while also advocating for regulation and political change?
What does holding evil corporations accountable look like if not refusing to give them your money?
Nahhhh, per the people in this thread you are personally responsible for climate change!
Yes, yes it would. About 14.5% of CO2e is from the meat industry, by changing our habits, we would make the world a better place. I'm not saying policy is not the most important factor, but if people are not willing to change their habits, this disaster will not be solved.