Everyone can be that. Stop eating meat and drop water-pollution, land-use and co2-emissions by two thirds. Less destruction, instantly.
Imagine one billion people doing that. Animal agriculture, one of the most evil industries, would shrink by a lot, our planet would change. No need for politicians, no need to spend a lot of money, no need to lobby. You just buy a different product next time you shop groceries at the supermarket. 💚
I meant 2/3 of your personal food emissions. I’m aware that this is not the solution, but it’s a very easy step and no solution will be enough without us changing what we eat.
Theres a reason people go with published peer reviewed journals and not the data sheets of non profits who refuse to disclose their sources of income. The link to the journal they’re referring to is in the article:
The data used in thr screen grabs you have also, very deliberately, separated the energy and transportation used by the meat industry, as separate things not used by the meat industry
this fluff piece uses a quote from the author of a power reviewed article which is not in that power reviewed article. their study does not support the quoted claim
In 2015, food-system emissions amounted to 18 Gt CO2 equivalent per year globally, representing 34% of total GHG emissions. The largest contribution came from agriculture and land use/land-use change activities (71%), with the remaining were from supply chain activities: retail, transport, consumption, fuel production, waste management, industrial processes and packaging.
That’s fair the numbers indeed don’t add up, my graphic uses CO2 while nature.com uses:
“estimating greenhouse gas (GHG; CO2, CH4, N2O, fluorinated gases) emissions” comparing apples to oranges.
But even in the nature.com study my original stance still stands, eating meat does not contribute to 2/3 of emissions. Yes it is an important factor but so is insulation & transportation.
Your graphic uses the same larger type of metric of greenhouse gases as does the Nature article. If you click on the greenhouse gas equivalents bit in the header where the figure came from, it makes that clear:
Carbon dioxide is the most important greenhouse gas, but not the only one. To capture all greenhouse gas emissions, researchers express them in “carbon dioxide equivalents” (CO₂eq). This takes all greenhouse gases into account, not just CO₂.
You’re not wrong about meat not comprising two-thirds of any person’s total GHG emissions, and I’ve never suggested otherwise. I just wanted to provide a better source of information than that graphic.
How is it a better source? It uses language that tricks most vegans in thinking 2/3s of pollution is from eating meat! I remember watching vegan documentaries and getting that same statistic.
The myworldindata shows the values in “tonnes ofcarbon dioxide-equivalents per person per year” apples to oranges.
It’s a Nature article; there’s no better source for information. Not sure where you’re getting the 2/3s idea or meat idea from that article–it does not use such language.
My family realized that most meals we have meat was just kind of an unnecessary element? Cut out meat and it was still delicious.
Our meat consumption dropped to ground turkey once a month and beef maybe once every 6 months when our to eat? i really feel like limiting is the way to go for most people, but too many suggest all or nothing.
Just be mindful of replacing it with another source of protein. Just removing meat and leaving your diet as is might not do. Depending on your diet, it might not be an issue. If you’re from Latin America for example, you probably already eat a lot of beans. But you are less likely to regularly eat a vegetarian source of protein if you live in a more northern region of the world.
Simply being selective with meat can go a long way as well. Cattle grazing on regenerative farms is in a completely different category from generic CAFO beef from the grocery store (at least if you’re in the US). The main issue is finding it locally.
And yes it’s more expensive, but also more nutritionally dense so you end up using less anyway. Plus it actually tastes like beef. We should be paying more for meat IMO, considering the resources going into its production.
Wouldn’t just a reduction in meat consumption be enough? Though looking at how much the average is that will probably need to be a very significant reduction frI’m some people.
Solar farms go well with grazing animals, recently heard it can actually increase the grass yields when you add solar panels, think it helps protect it a bit from strong wind and too much sun that can dry out the soil more and stunt growth.
Also any time you hear people complain about “prime farmland” (that is so shit they only ever use it for grazing) being used for solar “instead of food production” be aware it’s very likely bullshit anti-solar propaganda. It’s very common here in the UK.
I say why not, imagine 1 billion people eating 0 meat or 8 billion people reducing their intake. Net result is probably the same, but the problem is that there are some people that will use this reduction excuse to not actually do much about their diet. Then there are the people like you mentioned that eat meat 3 times a day and then there are the people that surround their own identity around meat eating.
I’m not a dogmatic and tell people irl that each individual should do as much as they can, but even with that low bar most people don’t do shit.
We usually don’t have that much, this week between 2 of us we bought 6 of the finest sausages Aldi provide and they went into a sausage and bean casserole that lasted for 3 meals each. Other meals didn’t have meat in them.
Would like to try finding a butchers but there aren’t really any near where we live other than a guy selling meat out of a van a few days a week.
My family realized that most meals we have meat was just kind of an unnecessary element? Cut out meat and it was still delicious.
Our meat consumption dropped to ground turkey once a month and beef maybe once every 6 months when our to eat? i really feel like limiting is the way to go for most people, but too many suggest all or nothing.
I wish corpos disappeared in flames tomorrow, but unless I get a magic lamp that won’t happen. In the mean times there are levels of activism everyone can do including in their personal lives. Deflecting and ignoring won’t achieve anything, so we have to take responsibility for our actions as well.
While This is true, always remember that each single one of us only has a small impact and you shouldn’t feel guilty for not being able to do everything while billionaires fly with private jets.
So you’d stop eating meat when billionaires stop flying private jets? Then both of you will conveniently continue until our biosphere collapses.
To me, this sounds like a protective claim while you’re just as greedy, entitled and reckless as the flying billionaire, you just have fewer opportunities and resources. Contributing to something as evil as global animal agriculture while ignoring the numerous alternatives is something everyone has to take responsibility for, no?
You completely missed my point. I actively try to reduce my carbon footprint, but I will not jump through 16 extra hoops to save a tiny fraction of CO2, while Taylor swift fly’s to fucking space. You can not blame the entirety of climate change onto the single individual. Change is especially needed in terms of abolishing billionaires and it also has to come from the politics.
An example: In my hometown village there is basically zero public transit. There is some usable, but its main use is for people who aren’t in a rush and dont have that much other things that might interfere. If I want to drive to the next city without using a car it takes me about 1h, which includes about 10 minutes with riding your bike to the next village. This bus drives every two hours so a trip to the next city to do some stuff takes at least 2-3 hours and depending on what you have/want to do there it can quickly become a 4-5 hour trip. Under these circumstances I Am usually going to drive there by car (which takes about 20-25 minutes). Does it emit more CO2? Of course it does. Can I easily sacrifice 3-5 hours for something that can be done in 1-2? Usually not.
The thing is, we’re at a point where any reduction or slowing of Co2 is a victory, and can at the very least buy us (especially the populations most effected) a little bit more time to get our collective shit together against the big polluters.
But we don’t know when that time will come, so we need to do as much as we can until then. We know the billionaires planes will continue, but we can at the very least prevent some of our own emissions from compounding with them. Us doing our bit is not negated by the billionaires not joining in with us. It’s not fair, but the climate doesn’t care about fair, it cares about total emissions.
So let’s chip in collectively to slow things down, even if only slightly, until we can slow it down a lot. :)
Youre right, but each of us as an individual only has limited options. If politicians and billionaires dont want to take on climate change we sadly can’t do that much against it (except trying to influence politicians as a collective).
And its of course always a matter of money. If I dont have the money for a more climate friendly lifestyle, theres not that much you can do about it.
There are quite a few options we can do that either cost nothing to do, or even save money compared to the higher emission option.
Animal meat is usually more expensive than a plant based diet. Quorn is on par or cheaper than ground beef, homemade Seitan from vital gluten comes out to around $1.80/lb. Tofu, lentils, and beans are also extremely cheap. Red meat is the most polluting, so even just switching to chicken + vegetarian options would make a substantial difference.
Turning the temperature down in the winter will use substantially less energy and lower your bills, and can be compensated for with the use of hot water bottles, heating pads, and bundling up, along with other methods.
Consider joining your local Strong Towns (if you live in the US) to help make non-car transport more viable, even for rural areas.
Buy used instead of new where possible, and buy as little as needed.
There are low-cost solar options that can be implented slowly over time, and can be made extremely affordable using used panels from Craigslist/Facebook marketplace.
All of these combined will drastically lower your emissions. As an individual it wouldn’t impact much, but done collectively, it can make a genuine difference. I can at least vouch that you’d be joining in with me :p
You’re picking a water bottle out of a landfill and calling it a victory. If it makes you feel less powerless by all means, you do you. But there are a thousand corporations, each with a fleet of dump trucks adding to it every hour.
As an individual, it’s a drop in the ocean, yes. But done collectively at scale, those drops become a meaningful difference. In regards to animal meat, if we collectively switch to plant based options, we literally strangle the means for the animal industry to pollute. It’s a form of direct action that anyone can partake in. Even just opting for chicken instead of red meat, if done collevtively, would result in substantial decreases in emissions.
That’s not how I would describe it. Change always starts with a personal realization. And what animal agriculture does to our soil, rivers and atmosphere is not right, do you agree?
We could reforest close to 80% of agricultural land, thats an area the size of Africa, and return it to nature. Forests cool our climate, breathe in co2. Do you want this? It is already happening and you can be part of it if you decide to buy chickpeas and lentils instead of animal tissue. It’s one step closer to a solution. A small step, but the right thing to do.
Everyone can be that. Stop eating meat and drop water-pollution, land-use and co2-emissions by two thirds. Less destruction, instantly.
Imagine one billion people doing that. Animal agriculture, one of the most evil industries, would shrink by a lot, our planet would change. No need for politicians, no need to spend a lot of money, no need to lobby. You just buy a different product next time you shop groceries at the supermarket. 💚
While yes, consuming less meat and especially cow (dairy, beef) is good for you and the environment, your 2/3 statistic falls a part with actual data
https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector
Get your statistics right or don’t say them at all.
I meant 2/3 of your personal food emissions. I’m aware that this is not the solution, but it’s a very easy step and no solution will be enough without us changing what we eat.
So 2/3 of something that wasn’t that much to start with. Got it.
Theres a reason people go with published peer reviewed journals and not the data sheets of non profits who refuse to disclose their sources of income. The link to the journal they’re referring to is in the article:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth
The data used in thr screen grabs you have also, very deliberately, separated the energy and transportation used by the meat industry, as separate things not used by the meat industry
this fluff piece uses a quote from the author of a power reviewed article which is not in that power reviewed article. their study does not support the quoted claim
Insufferable
deleted by creator
That graph is wrong/misleading:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-021-00225-9
this article relies on poore-nemecek 2018, and should not be considered reliable itself
No? They merely state that their results are consistent with one of Poore and Nemecek’s findings. The methods, article scope, and more differ.
I’m not going to defend the article further. If you all want to believe a website over a scientific publication, feel free.
what website?
oh? can you link a version that isn’t pay walled?
Food = total GHG emissions * 0.34
Agriculture = Food * 0.71
(supply chain activities: retail, transport, consumption, fuel production, waste management, industrial processes and packaging) = Food * 0.29
Learn to read
I know how to: .71 * 18 = 12.78 Gt, which is more than double what your graph ascribes to agriculture.
Also, there’s no need to be rude, even if I had been wrong.
That’s fair the numbers indeed don’t add up, my graphic uses CO2 while nature.com uses: “estimating greenhouse gas (GHG; CO2, CH4, N2O, fluorinated gases) emissions” comparing apples to oranges.
But even in the nature.com study my original stance still stands, eating meat does not contribute to 2/3 of emissions. Yes it is an important factor but so is insulation & transportation.
0.34 * 0.71 ≠ 0.66
Your graphic uses the same larger type of metric of greenhouse gases as does the Nature article. If you click on the greenhouse gas equivalents bit in the header where the figure came from, it makes that clear:
You’re not wrong about meat not comprising two-thirds of any person’s total GHG emissions, and I’ve never suggested otherwise. I just wanted to provide a better source of information than that graphic.
How is it a better source? It uses language that tricks most vegans in thinking 2/3s of pollution is from eating meat! I remember watching vegan documentaries and getting that same statistic.
The myworldindata shows the values in “tonnes ofcarbon dioxide-equivalents per person per year” apples to oranges.
It’s a Nature article; there’s no better source for information. Not sure where you’re getting the 2/3s idea or meat idea from that article–it does not use such language.
I really need to stop making excuses and stop eating meat. I think I’m going to start tomorrow. I dunno why but this thread really is motivating me.
Just do it for health reasons, especially in the US where meat is full of drugs and literal shit.
Even if you don’t go meatless, dropping or severely limiting beef is a huge start.
My family realized that most meals we have meat was just kind of an unnecessary element? Cut out meat and it was still delicious.
Our meat consumption dropped to ground turkey once a month and beef maybe once every 6 months when our to eat? i really feel like limiting is the way to go for most people, but too many suggest all or nothing.
Just be mindful of replacing it with another source of protein. Just removing meat and leaving your diet as is might not do. Depending on your diet, it might not be an issue. If you’re from Latin America for example, you probably already eat a lot of beans. But you are less likely to regularly eat a vegetarian source of protein if you live in a more northern region of the world.
True. We have a lot of beans now lol
I feel like meat only on weekends would be a pretty great compromise for the near term.
If enough people did that, meat would stop being the default with every meal and it’d end up easier to go farther.
And I think people are more likely to stick with a dramatic reduction than to go all the way.
Simply being selective with meat can go a long way as well. Cattle grazing on regenerative farms is in a completely different category from generic CAFO beef from the grocery store (at least if you’re in the US). The main issue is finding it locally.
And yes it’s more expensive, but also more nutritionally dense so you end up using less anyway. Plus it actually tastes like beef. We should be paying more for meat IMO, considering the resources going into its production.
Grass fed cattle uses way more land and resources and produce more emissions than the efficient hell on earth we call “intensive life stock farming”.
Give the plant based meats a try, like Impossible meat or Quorn. They’re astonishingly good now, and have completely replaced animal meat for me.
We don’t have any of those in Japan yet, unfortunately. I think I’ll have to go with beans for now!
You could also create your own meat alternatives with tofu or Seitan, which are very cheap to make ^^
Beans are cheaper and delicious
As is Tofu, Seitan (homemade), and lentils!
Wouldn’t just a reduction in meat consumption be enough? Though looking at how much the average is that will probably need to be a very significant reduction frI’m some people.
Solar farms go well with grazing animals, recently heard it can actually increase the grass yields when you add solar panels, think it helps protect it a bit from strong wind and too much sun that can dry out the soil more and stunt growth.
Also any time you hear people complain about “prime farmland” (that is so shit they only ever use it for grazing) being used for solar “instead of food production” be aware it’s very likely bullshit anti-solar propaganda. It’s very common here in the UK.
I say why not, imagine 1 billion people eating 0 meat or 8 billion people reducing their intake. Net result is probably the same, but the problem is that there are some people that will use this reduction excuse to not actually do much about their diet. Then there are the people like you mentioned that eat meat 3 times a day and then there are the people that surround their own identity around meat eating.
I’m not a dogmatic and tell people irl that each individual should do as much as they can, but even with that low bar most people don’t do shit.
We usually don’t have that much, this week between 2 of us we bought 6 of the finest sausages Aldi provide and they went into a sausage and bean casserole that lasted for 3 meals each. Other meals didn’t have meat in them.
Would like to try finding a butchers but there aren’t really any near where we live other than a guy selling meat out of a van a few days a week.
My family realized that most meals we have meat was just kind of an unnecessary element? Cut out meat and it was still delicious.
Our meat consumption dropped to ground turkey once a month and beef maybe once every 6 months when our to eat? i really feel like limiting is the way to go for most people, but too many suggest all or nothing.
I would prefer for the giant polluting corporations to do something that’s actually useful. Enjoy veganism though.
I wish corpos disappeared in flames tomorrow, but unless I get a magic lamp that won’t happen. In the mean times there are levels of activism everyone can do including in their personal lives. Deflecting and ignoring won’t achieve anything, so we have to take responsibility for our actions as well.
While This is true, always remember that each single one of us only has a small impact and you shouldn’t feel guilty for not being able to do everything while billionaires fly with private jets.
So you’d stop eating meat when billionaires stop flying private jets? Then both of you will conveniently continue until our biosphere collapses.
To me, this sounds like a protective claim while you’re just as greedy, entitled and reckless as the flying billionaire, you just have fewer opportunities and resources. Contributing to something as evil as global animal agriculture while ignoring the numerous alternatives is something everyone has to take responsibility for, no?
You completely missed my point. I actively try to reduce my carbon footprint, but I will not jump through 16 extra hoops to save a tiny fraction of CO2, while Taylor swift fly’s to fucking space. You can not blame the entirety of climate change onto the single individual. Change is especially needed in terms of abolishing billionaires and it also has to come from the politics.
An example: In my hometown village there is basically zero public transit. There is some usable, but its main use is for people who aren’t in a rush and dont have that much other things that might interfere. If I want to drive to the next city without using a car it takes me about 1h, which includes about 10 minutes with riding your bike to the next village. This bus drives every two hours so a trip to the next city to do some stuff takes at least 2-3 hours and depending on what you have/want to do there it can quickly become a 4-5 hour trip. Under these circumstances I Am usually going to drive there by car (which takes about 20-25 minutes). Does it emit more CO2? Of course it does. Can I easily sacrifice 3-5 hours for something that can be done in 1-2? Usually not.
The thing is, we’re at a point where any reduction or slowing of Co2 is a victory, and can at the very least buy us (especially the populations most effected) a little bit more time to get our collective shit together against the big polluters.
But we don’t know when that time will come, so we need to do as much as we can until then. We know the billionaires planes will continue, but we can at the very least prevent some of our own emissions from compounding with them. Us doing our bit is not negated by the billionaires not joining in with us. It’s not fair, but the climate doesn’t care about fair, it cares about total emissions.
So let’s chip in collectively to slow things down, even if only slightly, until we can slow it down a lot. :)
Youre right, but each of us as an individual only has limited options. If politicians and billionaires dont want to take on climate change we sadly can’t do that much against it (except trying to influence politicians as a collective).
And its of course always a matter of money. If I dont have the money for a more climate friendly lifestyle, theres not that much you can do about it.
There are quite a few options we can do that either cost nothing to do, or even save money compared to the higher emission option.
All of these combined will drastically lower your emissions. As an individual it wouldn’t impact much, but done collectively, it can make a genuine difference. I can at least vouch that you’d be joining in with me :p
You’re picking a water bottle out of a landfill and calling it a victory. If it makes you feel less powerless by all means, you do you. But there are a thousand corporations, each with a fleet of dump trucks adding to it every hour.
As an individual, it’s a drop in the ocean, yes. But done collectively at scale, those drops become a meaningful difference. In regards to animal meat, if we collectively switch to plant based options, we literally strangle the means for the animal industry to pollute. It’s a form of direct action that anyone can partake in. Even just opting for chicken instead of red meat, if done collevtively, would result in substantial decreases in emissions.
That’s not how I would describe it. Change always starts with a personal realization. And what animal agriculture does to our soil, rivers and atmosphere is not right, do you agree?
We could reforest close to 80% of agricultural land, thats an area the size of Africa, and return it to nature. Forests cool our climate, breathe in co2. Do you want this? It is already happening and you can be part of it if you decide to buy chickpeas and lentils instead of animal tissue. It’s one step closer to a solution. A small step, but the right thing to do.
Yeah, me too. That’s something we have no power over, though. But you can take responsibility for what you eat.
The way I lobby for that is by not buying products that are harmful.
nice generalizations