Halving reliance on meat and dairy could cut land-use emissions ‘by 31%’
Halving reliance on meat and dairy could cut land-use emissions ‘by 31%’
Substituting half of animal products could “almost fully halt” the conversion of forests and natural land for agriculture.
Reducing meat/dairy consumption seems to be one of the easiest changes we can make to lower GHG output, since it doesn't require major infrastructure changes.
But it also means changing habits, which is hard for other reasons.
It's also going to be hard to convince the hardcore carnivores: just 12% of the population eat over half the beef in the US.
It's a lot harder to drop carbs out of my diet but I have to. I let any of them in my body and now I'm dying again woo! Yall can do what you want but I will find a source of animal products if I have to eat the local quails and their eggs. When you can't eat legumes or tubers or fruit or grains, you'd be better off starving to death if you can't even have a steak with your green beans. I just wish I weren't addicted to carbs. I need to get back on keto to get my body back again... 😩
I have to get on keto again and lose the 60 lbs I gained after I fell off the wagon, and stop feeling hungry all the time. Carbs are a fucking bitch.
I have Coeliac's and things with gluten are out for me unless I want a lot of misery for a couple of days (which sucks because I love bread). This cuts out a lot of things for me. I also typically do a very low-carb diet because, for whatever reason, it vastly improves my mood and how my body feels.
That said, I am moving to grow a lot more of my own food with plans to have my own chickens for eggs and eventually raising most of the meat my wife and I consume. The rest we plan on sourcing from local hunters (wild boar and overpopulated deer are big issues where we're moving) and farmers We also eat a lot of seafood, so probably less land-based meat than most already (definitely less than when I lived in the US).
Its easy yes.but livestock is only 6% of emissions..
I think it is higher, the current food production is something like 25% of the global GHG emissions, 2/3 are from the animal industry. Besides the direct impact there is less land use and the opportunity to re-nature large areas.
Cutting down on billionaires would do a lot more for the environment
seriously let's fucking send all the jets and motor yachts to the bin before we start telling the common man things are his fucking fault
But it's so much easier to ban straws than to make fishing companies responsible for their waste and destruction!
Billionaires like Joesley Batista?
Permanently Deleted
Every single bit?
I've been a vegan for 17 years and I can tell you one thing Americans don't give a shit. They well not eat less meat. They don't give a fuck that they are killing the planet and they sure as fuck don't want you to tell them that. I've traveled over seas quite a bit and I see people from other countries seem genuinely interested in veganism but Americans don't give a fuck and give even less of a fuck when you tell them you're a vegan.
South Africa might be the only country that's worse, chicken is a vegetable here lmao 💀. We're also really obese, just like the good old USA
I'm not interested in veganism but I am interested (and practicing) massive reductionism, near vegetarianism.
I think that sliding scale of reduced meat consumption is the ONLY move that can be made. (Surprise? Lol)
Americans will accept reduced meat as alternatives are around, but it needs to be a "here's a new fun thing" not a "stop doing that"
Where in America have you gone?
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Pensacola Florida, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, From Denver to Pueblo Colorado, Albuquerque, New Mexico but all of that might give away who I am so I might delete this after I get a vote.
Realistically, pushing veganism is simply a bad choice in America. Instead, we should be pushing a simple reduction in meat consumption. Just educate people and encourage them to REDUCE meat in their diet.
-
Take away the government subsidies that make our meat artificially cheap, doing that alone will naturally raise meat prices and lower the average person's meat intake.
-
Consider throwing a carbon tax on the types of meat with the greatest environmental impact, why not?
-
If we want to be more equitable we could only tax the "luxury" meats (like goose, veal, lamb, oysters, or expensive beef cuts that are usually only purchased by upper class people anyway).
There are a lot of ways to skin this cat (lol), and I think we've sufficiently demonstrated that most Americans are WAY too resistant to cutting all meat out of their diet.
-
I reduce my meat intake but I'm not going to act holier than though and pretend it has anything to do animals.
When you tell me you're vegan you're telling me that's your identity as a person and no one wants to listen to you after that. It has nothing to do with what veganism is.
@blindbunny @inasaba they're indeed driving global warming to the extreme with their cattle ranches and ignorance. They have a lack of education since primary school, most of them have no idea what evolution is, much less would they know what carbon emissions are!
ps. America is not a country but a Continent. It might be ok to call it like that within its limits, but we're in an international platform here, so please...
For real. The disinformation starts with pushing children to consume dairy in all kinds of products, raw as well as processed, and claiming that it's good for your health. It all goes downhill from there.
I've got you even better. For the past 15 years I haven't used a car to commute, and man do vegans NOT like the fact that their aesthetic lifestyle choice is meaningless compared to reliance on fossil fuels. Other countries have policies that genuinely reduce car culture, but holy fuck as soon as you suggest not living in the suburbs, vegans are up in arms about how America is just too big for such a thing to be possible.
"Aesthetic life choice" my ass lol. I am fortunate enough to not have to rely on a car (don't even have a driver's license) but suggesting others can when public transport in the US is that bad is just silly. Veganism is something you can actually easily practise though that has a meaningful impact on both the environment as well as animal well-being. This is not about "aesthetics": it's about making life on earth easier for everyone - both humans as well as animals alike.
So I just do both???
Veganism is not an "aesthetic lifestyle choice" nor is it "meaningless" in reducing emissions. Reducing reliance on cars is good (where possible), doing both is better. Some people's living situations do necessitate using a car and not everyone has the money to pack up and move to a place with good public transit.
So we decrease it from 13% of global to 10%? Not much of a dent in view of the 87% from fossil fuel use 🤷🏽♂️ but let's not mention that
"Globally, the largest share of humanity's CO2 emissions stems from burning fossil fuels, which made up about 87% of CO2 emissions over the past 20 years. Land-use emissions are responsible for the remaining 13%." https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-land-use-drives-co2-emissions-around-the-world/
Even if we could cut all fossil fuels, the animal industry would push us over the Paris goal. Changing what we eat is a option we all have but let's not mention that
Seriously. If everyone on earth stopped eating meat tomorrow, we would still be just as fucked as we are now.
And do we expect the meat industry to just disappear? They have lots of land and equipment that they will try to use in other ways. Maybe they'll even decide to drill for oil on their land.
If I cut my meat by 75% can I keep my dairy at only a 25% cut? I need cheese more than meat.
You can do anything you want, and any non-zero improvement is still an improvement. It's far better if everyone dropped their meat consumption by a third than a small number of people completely dropped it.
The perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good.
Shooting for 0% even better.
Halving anything will reduce land-use emissions....
But this is something people can halve without lowering their standard of living, while simultaneously helping with weight control and general health.
"without lowering their standard of living, "
Clearly doesn't understand what a standard of living is.
While I agree land use matters to a degree, beef is a much worse producer of CO2 per KG of food consumed compared to cheese, or even 'dairy' like people think of as eggs and milk.
There's been a lot of disingenuous greenwashing around here lately for absolutely no reason. Here's the actual Nature study.
What can you as a consumer genuinely do that WILL make a difference? Vote progressive or as left as you can which will actually win. Research and invest in new technologies that help with lab meats and alternatives.
Everything else is just helping your conscience, treat it as such. Not as some little blow to big AG. They're the ones investing in these alternatives anyway lol. You're patting yourself on the back for giving your money to the same dude in a trenchcoat vs coveralls. Every little bit helps in a wave, but unless they hit tipping points, then understand the real reason why you're doing the things you do. It's to let you sleep easier at night, which is a good thing to strive for.
Since I'm lazy I'm just going to repost my comment from last time.
You can see from the graphs that the smaller animals don't matter. It's per kg of consumed food per kg of CO2.
That also means that meats which are more nutrient rich and bioavailable are often as good as plant alternatives. This only gets better with time and eventual lab grown alternatives.
Altering diets for husbandry has made huge strides in lowering emissions too.
Vegans can Doomer emissions as much as they want to but it's already solved lol. The market will get there just like every other green intiative because turns out people and money DOES care about the future.
The biggest issue with eating meat currently is their shit poor living conditions and treatment. Even separating calves early for dairy isn't nearly as bad for yields as people previously thought too. Like any industry it takes time to make change.
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-top-10-foods-with-the-biggest-environmental-footprint-2015-9
https://www.eenews.net/articles/changing-cows-diets-could-curb-emissions-will-farmers-dig-in/
Reduction isn't talked about nearly enough. It is only a start, but it is a start.
You don’t even have to change your diet all at once, but you can take baby steps to get there until you’ve found substitutions for everything. I think alot of people try to change too much all at once, and it’s such a shock to their routine that oftentimes they haven’t built up the habit enough for it to stick.
What’s worked for me at least is slow, gradual, purposeful changes. You’re trying to build up your supports and platforms for you to slowly climb higher and higher, not just jumping into free solo climbing and expecting to reach the top in one go without any effort. Start small and make it a repeatable habit, then as you get comfortable, build up from there.
Land use is not the problem. There are some places that are only good for growing hay or pasture.
Right after rich people quit flying around on jets...