Avoiding meat and dairy is ‘single biggest way’ to reduce your impact on Earth

[Baronage-Phase]

Ps.
I think people should be able to eat what they want...
But I am in favour of buying and eating local produce and it does get to me seeing supermarkets selling carrots and potatoes etc.. from other countries, when they could stock veg that's grown locally.

 

[kabbes]

Ps.
I think people should be able to eat what they want...
But I am in favour of buying and eating local produce and it does get to me seeing supermarkets selling carrots and potatoes etc.. from other countries, when they could stock veg that's grown locally.

Nothing is straightforward. It can take a bigger carbon footprint to grow things in awkward climates and/or store things for long periods than to grow things in easy climates and transport them to be eaten in short order.

Even if you buy UK food, there is every chance it’s been flown to a central processing point in a different country first and then flown back to the UK for sale.

Basically, the chance of any individual being able to unravel all this and arrive at an answer for most/least environmentally friendly diet is negligible. Which is why the problem should be tackled top-down, structurally, rather than relying on individuals to figure it out and choose to do the right thing with that calculation.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

Nothing is straightforward. It can take a bigger carbon footprint to grow things in awkward climates and/or store things for long periods than to grow things in easy climates and transport them to be eaten in short order.

Even if you buy UK food, there is every chance it’s been flown to a central processing point in a different country first and then flown back to the UK for sale.

Basically, the chance of any individual being able to unravel all this and arrive at an answer for most/least environmentally friendly diet is negligible. Which is why the problem should be tackled top-down, structurally, rather than relying on individuals to figure it out and choose to do the right thing with that calculation.

True

 

[Infidel Castro]

Yes, obviously but the thread is about the impact eating meat and dairy has on the environment not its impact on chickens.

Aren't we all part of the environment? We don't exist outside of it. But yes, fair point.

 

[8ball]

Basically, the chance of any individual being able to unravel all this and arrive at an answer for most/least environmentally friendly diet is negligible. Which is why the problem should be tackled top-down, structurally, rather than relying on individuals to figure it out and choose to do the right thing with that calculation.

A group effort at unravelling at least some of this and making the information more readily available could help people make more informed choices, as well as pressure producers to make improvements.

Lots of the calculations have already been done, hence your knowledge about some of the counter-intuitive realities of the situation.

Maybe ideally it *should* be tackled in a top-down fashion, but going by the type of people we currently have at the top, I don’t hold out much hope.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Ps.
I think people should be able to eat what they want...
But I am in favour of buying and eating local produce

I too am in favour of letting everyone in London starve.

 

[kabbes]

Maybe ideally it *should* be tackled in a top-down fashion, but going by the type of people we currently have at the top, I don’t hold out much hope.

Going by the type of people we currently have providing consumer information, I don’t hold out much hope.

Going by the type of people we currently have as consumers, I don’t hold out much hope.

There is no hope.

 

[8ball]

 

[8ball]

Being serious though, almost no one buys cage eggs these days due to a mixture of regulated clear labelling and information about what the cages entail.
Also, no-meat and less-meat diets are on the increase with environmental concerns being high on the list of reasons for it.

I don't think we need to go "full Eeyore" just yet.

 

[lazythursday]

What impact would we have on the planet if everyone decided to fuck meat off and become a vegetarian?
Would it be better for the environment or would we end up with all the rivers and lakes awash with pesticides and herbicides?

36% of the crops currently grown are for animal feed. So we're not necessarily talking about converting pasture to crops, we're talking about using the crops we're already growing more efficiently, eg by not feeding them to animals.

 

[lazythursday]

Eh?

Why being vegan isn’t as environmentally friendly as you might think


We are buying blueberries...all year round.... often from 2000km away ... one would suspect that to preserve freshness, these are bound to have been flown in. So, that would suggest that the environmental footprint of some of our fruit and veg isnt great ..is it? It has gotten to the stage where people expect to be able to eat certain fruits and vegetables all year round...and these are imported from thousands of km away, which means 1000s of air miles.

Yet one can go down the road and buy a steak from a local butcher..from a local farm...from a local cow...Fed by local grass....organic...no pesticides.. if one chooses, and it will have less impact on the environment than a punnet of strawberries in January flown in from the middle East.

It is something that needs to be looked at surely?

Whatever happens in the future with our food there is no doubt that if we are to "save" the planet then surely whatever we eat should be locally produced....and sustainable. This will mean that major efforts will have to go into growing fruit and veg in our own country...in a way that will require energy. Sustainable energy.
I've no doubt it can be done...and it should be cheaper and have a lower carbon footprint than importing fruit and veg. Maybe that's something to look at?

I know this seems counter-intuitive - but you are just wrong about this. The amount of carbon used in transporting food is only a small percentage of the overall carbon footprint of that food product. The food miles campaign has a lot to answer for as it's given people the impression that it's the main problem.

Don't get me wrong, I think we should buy locally when it comes to vegetables where possible, and there are other social/economic reasons for buying locally. But don't kid yourself that a steak from a local cow has less environmental impact than, say, lentils imported from the middle east.

 

[8ball]

...don't kid yourself that a steak from a local cow has less environmental impact than, say, lentils imported from the middle east.

Bit of an extreme case, comparing steak with lentils.

Edit: though I did read that Big Macs have a lower carbon impact per calorie than air-freighted asparagus. Another reason for gathering the specifics and acting on them - basic common-sense intuitions can be very wrong in this area.

 

[ddraig]

Eh?

Why being vegan isn’t as environmentally friendly as you might think


We are buying blueberries...all year round.... often from 2000km away ... one would suspect that to preserve freshness, these are bound to have been flown in. So, that would suggest that the environmental footprint of some of our fruit and veg isnt great ..is it? It has gotten to the stage where people expect to be able to eat certain fruits and vegetables all year round...and these are imported from thousands of km away, which means 1000s of air miles.

Yet one can go down the road and buy a steak from a local butcher..from a local farm...from a local cow...Fed by local grass....organic...no pesticides.. if one chooses, and it will have less impact on the environment than a punnet of strawberries in January flown in from the middle East.

It is something that needs to be looked at surely?

Whatever happens in the future with our food there is no doubt that if we are to "save" the planet then surely whatever we eat should be locally produced....and sustainable. This will mean that major efforts will have to go into growing fruit and veg in our own country...in a way that will require energy. Sustainable energy.
I've no doubt it can be done...and it should be cheaper and have a lower carbon footprint than importing fruit and veg. Maybe that's something to look at?

yet again!! do no meat eaters eat blueberries?? do they just eat the happy cow they can see from their kitchen window at their local farm?? ffs
how many people can actually do that do you think? and I hope you're not suggesting that people on low incomes or who live in food deserts seek out their local expensive organic bits of cow rather than getting them from the much cheaper asda?? tut tut

 

[Saul Goodman]

36% of the crops currently grown are for animal feed. So we're not necessarily talking about converting pasture to crops, we're talking about using the crops we're already growing more efficiently, eg by not feeding them to animals.

Is that all? I thought it might be more.
So when everyone stops eating meat, 100% of crops will be grown for human feed, right?
And with crops being seasonal and their production determined by climate, this means that a lot of crops have to travel, either by air or by sea, to their destination countries.
I'll be generous here and say that 10% of the world's population are already vegetarians. When this figure changes to 100%, how much extra carbon will have to be spewed into the air to transport all this extra food?
Yes, most meat eaters also eat vegetables but stopping eating meat doesn't mean you only eat the same amount of vegetable matter. It means, for most people, you'll probably eat, at a minimum, twice as much, so 90% of the planet, eating twice the amount of vegetable matter, which is largely transported by air... How is that going to affect each person's carbon footprint? I might get some proper stats and get a calculator out later, but I'm guessing this would drastically increase each person's carbon footprint.

 

[Flavour]

Is that all? I thought it might be more.
So when everyone stops eating meat, 100% of crops will be grown for human feed, right?
And with crops being seasonal and their production determined by climate, this means that a lot of crops have to travel, either by air or by sea, to their destination countries.
I'll be generous here and say that 10% of the world's population are already vegetarians. When this figure changes to 100%, how much extra carbon will have to be spewed into the air to transport all this extra food?
Yes, most meat eaters also eat vegetables but stopping eating meat doesn't mean you only eat the same amount of vegetable matter. It means, for most people, you'll probably eat, at a minimum, twice as much, so 90% of the planet, eating twice the amount of vegetable matter, which is largely transported by air... How is that going to affect each person's carbon footprint? I might get some proper stats and get a calculator out later, but I'm guessing this would drastically increase each person's carbon footprint.

You have literally no idea what you're talking about. The vast, vast, vast majority of the vegetables consumed worldwide are locally grown, within a few 100 kms at most of the end user. Northern European and American supermarkets are the exception.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I might get some proper stats and get a calculator out later, but I'm guessing this would drastically increase each person's carbon footprint.

If only some people had done the maths already and published their findings, and if only there was a thread where we could discuss those findings.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Earth has been around 4.5 billions years.
Humans been around 200,000 years.
Sun dies in about another 5 billion years.

We have time for the human race to die out and come back 25,000 times over.

The earth will be fine.

I think your calculator is a bit fucked.
In 4.5 billion years we've had ONE human race.
If the human race went extinct tomorrow, it would likely mean all primates and probably most other mammals would also go toes up.
How long do you think it would it take for nature to mutate another species into something comparable?
You could be looking at hundreds of millions of years, even billions.

 

[skyscraper101]

Problem I have with avoiding meat is the lack of soya/meat substitute options in supermarkets and restaurants. Unless you go to a massive supermarket you're options are normally limited to some Quorn mince or Linda McCartney sausages. There's a whole industry of meat alternatives out there but smaller supermarkets just never have enough.

 

[8ball]

In 4.5 billion years we've had ONE human race.

We've had a bunch of them.
All but one are extinct.

 

[Flavour]

Problem I have with avoiding meat is the lack of soya/meat substitute options in supermarkets and restaurants. Unless you go to a massive supermarket you're options are normally limited to some Quorn mince or Linda McCartney sausages. There's a whole industry of meat alternatives out there but smaller supermarkets just never have enough.

You don't need to eat those meat substitutes if you don't eat meat. Quorn mince, Linda McCartney... it's all processed bullshit. Eat some beans! Nobody needs to eat fucking tofu.

 

[8ball]

You don't need to eat those meat substitutes if you don't eat meat. Quorn mince, Linda McCartney... it's all processed bullshit. Eat some beans! Nobody needs to eat fucking tofu.

Those "no bull" burgers are really nice. Looks like you can't barbecue them, though, which is a shame.

 

[Yossarian]

36% of the crops currently grown are for animal feed. So we're not necessarily talking about converting pasture to crops, we're talking about using the crops we're already growing more efficiently, eg by not feeding them to animals.

Livestock also eat around a third of the world's fish catch - a lot of that is fish like menhaden that people don't tend to eat anyway, but the oceans would still be a lot better off if they were left in there instead of being scooped out and fed to pigs and chickens.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Those "no bull" burgers are really nice. Looks like you can't barbecue them, though, which is a shame.

I tried the Beyond Meat burgers and they aren't bad. However, I don't plan on buying them again. They were seriously over packaged. There were two burgers in a plastic container that had been designed to fit. Then, they put some plastic wrap over that and a cardboard cover over top that. If they insist on using that amount of packaging they're going to lose the "vegan for the environment" crowd. The other disadvantage was the cost. Two patties cost $7.99--well beyond what I'm will to pay for some mushed up pea protein. Another case of the manufacturer not understanding their client base.

 

[Pickman's model]

I tried the Beyond Meat burgers and they aren't bad. However, I don't plan on buying them again. They were seriously over packaged. There were two burgers in a plastic container that had been designed to fit. Then, they put some plastic wrap over that and a cardboard cover over top that. If they insist on using that amount of packaging they're going to lose the "vegan for the environment" crowd. The other disadvantage was the cost. Two patties cost $7.99--well beyond what I'm will to pay for some mushed up pea protein. Another case of the manufacturer not understanding their client base.

oh i think they understand it very well, wealthy people with more money than (environmental) sense who will doubtless be the core repeat customers.

 

[Pickman's model]

We've had a bunch of them.
All but one are extinct.

an artificial intelligence will come across this thread in the future and correct you after we've disappeared

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

oh i think they understand it very well, wealthy people with more money than (environmental) sense who will doubtless be the core repeat customers.

The sad thing is that section of the consumer population would probably congratulate themselves on their environmental awareness.

 

[8ball]

I tried the Beyond Meat burgers and they aren't bad. However, I don't plan on buying them again. They were seriously over packaged. There were two burgers in a plastic container that had been designed to fit. Then, they put some plastic wrap over that and a cardboard cover over top that. If they insist on using that amount of packaging they're going to lose the "vegan for the environment" crowd. The other disadvantage was the cost. Two patties cost $7.99--well beyond what I'm will to pay for some mushed up pea protein. Another case of the manufacturer not understanding their client base.

These are 2 patties in a cardboard container for two quid. Soy rather than pea protein based.
The appearance wasn't quite right (starts off a nice red, but is the same bloody red when cooked), but if you closed your eyes and didn't overanalyse the texture it could quite plausibly be beef.

 

[Combustible]

You don't need to eat those meat substitutes if you don't eat meat. Quorn mince, Linda McCartney... it's all processed bullshit. Eat some beans! Nobody needs to eat fucking tofu.

In what way is tofu "processed bullshit" or for that matter a meat substitute?

 

[lazythursday]

You don't need to eat those meat substitutes if you don't eat meat. Quorn mince, Linda McCartney... it's all processed bullshit. Eat some beans! Nobody needs to eat fucking tofu.

I agree with you re quorn and Linda but don't knock tofu! it's a natural, extremely lightly processed product that's been made for hundreds (thousands?) of years. And it's also delicious if you know how to cook it properly.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

These are 2 patties in a cardboard container for two quid. Soy rather than pea protein based.
The appearance wasn't quite right (starts off a nice red, but is the same bloody red when cooked), but if you closed your eyes and didn't overanalyse the texture it could quite plausibly be beef.

That's at least better than the Beyond Beef burger. Currently, I eat a pea protein garam masala burger from Trader Joes. It's four patties for $4 and a plastic wrapper. You wouldn't mistake it for beef, but it tastes good enough that you don't mind.