Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Oh I don't know. One faux pas could hardly undo the absolute annihilation the veganists have suffered here, but it certainly didn't help the cause.

Pah.

"Nutty Jeff and the Veg-Heads" were totally on the ropes right up until post #1880.

Then it was like Ali's corner chucking-in the towel in the 8th round v Foreman in Zaire.

Stupid.
 
Thread is too stupid, you all have trench foot. But the title has got to be wrong surely not having offspring is the biggest way you can help save the planet.

If we completely decarbonised our energy production and did nothing else, then that alone would be enough to meet at least some of the UN climate change goals. Of course, there are still other things we could do (like decarbonising transportation) that don't involve fighting yet another bullshit culture war.

But no, closing down all the fossil fuel plants and replacing them with nuclear and renewable power plants is apparently not radical enough.
 
If we completely decarbonised our energy production and did nothing else, then that alone would be enough to meet at least some of the UN climate change goals. Of course, there are still other things we could do (like decarbonising transportation) that don't involve fighting yet another bullshit culture war.

But no, closing down all the fossil fuel plants and replacing them with nuclear and renewable power plants is apparently not radical enough.
Thorium power plants would be good
 
They could be used to produce green hydrogen as a lifting gas for the airships that would be making a comeback. Seaborne shipping currently burns a lot of this really nasty shite. Regardless of whether you're shipping soy beans or tins of Brazilian corned beef, that gunk is what is now being burned to power that.
Another thing that will fuck us - soot one thing making the Arctic warm by reducing the amount of sun reflected by snow. So sending big fuck off ships around the north coast of siberia or Canada/Alaska going to accelerate things.
 
There are loads of things we can do...as individuals and as broader social movements. Hectoring, sneering and finger-pointing changed no-one's mind, ever. I think it would be entirely laudable if we all ate less meat but not for one second, could I entertain the idea that climate change will be defeated by a totally plant based diet.
And I haven't even gotten started on the crimes we daily commit against the plant kingdom. In comparison with the immense, ancient communities of trees, I am not sure humans are the apex species we believe them to be.
 
The reduction in transport during the pandemic by itself resulted in emissions decreases globally of 17- 25%


And yet, apparently we should be focusing on the C10% food is responsible for...
 
The reduction in transport during the pandemic by itself resulted in emissions decreases globally of 17- 25%


And yet, apparently we should be focusing on the C10% food is responsible for...
What about, you know, BOTH!! :eek:
 
The reduction in transport during the pandemic by itself resulted in emissions decreases globally of 17- 25%


And yet, apparently we should be focusing on the C10% food is responsible for...
Because the reduction in traffic emissions is - sadly - temporary, whereas EU's farm animals 'produce more emissions than cars and vans combined'

And where are you getting this 'C10%' figure from?

For example, for every person on the planet, there are approximately three chickens. Meat and dairy specifically accounts for around 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).

1627225936139.png

The chart illustrates how the climate impact of beef and lamb dwarfs that of other foods. This is partly down to the biology of how these animals digest food, explains Prof Sir Charles Godfray, a population biologist and head of the Oxford Martin School at the University of Oxford. He tells Carbon Brief:

“In a very broad-brush approach, the products from ruminant animals – sheep, cows and their relatives, animals with four stomachs – they tend to have greater greenhouse gas effects. Part of that is because digestion by ruminants produces a lot of methane.”
Cows and sheep are “ruminants” – meaning that their stomachs contain specialised bacteria capable of digesting tough and fibrous material, such as grass. The digestive process causes the animals to belch out methane, a greenhouse gas that is around 28-34 times (pdf) more powerful than CO2 over a 100-year period.

However, the chart illustrates that producing beef is more than twice as carbon intensive as producing lamb.


1627226106123.png


 
Because the reduction in traffic emissions is - sadly - temporary, whereas EU's farm animals 'produce more emissions than cars and vans combined'

And where are you getting this 'C10%' figure from?



View attachment 280488




View attachment 280490


EU emissions from ag c10%, us emissions from Ag just under 10% etc etc EU and US account for lots of this travel.

Of Ag, less than half from animal ag, have included entire figure as systems are inextricably linked, bit if I wanted to be pedantic, I could have used animal ag only.

Not entirely sure why picking out personal cars and vans from the transport figure 21% EU, 29% US is particularly relevant to be honest.
 
What about, you know, BOTH!! :eek:
Because we need to eat, we don't need to go on aeroplanes for fun.
Also because animal and plant ag inextricably linked. The most sustainable fert will come from animals, not petrochemicals. Animals make use of waste, which has also required energy expenditure to grow - straw can be turned into manure, OSR cake is worthwhile feeds etc etc.
Ag should never really be viewed as disparate - sustainable systems will end up having to be holistic.
 
Because we need to eat, we don't need to go on aeroplanes for fun.
Also because animal and plant ag inextricably linked. The most sustainable fert will come from animals, not petrochemicals. Animals make use of waste, which has also required energy expenditure to grow - straw can be turned into manure, OSR cake is worthwhile feeds etc etc.
Ag should never really be viewed as disparate - sustainable systems will end up having to be holistic.
"look over there" , "what about that, what about this"

We don't need to eat animals tho, it's a choice, like flying (yeah yeah with all the usual caveats)
Out again before the abuse and bullshit
 
"look over there" , "what about that, what about this"

We don't need to eat animals tho, it's a choice, like flying (yeah yeah with all the usual caveats)
Out again before the abuse and bullshit
You do need something to fertilse crops, you cannot keep cropping (removing nutrient from the soil) without replacing it. Crops will fail.
You also need to invest energy in growing crops - most crops have a significant part of the plant that is inedible to humans but entirely digestible by other species.
One does not exist without the other.
 
"look over there" , "what about that, what about this"

We don't need to eat animals tho, it's a choice, like flying (yeah yeah with all the usual caveats)
Out again before the abuse and bullshit
Not 'look over there', no.

One of the points here is that animal agriculture can and should be done better. That much of the most destructive animal farming could be done very differently is relevant when you're trotting out statistics about animal farming and using those stats to demand that it should stop.

Some of us have been trying to have that part of the conversation. Others don't want to engage with it. Just the usual passive aggression with zero content.
 
Not 'look over there', no.

One of the points here is that animal agriculture can and should be done better. That much of the most destructive animal farming could be done very differently is relevant when you're trotting out statistics about animal farming and using those stats to demand that it should stop.

Some of us have been trying to have that part of the conversation. Others don't want to engage with it. Just the usual passive aggression with zero content.

Its reasonably apparent if you've actually tried to grow any veg yourself- you quickly realise you need to fertilise your soil, and your options are: synthetic NPK (synthetic K is gonna run out soon anyway, is a limited resource) or some kind of manure. Compost is great but generally short of N.
 
Its reasonably apparent if you've actually tried to grow any veg yourself- you quickly realise you need to fertilise your soil, and your options are: synthetic NPK (synthetic K is gonna run out soon anyway, is a limited resource) or some kind of manure. Compost is great but generally short of N.
Almost like animals and plants co-evolved or something.
 
"look over there" , "what about that, what about this"

We don't need to eat animals tho, it's a choice, like flying (yeah yeah with all the usual caveats)
Out again before the abuse and bullshit
We really do need a new word to describe your level of stupidity. Why do you try to ruin a topic you know absolutely nothing about and aren't willing to learn anything about? Why don't you step out and leave the adults to talk?
 
Almost like animals and plants co-evolved or something.
And the more plants we grow, the more animals we need to feed them, which ties in quite well with population growth. It's almost as if we live in some sort of ecosystem, where an omnivorous diet is exactly how it's supposed to be.
 
We really do need a new word to describe your level of stupidity. Why do you try to ruin a topic you know absolutely nothing about and aren't willing to learn anything about? Why don't you step out and leave the adults to talk?
:facepalm: Straight out of trolling 101! :( for you

worked tho, luring me back in, sure you'll get a pat on the back for that
 
And the more plants we grow, the more animals we need to feed them, which ties in quite well with population growth. It's almost as if we live in some sort of ecosystem, where an omnivorous diet is exactly how it's supposed to be.
You sound like one of those nutty religious types insisting that their way of life - no matter how damaging it may be for others - is absolutely the 'right' choice because it's 'supposed to be.'

Like wickedly cruel, intensive chicken farms and resource-hogging, pollution-spewing beef production is somehow pre-ordained in some sort of twisted natural order.

There's very little that's remotely natural about industrial meat production and factory farms.
 
You sound like one of those nutty religious types insisting that their way of life - no matter how damaging it may be for others - is absolutely the 'right' choice because it's 'supposed to be.'

Like intensive chicken farms and resource-hogging, pollution spewing beef production is ordained in some sort of natural order.
You sound like one of those nutty veganists who believe meat eating and factory farming are one in the same.
 
You sound like one of those nutty veganists who believe meat eating and factory farming are one in the same.

Are you denying that the VAST majority of chicken meat comes from industrial farming? And that vast quantities of meat aren't being produced in fast-growing number of factory farms in the UK?

There are currently almost 800 U.S.-style “megafarms” in the U.K., and since 2011, the number of intensive pig and poultry farms has increased by 26 percent, the investigation revealed. The largest farms hold more than a million chickens, 20,000 pigs, or 2,000 dairy cows. (Poultry is by far the biggest sector, comprising 86 percent of the permit-holding intensive operations.)


Whilst it is often claimed that the UK has the highest standards of animal welfare world-wide, around 70% of the UK's farm animals are kept in factory farms every year.

British farmers are under growing pressure to use more intensive methods to produce huge quantities of cheap meat, eggs and dairy. But this comes at a great cost to animal welfare, to human health, and to the environment.


In England alone, according to 2020 data obtained by the Guardian and Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the number of permitted intensive livestock facilities in England has risen 7% since 2017 to 1,313 as of February this year. Of these, 1,092 are poultry and 221 are pig units, up from 1,016 and 210 respectively. Scotland has seen a rise of 10% and Wales has seen the highest rise, up 21% since 2017. Northern Ireland’s figures have not shown any increase.


Here's an interactive map where you can see the explosive rise n intensive poultry farms


And in America:

We estimate that 99% of US farmed animals are living in factory farms at present. By species, we estimate that 70.4% of cows, 98.3% of pigs, 99.8% of turkeys, 98.2% of chickens raised for eggs, and over 99.9% of chickens raised for meat are living in factory farms.


And is this 'how it's supposed to be' too?

1627258917966.png

1627258945030.png

Later, several farmers showed me round their sheds. Inside one, I stood rather stunned at the sheer scale of the building stretching in front of me and the 45,000 chickens crowded into the space. They pecked at plastic feeders or the occasional small bale of hay providing “environmental enrichment”.

This is how 95% of the one billion chickens raised in the UK each year are grown: chicken is the country’s most popular meat and these massive sheds are why it’s so cheap.

 
Are you denying that the VAST majority of chicken meat comes from industrial farming? And that vast quantities of meat aren't being produced in fast-growing number of factory farms in the UK?
Are you denying that the Vast majority of meat in the UK and Europe DOESN'T come from factory farms?
 
So the VAST majority of meat in the UK isn't factory farmed? That's what I thought.
I'm sorry. I can't help you if you're unable to read the links I posted or wish to remain in some sort of weird denial.

Here's the questions I asked you again. They're very straightforward and haven't benefited from your attempt to twist and misrepresent what was actually said.

Are you denying that the VAST majority of chicken meat comes from industrial farming?
And that vast quantities of meat aren't being produced in fast-growing number of factory farms in the UK?


Could you answer them now please?
 
I'm sorry. I can't help you if you're unable to read the links I posted or wish to remain in some sort of weird denial.

Here's the questions I asked you again. They're very straightforward and haven't benefited from your attempt to twist and misrepresent what was actually said.

Are you denying that the VAST majority of chicken meat comes from industrial farming?
And that vast quantities of meat aren't being produced in fast-growing number of factory farms in the UK?


Could you answer them now please?
I'd guess that a large percentage of chicken meat comes from large factory farms, but I have no idea of the exact numbers. Would you like to quote them for me?
My turn, and seeing as we've been discussing beef for 99% of the thread... Are you denying that the VAST majority of beef in the UK and Europe DOESN'T come from factory farms?
 
I'd guess that a large percentage of chicken meat comes from large factory farms, but I have no idea of the exact numbers. Would you like to quote them for me?
My turn, and seeing as we've been discussing beef for 99% of the thread... Are you denying that the VAST majority of beef in the UK and Europe DOESN'T come from factory farms?

I stated that the "vast majority of chicken meat comes from industrial farming." You are welcome to try and disprove this even though I have already posted plenty of evidence to support that claim.

I also stated that "vast quantities of meat are being produced in fast-growing number of factory farms in the UK," and also supported that claim with relevant links. I made no mention of Europe, neither did I singularly specify beef, so it really would help if you stopped trying to twist and distort what I have clearly stated.

And there's also plenty of evidence that industrial-scale beef farming is on the rise in the UK:



 
Back
Top Bottom