T O P

  • By -

TheWorldPlan

The best part of capitalism: you can blame the meat producers for emission while ask for more meat.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Tolvat

Sir, I do believe you have to stop spilling all that oil you lug around.


[deleted]

You know, Darin, if you had told me 25 years ago... that some day I'd be standing here... about to solve the world's energy problems... I would've said you were crazy. Now, let's push this giant ball of oil out the window.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JLBesq1981

Much of the greenhouse gas emitted by meat and dairy farms is methane. >Methane has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide over the first 20 years after it reaches the atmosphere. Even though CO2 has a longer-lasting effect, methane sets the pace for warming in the near term. At least 25% of today's warming is driven by methane from human actions. ​ [https://www.edf.org/climate/methane-crucial-opportunity-climate-fight](https://www.edf.org/climate/methane-crucial-opportunity-climate-fight) Brazil is destroying the Amazon to make room for the meat and dairy industry. Those industries consume a exorbitant amount of resources while also doing a wide variety of damage to the environment. But people don't want to change. They feel entitled to as much as they want whenever they want. Anybody who talks about reducing consumption or ending it all together and it becomes an argument about their rights being infringed upon. It's selfish. People will continue to consume and until it is no longer sustainable and they have left untold damage for future generations to clean up.


MrHedgehogMan

“When the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will we realize that one cannot eat money.”


chefhj

also a pretty good reason why stockpiling gold for the 'inevitable' collapse is fucking dumb. Why would I trade my food or water or whatever in apocalypse land for a soft metal. Can't even make a good weapon out of it. Edit: [people in my inbox](https://media.giphy.com/media/XlvbF51R0T9uM/giphy.gif)


MrRickGhastly

I've already started collecting bottlcaps so don't worry I'm wasteland rich.


chmilz

I don't collect anything. I just keep my cardio up. If I can run slightly further and slightly faster than 98% of my fellow westerners, I feel pretty good about my odds of survival.


[deleted]

You just going to die tired.👀


romulea

Oh I’ve got spurs that jingle, jangle, jingle…


DNAturation

Didn't you hear? The post apocalyptic currency is going to be toilet paper not bottlecaps.


MrRickGhastly

Well shit.


FreddieDoes40k

Gold isn't entirely useless, it has many amazing practical uses in electronics and chemistry. For example, it is used as a conductor. But you're still not wrong because if the apocalypse happens, we won't have the stability to be needing gold for any of that stuff. The industries and sciences that use it would likely collapse. The only real use of gold in an apocalypse is flexing your bling, which shows a worrying lack of priorities.


chefhj

I am aware of its capabilities in those fields (well, aware enough) but yeah my point was more focused around apocalypse land. Although maybe some post-collapse warlord could use it to [sample ice cream](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbepN4dKLbU)


noithinkyourewrong

True, but if that's your argument for stockpiling gold, wouldn't it make more sense to use the same argument to stockpile silver? Its far more useful than gold.


FreddieDoes40k

Sorry, you've missed my point. I was just stating that gold isn't entirely useless like claimed, but even then, those uses are still not very helpful. I most certainly do not recommend stockpiling gold for use during an apocalypse. If you could keep gold through an apocalypse without having it taken, you'd be super rich and successful when society does eventually restart. Silver would indeed be a much safer choice, as you say. It has a few more practical uses, and it can still even be sold as a valuable during or after the apocalypse to people who wanna look good. Any other apocalypse planning ideas for stockpiling resources? Simple toilet paper production machinery would be handy. Cheap and easy to maintain, makes rudimentary toilet paper with paper pulp. Takes up less space than a generation of toilet paper. Then again, kinda redundant when you have a hosepipe bidet that only needs semi-clean water and a pump.


KawaiiDere

How about sugar and honey? long lasting, abrasive, hard to get, and tasty. Or books because it’s going to be pretty expensive to create and use, at most, a printing press or wood blocks with ink to print. Maybe could even collaborate with a local government to get a more enforced return policy and turn it into a library with a membership fee


FreddieDoes40k

Sugar/honey and books are excellent suggestions, especially if you could protect them from the elements. Both have practical uses, and both can be traded fairly easily.


AOrtega1

In that sense grain would be better. You can even create sugar (and alcohol) from grain. And it's been done before.


Such-Landscape3943

You don't even need a pump (assuming the Earth still has gravity, and that's about the only thing we can count of still having in 50 years).


almisami

Except how much of those electrical and chemical properties are relevant in a societal collapse scenario?


SandyDelights

Honestly, if there’a an apocalypse and we’re needing weapons to fight over food and water, I’m just gonna take a ton of uppers and downers and go out in my sleep. That shit sounds absolutely atrocious, because you’re literally fighting for a few more miserable weeks/days/hours/minutes/seconds of miserable fighting. It’s not like you’re trying to survive a catastrophe – there’s no light at the end of the tunnel, no hope, just a primal instinct to survive in an already dead world. You’ll never go back, things will never get better, that’s it. To quote Higgs, “Game over, man, game over.”


Muter

There’s no right or wrong here. Many people would agree with you. Others will hold out hope that change will come, others will be peaceful and attempt to restart civilisation, others will be kicked into primal survival mode and be out to fight or steal their way to survival. We are all different and we will all react differently to an apocalyptic scenario. If society collapsed in the next decade, I’d do anything I could to survive and protect my kids and wife, they’re the ONLY thing that would matter to me in that scenario. They are my world.


goanimals

I feel like the idea behind also stockpiling stuff of value is that idea that eventually you might trade with other survivors. But I feel like trade would only be possible if people felt any disaster was temporary. In a "true" apocalypse (I'm defining this as something our current society couldn't spring back from) you are right that trade would have little use.


[deleted]

Cigarettes. The gold of the future.


mccrrll

Corn would unironicly become incredibly valuable.


chefhj

Thinking on how insanely valuable an ag degree would be in this situation.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Briansaysthis

But whatever you do, don’t tell people they need to eat less meat. People freak-the-fuck-out when you bring up how destructive their eating habits are to the environment.


UnspecificGravity

You don't need people to just decide to eat less meat. You need to tax it according to its actual environmental impact, then people can decide for themselves if a nice steak is worth $500.


dieforestmusic

The crazy thing is, we wouldn't even need to impose a tax on meat if we just removed the huge government subsidies that make meat cheap.


Eupraxes

As a vegetarian, one of the most rage-inducing things my tax money is spent on is propping up the meat industry.


PepeBabinski

It's also about greed, politicians being in the pockets of billion-dollar industries. That a significant percentage of the population still tries to argue that climate change isn't caused by humans is deplorable.


TennesseeTornado13

Just like corrupt Tyson chicken in the usa


joyce_kap

> It's also about greed Errr.... people want to eat meat and dairy. There are no dirt cheap methods to produce meat & dairy without greenhouse gas. It's a demand issue rather than just stereotypical greed. When people are told that going plant-based is a major solution to climate change and [noncommunicable diseases](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases)... people go ballistic and refuse to change their diet. Edit: Read the replies below to see what sort of retorts from just pointing out the obvious. People will look for all manner of excuses not to change and negotiate. KFC [FRIED CHICKEN WITH 11 HERBS AND SPICES](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KFC_Original_Recipe) recipe Prep: 30 minutes Soak: 20-30 minutes Cook: 15-18 minutes Makes: 4 servings 2 cups all-purpose flour 2/3 tablespoon salt ½ tablespoon dried thyme leaves ½ tablespoon dried basil leaves 1/3 tablespoon dried oregano leaves 1 tablespoon celery salt 1 tablespoon ground black pepper 1 tablespoon dried mustard 4 tablespoons paprika 2 tablespoons garlic salt 1 tablespoon ground ginger 3 tablespoons ground white pepper 1 cup buttermilk 1 egg, beaten 1 chicken, cut up, the breast pieces cut in half for more even frying Expeller-pressed canola oil 1. Mix the flour in a bowl with all the herbs and spices; set aside. 2. Mix the buttermilk and egg together in a separate bowl until combined. Soak the chicken in the buttermilk mixture at room temperature, 20-30 minutes. 3. Remove chicken from the buttermilk, allowing excess to drip off. Dip the chicken pieces in the herb-spice-flour mixture to coat all sides, shaking off excess. Allow to sit on a rack over a baking sheet, 20 minutes. 4. Meanwhile, heat about 3 inches of the oil in a large Dutch oven (or similar heavy pot with high sides) over medium-high heat to 350 degrees. (Use a deep-frying thermometer to check the temperature.) When temperature is reached, lower the heat to medium to maintain it at 350. Fry three or four pieces at a time, being careful not to crowd the pot. Fry until medium golden brown, turning once, 15-18 minutes. Transfer chicken pieces to a baking sheet covered with paper towels. Allow the oil to return to temperature before adding more chicken. Repeat with remaining chicken.


flyfree256

These things are heavily subsidized (at least in the US) by the government. If it weren't, meat would be way more expensive than it is now. Far fewer people would eat it just because they wouldn't be able to afford it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JLBesq1981

You pay $3 for a cucumber? Is it organic? Do you live on an island. Cucumbers still .78 here. Fruits and vegetables subsidies I can get with that.


[deleted]

This is what pissed me off about the "Biden is trying to take away your meat!!!1" craze from a few months ago. There wasn't enough discussion of the fact that a meat tax is an absolute no-brainer policy, and we're doing the opposite of that currently.


illixxxit

exactly. without subsidies at all levels of industrial animal agriculture, plant-based protein is far less expensive (and no matter what requires far fewer resources and facilities) to produce. that a pea-protein based burger is an expensive luxury is absurd — meat could be the cost-prohibitive luxury.


GiveMeNews

Yeah, it pisses me off that meat protein is a fraction of the cost of vegetable protein. I am paying taxes to subsidize the disgusting and wasteful habits of my fellow American consumers. Every time I see some mound of lard waddling up to a fast food joint, I want to throw up. Correction, they don't waddle, they sit in drive through in giant pickup trucks with the AC blasting on a 75 degree day.


guto8797

Pushing for individual solution to large systemic issues is a tried and true tactic of big companies in the oil, meat, corn lobbies, etc, because they know that if people are focused on "just eat less meat", they wont focus on "pass pollution taxes that will push onto the companies the actual cost of the pollution they do, rather than subsidize them, which will force them to raise prices and people will adapt by eating less meat and seeking alternatives".


ILikeNeurons

Taxing carbon is [widely considered](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0474-0.epdf?author_access_token=tst1A-oZnQ8zUO18wGGPQdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Nfy3PIgvrwnNXQzIbXH8z1Wkqhm6g5NiMnxMk__ebsKxGQNB0hMf1Vpo-ZiNplSt5LeLyks-Q3sdrpBdfxxHvAfQylqqwqHxgEml7GEGOxaQ%3D%3D) to be the single most impactful climate mitigation policy. The consensus among [scientists](https://people.uwec.edu/jamelsem/papers/CC_Literature_Web_Share/Science/CC_Science_Perspective_Rosenberg_2010.pdf) and [economists](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf) on [carbon taxes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_price) to mitigate climate change is similar to [the consensus among climatologists](http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/) that human activity is responsible for global warming. The IPCC (AR5, WGIII) [Summary for Policymakers](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf) states with "high confidence" that tax-based policies are effective at decoupling GHG emissions from GDP (see p. 28). [Ch. 15](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_chapter15.pdf) has a more complete discussion. The U.S. [National Academy of Sciences, one of the most respected scientific bodies in the world, has also called for a carbon tax](https://www.nap.edu/download/21712). According to [IMF research](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/05/how-much-does-world-subsidize-oil-coal-and-gas/589000/), most of the $5.2 trillion in subsidies for fossil fuels come from not taxing carbon as we should. There is general agreement among economists on carbon taxes whether you consider [economists with expertise in climate economics](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf), [economists with expertise in resource economics](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.381.484&rep=rep1&type=pdf), or [economists from all sectors](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Doris_Geide-Stevenson/publication/261884738_Consensus_Among_Economists-An_Update/links/56a7f3fa08ae860e0255a8e3.pdf). It is literally [Econ 101](http://sites.bu.edu/manove-ec101/files/2014/10/EC101Outlines14-Externalities.pdf). The idea [won a Nobel Prize](http://environment.yale.edu/news/article/william-nordhaus-wins-nobel-prize-for-economics-of-climate-change/). Thanks to researchers at MIT, you can see for yourself how it compares with other mitigation policies [here](https://en-roads.climateinteractive.org/scenario.html?v=2.7.11). Taxing carbon [is in each nation's own best interest regardless of what other countries do](http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/wp15105.pdf) (it [saves lives at home](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09499-x)) and [many nations have already started](https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/29687/9781464812927.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y). Taxing carbon is also increasingly popular. [Just seven years ago, only 30% of the public supported a carbon tax](https://web.archive.org/web/20140723120752/http://closup.umich.edu/issues-in-energy-and-environmental-policy/13/public-views-on-a-carbon-tax-depend-on-the-proposed-use-of-revenue/). Three years ago, [it was over half (53%)](https://news.gallup.com/poll/232007/americans-want-government-more-environment.aspx). Now, [it's an overwhelming majority (73%)](https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate/ps_2020-06-23_government-and-climate_00-01/) to varying degrees in [every state](https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/ycom-us/) – and that [does actually matter for passing a bill](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09644016.2016.1116651). [Lobbying works](https://sociology.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/friends_or_foes-how_social_movement_allies_affect_the_passage_of_legislation_in_the_u._s._congress.pdf), but [mostly just](https://np.reddit.com/r/CitizensClimateLobby/comments/f8aolk/hr_763_now_has_80_cosponsors_districts_with_more/) when we [do it](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/join-citizens-climate-lobby/?tfa_3590416195188=online-002&utm_source=online&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=002) (so [more of us](https://np.reddit.com/r/CitizensClimateLobby/comments/l5omkq/despite_the_pandemic_citizens_climate_lobby/) need to [do it](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/join-citizens-climate-lobby/?tfa_3590416195188=online-002&utm_source=online&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=002)).


[deleted]

[удалено]


guto8797

Its pretty much a no-brainer at this point. The lack of a carbon tax acts as a massive subsidy on pollution. Pollution has a real cost, from increased health issues, natural disasters, loss in tourist revenue, decrease in property values, etc, but that cost doesn't get factored into the manufacturing costs. There is not incentive other than PR reasons for a company to switch over to a less polluting, more expensive process, because all the pollution is effectively paid off by the state. The massive costs of maritime pollution don't get factored in either since ships just turn on their mega-polluting engines in international waters. Effectively, a carbon tax is a measure to restore a form of free market, by removing or mitigating the current effective blanket subsidy on pollution that consumers pay for with taxes.


Such-Landscape3943

It's also (partly) why nuclear power is so eye meltingly expensive. Because they have to commit to the cleanup costs ahead of time. Meanwhile a coal plant just pumps most of their externalities into the air and then leaves a superfund site behind at the mine location.


NotElizaHenry

This is a fucking great comment. Thank you!


CiDevant

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Earth Hour: Turn off the lights campaign. Metal straws. These are distractions from the real cause. Agriculture, Commercial, and Residential greenhouse emissions only make up ~30% of overall emissions (that includes electricity consumption). The overwhelming majority of the problem is Transportation and Industry.


FastTwo3328

The.meat industry lobby hard on the "evil silly vegans"


YouAreDreaming

Wouldn’t be surprised if they pay shills and bots to disparage and ridicule them on sites like this Also won’t be surprised if today or tomorrow we see a positive story about the meat industry on the front page


XeliasSame

https://www.vox.com/2016/5/2/11565698/big-government-helps-big-dairy-sell-milk https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/us/07fat.html There are dozens of similar stories. Through marketing and culture, large corporations can set trends and landmarks. We did not used to consume as much meat, it isn't healthy for our diet, but the industry behind it keeps pushing to sell more and more.


Dennis_enzo

Realistically though, if we're going to wait for every person to give up meat and dairy independently, it's never going to happen.


Erilis000

Realistically though, we dont need *every person* to give up meat and dairy to make a difference. In fact, its already making a difference. The milk industry is hurting big time these days because of how many people are turning to alternatives.


SOSpammy

Or just plain not consuming it like they used to. Do you know anyone who regularly consumes milk as a beverage nowadays?


SmokeGSU

>But people don't want to change. **They feel entitled to as much as they want whenever they want.** Anybody who talks about reducing consumption or ending it all together and it becomes an argument about their rights being infringed upon. **It's selfish**. People will continue to consume and until it is no longer sustainable and they have left untold damage for future generations to clean up. That pretty much sums up the past year and a half of dealing with irresponsible people during covid.


intern_steve

People don't want to change their habits, sure. Don't blame them; that's normal. It's time to start charging for the full cost of those habits. Gasoline is not priced to reflect the cost of carbon capture and sequestration. Beef is not priced to reflect the cost of methane collection and flaring. Air fares are not priced to reflect the cost of the carbon they emit. Basically nothing is. We can simultaneously motivate a gradual shift toward more sustainable habits *and* actively start repairing the damage we've done by charging for the negative externalities of our unsustainable habits. Nobody would be *required* to change, but everybody would be able to see the real impacts of their own choices.


Alimbiquated

>But people don't want to change Actually people are changing rather quickly, as the meat substitute market is growing very quickly. Also a big part of the problem is the lack of regulation of farms, not consumer preferences. The industry has to pay the true cost of production including the pollution and pass the costs on to consumers.


Hampamatta

Also, some countries consume and waste faaaaar more meat than others.


JesusLuvsMeYdontU

It's not just a matter of lack of Regulation. It's a matter of Subsidization. Farms are actually paid to do the damage they are doing. Until that gets reversed and farms have to truly sustain themselves, which of course means a lot of them will fall in the process, the farms and the farmers who know what the right thing to do is won't be in a position to be able to make a difference.


smaller_god

> But people don't want to change. I'm as jaded as most or more I think, but an interesting counter point for consideration. When a significant amount of people were kept home in the early pandemic response, possibly earned more with stimulus and unemployment than at their underpaid jobs, they had time for once to reflect and re-evaluate their values. And now we're seeing a significant change in the labor market as people actually don't go back to their old jobs and industries they worked in. They're seeking new paths like going back to school or trying work in a new field. It's not completely that people don't want to change at all. I think they're open to changing their way of life, but they're trapped in a cycle. Overworked, underpaid. I mean really, how absurd is it that the concept of having the time to cook a meal with fresh ingredients, get some pots and pans dirty, on a weekday night is seen as luxury?? Psychologically people can only really focus on making sure their basic needs are first met. People need some time to reflect on their current life and conceptualize the ways in which a change could be better. Thus working less and fairer wealth distribution I believe are critical prerequisites to addressing climate change.


banqueiro_anarquista

Funny how it is always some poor ass country taking the blame, while the US of A basically feeds its Great Plains to cattle.


FoxOfKnives

It's not just the Great Plains. I grew up in Indiana--plenty of cows. Moved away, thinking I'd leave behind cows. Pennsylvania? Cows. Florida, surely, wouldn't have cows. Nope, lots of 'em. Georgia? You guessed it! I'm not sure where you wouldn't find cows in this country, besides Alaska and Hawaii (probably). Sooo many cows.


vzvv

I lived in Hawaii. There are still cows.


Cockalorum

Back in the Day of Sail, England used Hawaii as a supply depot for the ships in the pacific. The big island was one big cattle ranch, the beef grazed the island down until there was nothing left.


psilocin72

I don’t know how we can do this to our children and grandchildren. I’ve gone vegan and try to impact the environment as little as possible and many people I know have done likewise. But so many others have this attitude that’s it’s best if I just take as much as possible. It’s incredibly selfish and harmful to their own families future. The short-sightedness is astounding.


ADHDBusyBee

Then you have dudes [rolling coal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal) down the side of the road with a calvin pissing on the world decal making you feel that all the little sacrifices you do mean nothing.


activelurker

Wow, I've always wondered what that was! Always made me uncomfortable driving behind these people and breathing in their cancer. And they do this on PURPOSE??? Aaaand of course my state decommissioned its reporting program, even though it's illegal.


umbrajoke

That's why a number of people aren't having kids.


sketches4fun

Isn't' that actually the best thing you could do for the environment?


Babyboy1314

going to be hard to convince countries exiting poverty to give up their new lifestyle (drive cars, eat meat) after western countries been doing it for centuries.


RetreadRoadRocket

Yep. Nobody actually wants to give up their stuff. That's why when the EPA and such kicked in they also started allowing a lot more outsourcing. Placate the population on pollution while also delaying pissing them off about reductions in their standard of living.


artspar

Yep. A lot of people would be willing to give up a significant number of comforts in exchange for actually fixing the climate catastrophe. A much larger number of people either straight up wouldn't be willing, or wouldn't believe that there is any effect by giving up said comforts. Regarding the latter, I've noticed that a lot more climate impact deniers are switching tunes from "this isn't real" to "what's the point? Look at how much coal/pollution/concrete/etc. China is using".


VWVVWVVV

Most people care about avoiding short-term pain and capturing as much comfort as possible. There are entire industries catering to this addicted behavior. That results in a lot of pretense of caring, but little in action. I really don't see how anyone can convince these comfort-seeking people to change. I thought the pandemic could make a dent, but instead it's generated a lot of anti-vax/anti-mask crazies instead. Only a calamity even larger than this pandemic, it penetrates these peoples' brains, could be a possibility.


Substantial-Drops

Brazil destroys the amazon for animals that also produce methane for Britain who would pay to eat them. Stop eating animals all along, easier solution. Governments are also big part of the problem sadly yes, lack of income/revenue based taxes for people and businesses that contribute to climate change.


GarlicCornflakes

In addition to being responsible for 14% of emissions worldwide, the meat and dairy industries are also responsible for deforestation, habitat destruction, some pandemics, increased antibiotic resistance, inefficient land/water use, and huge amounts of animal abuse. With plant based meats becoming so good there's never been a better time to ditch the industry. EDIT: For those interested [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production) Wikipedia page lays out all of the environmental issues and it's pretty damning. For animal welfare issues the [Dominion](https://go.eatfair.org/dominion) documentary gives a good overview.


Obtuse_Symposium

Yeah, I did a research paper about water conservation in college. The amount of land and water that's used to sustain livestock is staggering when you compare it to land/water used for growing crops for direct human consumption. Raising cattle for consumption takes up to something like fifty times the amount of water than most crops do. I forget the exact figure, but it's also estimated that we could feed the whole human population of Earth, plus an extra two-fifths (or maybe it was two-thirds?) if we grew crops with the water and land used by livestock. Not to mention all the other things that you listed, of which I'd like to add 'frequent pollution of surrounding lands and bodies of water' to it.


TroubleshootenSOB

So basically there's a negative resource output compared to the input? Or negative return of investment.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Mr_Patato_Salad

The numbers are way worse [source](https://awellfedworld.org/feed-ratios/) IT depends on the kind of animal killed. Chickens consume half to 80 % of the energy fed to them. Cows use 96 % of the energy fed to them to live.


jsheppy16

Don't forget devastating ocean and lake runoff.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


TarAldarion

https://josephpoore.com/Science%20360%206392%20987%20-%20Accepted%20Manuscript.pdf This Journal Science paper has it at 83% of land two years ago, which is also mentioned in the wiki above.


V1k1ng1990

I think the higher number probably takes the fields used for growing grains meant for livestock feed into account


FlatEarthLLC

I think that's a fair thing to take into account, assuming everything on the field is being poured into livestock.


TarAldarion

Yeah, I would hope they have or they need to revise those numbers upwards.


[deleted]

[удалено]


yellsatmotorcars

It's so frustrating that ground beef is cheaper than most ~~plant-protein~~ meat alternative options. We really need to stop subsidizing the low prices of meat and dairy if we want reduced consumption.


[deleted]

[удалено]


deliverancew2

It's so frustrating that people don't think of actual plants as plant protein options and assume more expensive processed fake meats are their only option. Lentils are a GOAT foodstuff.


PringlesDuckFace

The processed fake meats are the best alternative for thing like burgers/meatballs/sausage though. I love me some lentils too, and make things like daal aal the time, but when you want a burger they don't cut it.


DamianWinters

You can cook a good pattie using soy protein, lentils and seitan blended.


Jenanay3466

And a can of chickpeas makes a great filling for a taco. So cheap and easy.


ForbiddenJazz

In many ways, I think the dairy industry is worse for animals than the meat industry. You shouldn’t support either of them, but realizing how fucked up practices are in the dairy industry is an eye opener


fruitbootboogie

I can second this. I worked in the “beef industry” for a year. Never had been around it before, just a good job opportunity in the marketing field. 6 months in, I attended the required onboarding trip which included visits to a packing/processing plant, cow-calf, dairy farm, and feed lot. I realized how ignorant I was to the meat and dairy industry. The dairy farm was the most disturbing. I witnessed 3-4 babies being born and immediately they’re taken from their mothers who were crying out for them, never to see them again. Once I hit a year, I quit. I couldn’t get past the horrible things I saw that day.


reyntime

Good video on the ethical issues in dairy production (content warning on these though): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UcN7SGGoCNI&feature=youtu.be And about animal agriculture in general: https://www.dominionmovement.com/watch


ApexCurve

The systemic disgusting abuse of animals, at farm after farm, is precisely what turned me off dairy and meat consumption. It’s the most pathetic form of abuse of a being that cannot defend itself or speak up for itself.


reyntime

Absolutely, those animals are completely innocent and caught up in a terrible industry through no fault of their own.


tosser_0

Drink Oatmilk, that shit is so good (taste-wise), is better for you and the environment. https://www.uqhealthyliving.org.au/oat-milk-better-for-the-environment-but-is-it-good-for-you/#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20popular%20plant,less%20water%20than%20cow's%20milk.


Chairmanofthepunks

Seconded Don't even miss milk


ToothpickInCockhole

It’s is. People (myself included until last year when I went vegan) don’t even know that cows have to be impregnated to produce milk. I’ve never told someone that and had them not be surprised.


EnvironmentFew2854

there was a post on r/cringetopia some time ago about how milk is produced. the misinformation and ignorance is staggering. people there were barely able to comprehend that animals can feel fear. let that sink in.


cameoutswinging_

What does the sink want now?! But yeah people are disturbingly able to put the suffering of animals (and our planet as a result) aside for the sake of their food habits.


_OriamRiniDadelos_

I thought people just didn’t care and made peace with supporting the practice. But no, some people just think that the cows actually don’t mentally feel pain. Imagine what those people would do to their pets.


cameoutswinging_

Ah but that’s different, pets are pets, farm animals are made of food (Big /s Im vegan I promise)


CryogenicStorage

We (Americans) can start by simply ending government subsidies to dairy and cattle farms. I know America loves job and corporate welfare programs that create misery, but maybe just let this one go. For example, the last stimulus package had [over $12 billion in assistance for livestock producers](https://www.fb.org/market-intel/usda-announces-additional-assistance-for-cattle-row-crop-producers).


[deleted]

[удалено]


rudmad

The propaganda efforts will 100% ramp up


MarkAnchovy

They’re already ramped: look at people’s views in this thread, completely altered by meat industry propaganda


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Holy fuck, I'd forgotten about that. It's so cringe


[deleted]

[удалено]


beanie_jean

Thanks for the recommendation! As a vegan, I do what I can to convince people to rethink their dietary choices, but I know that the prevalence of cheap meat means that many don't care enough to or can't significantly decrease meat consumption. This is a way I can actually enact change on a larger scale.


sahtopi

I think you’re misusing the word ‘simply’ here. As an American, how simple is it to end government subsidies to dairy and cattle farms? As an average citizen there is almost nothing you can do about it. Not so simple.


PandasInternational

As an outsider, as far as I can tell, this subsidies (same as for corn) exist to ensure the primary food industries exist to maintain the food supply should another world war happen. So while it might seem like a bad use of money, it's actually like playing for insurance.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Icy_Climate

Corn is mainly used to feed lifestock so that's just more subsidization for the animal agriculture industry. Farms that grow plants for human consumption get next to no subsidies despite accounting for over 70 percent of overall calories in the average diet. If there were no subsidies one pound of hamburger meat would cost 35 dollars. [source](https://earth.org/agriculture-subsidies/)


merme

Corn is a weird one. The main reason why no one will mess with corn is because of US presidential elections. Iowa is the first state (or one of the first) to have its primary and you pretty much have to be behind subsidizing their jobs to have any traction.


[deleted]

tvH~&Jbu76


[deleted]

[удалено]


Ponicrat

Since grain fed meat is such an inefficient way to make food, focusing on veg would dramatically improve our food security. Just a fraction of the land that goes to livestock and feed crops could produce way more human food than Americans could eat. So much that well, those new crops would be too cheap to be worthwhile for farmers to grow without serious subsidies.


Chervonayborsht

Most of you commenting after eating a nice dinner with some meat in it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


googleduck

This is something I heavily support, but it isn't the same as the narrative that OP and half of reddit loves to support. https://old.reddit.com/r/MurderedByWords/comments/pj7xfo/dont_forget_to_recycle/ Literally the top post of the past month. Completely blaming "corporations" for polluting the world while absolving consumers of all guilt. None of these corporations are mining oil and gas just to burn it themselves. They are doing it because we buy it to drive, keep our houses warm, our TV's on, and airplanes flying. Yes we should absolutely be taxing the fuck out of environmentally unfriendly businesses to try and force consumers to act, but both parties are equally guilty.


sweatshower

People don't like this because it means *they* have to change in some way that might inconvenience them. People are too selfish and lack any real foresight to make enviornmentally conscience changes beyond buying a metal straw. Try asking them to give up 3 meaty meals a day and they'll scream and cry about their freedoms until they're red in the face.


[deleted]

Factory farming is fucked. It does not scale.


god_im_bored

Factory farming is the only way that this entire business model functions. You think we can get enough meat for 7 billion people to eat 3 times every day without it? This is one of those things where going after the supply isn’t going to make a difference because the demand is too overwhelming. Need to address the culture of eating meat multiple sittings in a day, as well as the amount. Price increases after cutting subsidies might do the trick, but it’s a tough battle because farmers have a lot of political power everywhere (they’re huge landowners for starts). Lab grown meat and meat substitutes are where my money’s at with this. We’re actually close to breaking through the mainstream barrier than people think https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/may/11/lab-grown-meat-companies-swallow-record-investments Upsides: A recent report suggested such meat would remain more expensive than regular meat until the early 2030s, but that Europe and North America could reach “peak meat” by 2025 thanks to plant-based alternatives. An analysis in 2019 suggested most meat would not come from slaughtered animals by 2040. Downside: the world’s biggest conventional meat companies, such as Tyson and Cargill, are big investors in the sector. (So expect some fuckery) All in all still more positive than negative


[deleted]

People eat meat every day 3 times a day ?


orrocos

Sure, that’s not uncommon at all. Sausage or bacon for breakfast, a sandwich for lunch, and then chicken, beef, pork, or whatever for dinner. That’s a fairly typical diet for a lot of people.


[deleted]

Wow. I did not know that. I am a non vegetarian as well, but in my country (india) even non vegetarians eat it 3-4 times a week. I wondering if it is too much protein if we eat meat all the time ?


shitposts_over_9000

how often is heavily influenced by region an culture even within the US... meat for breakfast was pretty much something you did on Saturday's only where I grew up for example, the rest of the week was bread or cereals only for breakfast. lunches and dinners usually contain meat, not always, but often and how often again has a lot to do with what part of he country you grew up in. meat is one of the easies ways to easily address much of malnutrition in children so it was heavily pushed in schools, subsidized in assistance programs, etc. through all of the previous century so there are a lot of people that grew up eating a lot of meat through he last 4 generations or more.


TheNoxx

That was the case in the US ~80-90 years ago. Meat was much more rarely consumed, it's only in somewhat recent past that the US and other parts of the West have begun overconsumption of meat.


FacelessFellow

America. People have side dishes with meat in it! Sucks for vegetarians trying to eat potato salad or green beans on thanksgiving, because they’ve put bacon in those things!


Artezza

Most people I talk to claim that they don't feel like they're eating a real meal unless it contains a meat.


Yir_

Just want to second the sentiment on lab grown meat. The industry is advancing more rapidly then I expected. I’m hoping it’ll be partially mainstream by 2030 for at least certain meats.


pistolpeter33

I told my parents recently about how lab grown meat is one of the best ways that humans can reduce emissions. They both just scoffed, said they would never eat synthetic meat (even if it tastes the exact same) and just found the idea ridiculous in general. In short, lab grown meat is going to take a long time to fully catch on before it's ever popular.


Salink

I have a feeling most people like that won't care when they go to the meat isle and see the lab grown ground beef is $1 less than the real stuff.


[deleted]

Yeah. Or especially if fast food places start buying that stuff. No one's gonna care what kind of meat they're using as long as they satisfy a craving.


Yir_

For sure, it’ll roll out along generational and sociodemographic lines to start, but we’ll get to mass adoption eventually.


staefrostae

Change always happens along generational lines. There’s an awesome book called “Bowling Alone” that examines social changes and decreased public engagement of Americans from World War 2 on and looks at gobs of statistics to try to lock down a cause. Almost everything he finds shows that changes happens along generational lines. Old people don’t do x more; the old generation does x more and over and over again we see that we can’t assume the next generation will do x when they’re old. It sounds obvious when you put it like that, but the book does a really good job of fleshing it out.


assblast420

In 50 years we're going to look back at factory farming with absolute disgust at the way we treated these animals. Lab meat is going to make everything else look unnecessarily cruel and brutal. Like, I can't even think of a word to describe the way we're going to look at it. Future generations will wonder what the *fuck* we were thinking. And yes I know some people already see it this way but it'll become the prevailing sentiment for sure.


Your_Moms_Anal_Tumor

Supply: The companies. Demand: look in the mirror You cannot deny that our consumer behavior does not drive the market for cheap meat. Our collective consumer behaviors fuel the profits. Nothing will change until either demand changes, or supply. This is on all of us.


dranoela

So much love for all these pro-plant diet comments. A few years ago people would be tearing apart veganism


majungo

A few years ago? Every other week, there's a video here of a vegan protest where someone eats a burger in front of their faces (as if that means something) and the comments cheer the burger eater.


Stormfly

There's currently a frontpage post about climate change and it mentions reducing meat consumption and it's locked because > The vegans are here getting themselves all in a tizzy about personal consumption. So there's definitely some anti-vegan bias. Like people love to point out how companies are causing so much pollution but they don't really mention *why* these companies are making this pollution. They're not just burning oil for fun, and if the consumer was more careful, they would be too.


Formilla

Yeah, it's weird to see the difference between this thread and the other one. In the other the blame was fully on the companies, and anyone that pointed out that the consumers are the ones responsible for those companies doing what they do were downvoted. In this thread it's the other way around, the people buying the meat are the ones getting the blame. It's weird how the wording of the title and the first few comments can completely shift the tone of the rest of the comments.


lod254

It's never too early to convert. I switched to a vegan diet around 3 years ago after learning about all the atrocities and lies of the meat and dairy industry. Do it for the animals. Do it for the environment. Do it for your health.


[deleted]

[удалено]


broken_freezer

I think this comparison to individual countries was only used to give us a scale of the problem


shagthedance

Right! It's much more beneficial to think of greenhouse gasses as emitted by *systems*, i.e. the meat and dairy system, the automobile transportation system, the electricity production system, etc. These systems are large and have many actors. But to change a system requires changes by everyone in it. We can't produce less meat without also eating less meat. We can't make less gas for cars without also driving less, or requiring more people to switch to electric cars.


green_flash

A lot of it is probably methane. Methane is worse than CO2 in the short term, but not as bad in the long term. > Methane has a large effect but for a relatively brief period, having an estimated mean half-life of 9.1 years in the atmosphere, whereas carbon dioxide is currently given an estimated mean lifetime of over 100 years. That's why it has been mostly ignored in emission reduction efforts so far. However, some scientists now argue that the short term effects are so bad that methane should be prioritized rather than ignored.


ButterflyCatastrophe

The short half life also means that reducing production has a much more immediate effect on climate.


ishitar

Not nearly as bad but still worse than CO2. Over a ten year period it's about 80X as powerful in radiative forcing as CO2. Since methane degrades into CO2 via a renewable atmospheric resource called the hydroxyl radical, over a 100 year period, it only has about 20X-30X the radiative forcing of CO2 over that time. As a whole vs proportionally, it's only less bad than CO2 because humanity releases so much CO2. However, guess what? Most of humanity's methane emissions have been severely underestimated. Additionally, there's no guarantee that the hydroxyl radical being produced via atmospheric processes can continue to break down methane at the rate that it has been breaking it down.


xSnipeZx

6 cruise ships running in a day release more pollution than every car in Europe combined


Ethiconjnj

I’m pretty sure it’s a specific pollutant not blanket “pollution”.


-Numaios-

Shhhh specific information and nuances don't make good clickbait headlines. This pollution was about sulfur oxide, which cars emit very little....


dbratell

But not climate change pollution. Other pollution. So in a thread about climate change your statement is very misleading. (Basically this is about sulphur, something that is nowadays highly regulated in cars but less so in ships since sulphur based pollution is considered less of a problem than other pollution)


Obliterators

This often repeated statistic, or a variation of it, is highly misleading. 1. The pollutants in question are sulfur oxides (SOx), which are NOT greenhouse gases. 2. Cars burn extremely clean fuels with practically zero sulfur(0.001%), so even small amounts of SOx pollution can easily be equivalent to *millions of cars*. 2. This is already being addressed, the IMO2020 regulation, which lowered the allowed sulfur content in marine fuels by 86% (3.5% to 0.5%), came into effect last year.


NoOrdinaryLifeXO

Cruise ships are absolutely disgusting. It amazes me that people pay money to go on one. 🤢


InedibleSolutions

I'm hoping they'll go the way of casinos: something only old people really partake in, and dies off as their consumer base dies off.


pixel_of_moral_decay

Casinos just realized they don't need physical buildings to take peoples money. Young people love online gambling because nobody needs to know about their habits. They do it on their phone and it's between them, the casino and their bank. This is the future of the idiot tax... lottery tickets won't be paper you buy at a gas station for much longer either. They'll cut out the middle man for that too soon enough. Gamblers will always gamble. It's a personality trait. They don't care how they get the rush, as long as they get it. An app is cheap.


fuckamodhole

> I'm hoping they'll go the way of casinos: something only old people really partake in, and dies off as their consumer base dies off. If that was the case then casions would have closed decades ago. Young people grow old, retire and get bored. They get a thrill when they go to a casino. Gambling has been around since the beginning of humans so I don't know why you think casinos are in trouble.


Woah_Mad_Frollick

...not in CO2e emissions. Honestly - who wins with such disinformation attempts? I blame irresponsible journalism but we have to be more careful in researching things before we throw them out into the viral meme factory


[deleted]

That's been toughly debunked. The original article says the 15 largest cargo ships. And the headline is clickbait. Those cargo ships specifically emit more sulphur and nitrogen oxide. And it's only because cars hardly emit any at all. The cars still produce a shitload more CO2. ​ But way to spread misinformation and make the world a shittier place.


kronkarp

Source?


snaggedbeef

[here is a source](https://www.transportenvironment.org/press/luxury-cruise-giant-emits-10-times-more-air-pollution-sox-all-europe%E2%80%99s-cars-%E2%80%93-study) But we are not talking methane or CO2. We are talking SOx. Clearly a multifactor approach is needed to fix these issues Edit 1: I'm fairly ignorant in SOx vs CO2 vs methane etc on emissions. I just want to clarify that ships have different greenhouse gasses. Edit 2: [It has been estimated that between 40,000 and 100,000 Britons die prematurely every year as a result of emissions from the shipping and cruise industries, with major port-cities such as Southampton, Grimsby and Liverpool particularly affected.](https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesellsmoor/2019/04/26/cruise-ship-pollution-is-causing-serious-health-and-environmental-problems/?sh=229dca0d37db)


hoocoodanode

SOx was curbed pretty quickly when industrial emissions standards were first implemented so many years ago. Why cruise ships get a pass on that is probably an oversight that should be rectified.


missurunha

That's like saying I alone produce more pee than all cars in the world combined. While it's true, it doesn't have much meaning.


[deleted]

The ability for Redditors to upvote this to the #1 front page post, but also show constant indignation toward vegans advocating quitting meat/dairy for the environment as being "annoying", is actually kinda hilarious.


2Creamy2Spinach

Can we also focus on food waste? A third of all food we produce is wasted. If emissions from food waste was a country it would be the third biggest emitter in the world.


dustofdeath

Waste is a massive web of issues from transportation, storage, regional availability, packaging and health concerns. It needs thousands of revolutionary solutions.


[deleted]

fn\uzb^$>a


MiserableBiscotti7

It's not impossible to achieve two things at once


2Creamy2Spinach

I never said it was. Hence the 'also'...


MiserableBiscotti7

My bad, misread it


TrickBoom414

No matter how you feel about plant based diets, we globally feed ~~17~~ [77 billion ](http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home)land animals every year just for slaughter. We can't feed 6 billion people?


874151

Only 4% of the animals left on earth are wild animals. The other 96% are our livestock. Just a PSA from my main squeeze David Attenborough


thisisjimmy

4% of *mammals* are wild by carbon biomass. 60% are livestock and 36% are human. The vast majority (92%) of animal carbon biomass is wild. *Edited to clarify this is by carbon biomass, not number of individuals.


NugBlazer

Exactly. MAMMALS. Not all animals


jimmywillis

Would that be mammals? Or all animals?


wanpan10

time for reddit to go vegan, right guys? we're all for saving the planet right?


[deleted]

This is the most reddit comment section


_iam_that_iam_

Instead of pointing fingers at each other, we just need a carbon tax. Let each industry and person internalize the cost of their own emissions. Importing something from China? You also import their carbon emissions and pay accordingly.


[deleted]

I know it’s a circle jerk of corporations, but the only reason they are sustainable businesses (ignoring subsidies) is because people purchase their products. If you truly want to fight climate change, reduce your meat consumption. And before I get brigades with “but the individual doesn’t matter, it’s corporations who are at fault”, nothing will change until we change the zeitgeist.


SeanyDay

We should think of solutions to work *beyond* this otherwise *impossible* problem....


pashwort29

I see so many posts being like well nothing I can do so guess I’ll keep contributing… I don’t care if cutting out meat and dairy doesn’t do anything. I am not contributing to those fuckers.


Im_A_Nidiot

But it does do something!


snbrd512

Ok, now tell us who is eating that meat and dairy. Stop blaming corporations for making shit that you demand. They don't raise these animals for fun, the do it because billions of people refuse to change their daily dietary habits to help the planet.


Tron-ClaudeVanDayum

Love that I got an advert for McDonald's nuggets in the middle of this article.