• VariousWorldViews@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Eating the rich is by far the most eco-friendly approach as it can dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

      • Striker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hooker spit. Lol. Imagine Jeff Bezos paying you hundreds of thousands to spit on him while trying to hide the fact that, you would gladly do it for free.

    • PanaX@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I vehemently disagree with this statement.

      We need to compost the rich and use that as a soil amendment to grow heirloom vegetables.

      • Erk@cdda.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        One Elon musk can feed a family for a year.

        One farm fertilized with musk mulch can feed a city block!

    • r1veRRR@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok, are actively working on this? Is your work on it so horrendously demanding of all your attention of every single day, that you couldn’t ALSO go vegan, or vegetarian, or just eat less meat? Eat the rich is just a fun day dream and a lazy excuse to not do what you can (like going vegan).

      Eating the rich would also vastly reduce racism, sexism, classism, and worker exploitation. Can I therefore ignore my negligible personal impact, and keep being racist, sexist, classist, and buy only the cheapest clothes crafted by the most exploited third world toddlers?

  • krayj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This crucially important caveat they snuck in there:

    “Prof Scarborough said: “Cherry-picking data on high-impact, plant-based food or low-impact meat can obscure the clear relationship between animal-based foods and the environment.”

    …which is an interesting way of saying that lines get blurry depending on the type of meat diet people had and/or the quantity vs the type of plant-based diet people had.

    Takeaway from the article shouldn’t be meat=bad and vegan=good - the takeaway should be that meat can be an environmentally responsible part of a reasonable diet if done right and that it’s also possible for vegan diets to be more environmentally irresponsible.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s both absolutely true and a massive distraction from the point. An environmentally friendly diet that includes meat is going to involve sustainable hunting not factory farming. In comparison an environmentally friendly vegan diet is staples of meat replacements and not trying to get fancy with it. It’s shit like beans instead of meat, tofu and tempeh when you feel fancy. It means rejecting substitutes that are too environmentally costly such as agave nectar as a sweetener (you should probably use beet or cane based sweetener instead).

      So in short eat vegan like a poor vegan not like a rich person who thinks veganism is trendy

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I source my beef or lamb from low-impact producers, could they have a lower footprint than plant-based alternatives? The evidence suggests, no: plant-based foods emit fewer greenhouse gases than meat and dairy, regardless of how they are produced.

      […]

      Plant-based protein sources – tofu, beans, peas and nuts – have the lowest carbon footprint. This is certainly true when you compare average emissions. But it’s still true when you compare the extremes: there’s not much overlap in emissions between the worst producers of plant proteins, and the best producers of meat and dairy.

      https://ourworldindata.org/less-meat-or-sustainable-meat

      Plant-based foods have a significantly smaller footprint on the environment than animal-based foods. Even the least sustainable vegetables and cereals cause less environmental harm than the lowest impact meat and dairy products [9].

      https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/8/1614/htm

    • HubertManne@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      yes. when you look at charts and such. Someone who exclusively ate meat for some reason who moved to chicken would have a greater impact than someone who exclusively ate chicken and went vegan. Sheep did not show up so well either so im guessing ruminants in general are not going to be so hot. Anyway I would encourage folk to keep it in mind and do what they can. I realize go vegan results in many. Well eff it all then but man just avoiding beef is big impact.

    • Hank@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I barely eat beef anymore, mostly chicken. I don’t want to give up on eating animals, especially since I’m trying to get into shape right now and it would be hard to eat healthy and get enough protein to build up muscle mass.

    • thehatfox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, I think it’s vital to avoid thinking in absolutes over carbon footprints if we are to make real progress. We can argue endlessly over the “necessity” of consuming meat, but that becomes a distraction. Many things are not “necessary”, but most people are not realistically going to live in caves wearing carbon neutral hair shirts.

      We need to continue increasing transparency on the impact of different animal products, so consumers can make informed choices. While also accepting they may not always be perfect.

      • Singar@citizensgaming.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only way to stop people from eating meat is to make a vegan food that tastes better than a bacon cheeseburger.

  • Another Llama ⓥ@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    A couple of people have spoken to me before about wanting to cut back on, or completely cut meat from their diets, but didn’t know where to start. If anyone reading this feels the same way, here’s some fairly basic recipies that I usually recommend (Bosh’s tofu curry is straight up one of the best currys i’ve ever had - even my non-vegan family members love it)

    Written:

    Videos:

    Tofu is also super versatile and is pretty climate-friendly. there’s a bazillion different ways to do tofu, but simply seasoning and pan frying some extra/super firm tofu (like you do with chicken) with some peppers and onions, for fajitas, is an easy way to introduce yourself. Here’s a little guide for tofu newbies: A Guide to Cooking Tofu for Beginners - The Kitchn. If you wanna level up your tofu game with some marinades here’s six.

    Lentils and beans are also super planet friendly, super cheap, and super versatile! You’ll be able to find recipies all over that are based around lentils and beans so feel free to do a quick internet search.

    Sorry for the huge, intimidating wall of text! I do hope someone interested in cutting back on meat found this useful though :)

  • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    In this thread: Shit loads of people who will say they care about the climate crisis on one day, then say they don’t care about the 18.5% of global carbon emissions that the meat industry causes the next day because they can’t get over the decade worth of anti-veganism jokes and memes that they’ve constantly repeated uncritically.

    Individual habits MUST be changed to solve this part of the problem, there is literally no way around that. Getting triggered and writing screeds because you’ve spent decades getting caught up in hate over food choices won’t stop the planet burning.

        • float@waveform.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some people have made eating meat and making fun of vegans their entire personality. They buy things and spend time posting on social media about it. It is basically their hobby. Really sad, honestly.

    • Noedel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nope, gotta blame “the cooperations” because God forbid you admit cooperations only pollute because of your own demand.

      Animal agriculture is a particularly good example here because literally nothing will ever make meat sustainable (except growing it in a lab).

    • HeuristicAlgorithm9@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No amount of individual choices can save the planet. The climate change causes by corporations is sufficiently world ending. So even if literally every single person on the planet went vegan it wouldn’t be enough. The idea of a personal carbon footprint was created by BP in order to make people put the blame on themselves. The only way to stop it is mass industrial action. Personal choice, at least at this point, is completely irrelevant.

      • Djennik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only way to do this is to not buy products that are incredibly harmful to the climate and voting for politicians that want to sharpen climate policy. Industries won’t regulate themselves. Acting like the consumer/voter can’t do shit is just straight up lying and results in inaction.

        • HeuristicAlgorithm9@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I never said anything about not voting for industrial action. But if you look at it logically, if there’s no industrial action with or without consumer choices the world burns, but if there is industrial action then with or without consumer choices (partly because the industrial action would alter what choices are available) the world has a chance to survive. So in our current situation devoting energy and thought to consumer choices is not just pointless if you would otherwise be working towards industrial action in any capacity it is actively detrimental (hence why BP created it as a concept)

          • Djennik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Again who is going to work towards industrial action? Not the industries… That’s not how capitalism works. Do you really think that asking them to be more climate friendly will work?

            Industries listen to two things: money and policy. And I’m not even so sure about the latter. Vote at the ballot and vote with your wallet.

            If you don’t want to change, the CEO of BP won’t either because he’s still getting those tasty dollars out of your pockets at the pump and through government aid.

            • Gutless2615@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              How do you think regulations work?? The poster is correct, no amount of individual action will save us. We need to collectively fight for regulations that force - not ask - businesses to change. “That’s now how capitalism works” — what does that even mean??

    • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      On the other hand, we could always just wait for the rich to tighten meat production and put us all on nutri-loaf.

  • LEX@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You don’t need to cut meat out of your diet to make an impact!

    Cut your meat intake down to just ONE meal a day. That’s it! If everyone did that, it would make an absolutely tremendous impact.

    Start noticing how often you eat meat. Many people eat meat for literally every single meal and don’t even realize it, it’s so ubiquitous in most societies.

    • EndlessApollo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Very true, but vegans are still gonna shit on you for cutting out less that 100% of animal products from your life. Idk how they can be so desperate to be superior to others that they would actively discourage improving your lifestyle just because it could be even better

      • FermatsLastAccount@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Vegans don’t eat animals for the sake of the animals, because they believe killing them unnecessarily is morally wrong.

        Saying you’re only going to eat animals once a day is like saying you’re going to halve the amount of violent crimes you commit and expecting praise for it.

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It depends on wether you’re actually concerned about the animals, or about yourself.

          If you’re concerned about the animals, 100 people reducing by 10% is exactly as good as 10 people reducing by 100%. The difference is, 10 people don’t have to feel guilty. But no animal benefits from that.

          • FermatsLastAccount@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Those 100 people would still be eating 90% as many animals as they were before. People don’t need to eat animals to live, so expecting praise for eating 10% less is pretty funny.

            It’d be like a criminal deciding to decrease the amount of crimes he commits by 10% and expecting people to encourage and praise him.

  • bossito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I upvoted because this message still didn’t reach everyone, but I guess it’s just that people are in denial… like, isn’t this obvious? And weren’t there already dozens of studies proving it?

    • marmo7ade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I got the message and I don’t care. Humans evolved to eat animals. B12 is an essential vitamin whose primary source is meat and dairy. The entire country of India is B12 deficient because of their diet:

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6540890/

      For humans to live, other organisms must die. We are part of the cycle. You want to preserve the biosphere that allows humans to survive? Reduce the number of humans. I am child free.

        • sicjoke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agreed, but it’s too easy to come after plebs like me and my eating habits when comparably private air flight is responsible for orders of magnitude more co2.

          Me turning down my heating or eating less bacon is not going to have the kind of impact that big corporations, government, and super wealthy could have if they curbed their destructive habits.

          • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            How do we hold evil corporations accountable if not refusing to give them our money?

            We can do better in our own lives while advocating for bigger change.

    • ██████████@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      people ate meat for MILLIONS OF YEARS with negligible global warming effect from the animals

      vegans going start blaming the Assyrianz for inventing husbandry before blaming Exxon Mobile BP

      like dude pick your battles

      • LEX@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        People did not consume the amount of meat they do today. Meat used to be a serious luxury most people couldn’t afford at all.

        You should educate yourself instead of knee jerk reacting to bash on vegans.

          • Spzi@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Certainly if we also stop indirect subsidies like the failure to internalize externalities. Include the climate damage caused in the price tag, and people will love a veggy curry instead.

        • ██████████@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I am a vegan bro I hate meet Because I don’t like the taste. I hate vegans trying to turn a food PREFERENCE into a snobbery high horse thing. dude eating Factory Farm Veggies is just as bad if not worse (see Monsanto)

          Maybe Boop A Pipeline if you are truly morally superior

          • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Veganism is not a food preference, you are not vegan.

            Veganism is a stance to avoid harming non-human animals.

  • BeeOneTwoThree@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    People can’t think critically over why they prefer meat over vegetables. They just think they do it because hurr durr meat tastes better or you need protines.

    If they actually think about the fact that they have been eating meat for every meal since they were a child they might understand that it is just a habit they have formed.

    I strongly suggest to those people to try to have 1 dinner a week without meat or fish. It has nothing todo about taste and all about habits and what you are used to.

    Try to challenge yourself a little bit and you might get a better perspective over these things.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was just talking about this idea with a friend. We decided it would be political suicide in the US for anyone to suggest eating less meat.

    People would literally rather see the world burn than give up their chicken nuggets.

    I’m not even hardcore vegetarian. I looked at the situation and agreed it’s hard to ethically justify eating meat. So I started eating less. I’m down to pretty much just “sometimes I get a pizza slice with a meat topping if there’s nothing good without meat”. Maybe I’ll cut that out too one day.

  • Sagrotan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    IMO people should’ve dialed down their meat consume for years, everybody knows what it’s doing. I’m not a vegetarian by any means (I love many veggy recipes though & I adore good (!) tofu), we (my family) are getting meat from organic farms or from hunters for years, that’s more expensive but 2 times a week is absolutely sufficient. Same price as before, roughly. Even my meat devouring daughter thinks like that, but she gets real cranky after 5 days of lentils, bulgur wheat and paprika ;)

    • bumblebrainbee@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I dont understand how people who eat meat every single day don’t feel disgusting. I feel horrible eating meat every day. I have more energy and feel lighter when I limit my meat eating to maybe once or twice a week. Plus my farts don’t smell as awful when I’m eating mostly plant based things. It’s cheaper too! Especially when I end up growing my own garden.

  • Zitroni@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Every time I read about meat and greenhouse gases I feel the need to explain the natural carbon circle. A cow does not produce carbon. It takes carbon from plants and releases it to the atmosphere. Then plants retake that carbon.

    Humans are adding carbon to the atmosphere by digging out stored carbon from the ground and bring it to the atmosphere.

    So we have to fix the part where we bring additional carbon to the atmosphere. But yes, there are other environmental issues with cattle if you read the op’s article.

    The Biogenic Carbon Cycle and Cattle: https://clear.ucdavis.edu/explainers/biogenic-carbon-cycle-and-cattle

    • Vegoon@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel the need to explain the natural carbon circle.

      You know that the problem with ruminants is that they produce methane and not CO2 which is 25 times worse? A cow takes carbon from the ground and the bacteria creates a 25 times more potent GHG. But you are right that creating new fields and tiling the soil is a huge factor.

      IPCC on methan

      • TauZero@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I feel that anyone who advocates to stop eating meat for methane reasons is a vegetarian in disguise who latched onto global climate change to push their own agenda, having failed to dissuade meat eaters on animal rights grounds. They are doing the fight against climate change a disservice by muddying the waters. If they were serious about methane specifically (which anyone concerned about GHG should be, to within (x*25)% of its contribution), they would be dedicating 10 times more of their time in researching some kind of pill to give the cows to stop them from making methane - a much more feasible outcome. But doing so does not synergize with their animal welfare goals.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I feel that anyone who advocates to stop eating meat for methane reasons is a vegetarian in disguise who latched onto global climate change to push their own agenda

          funny, I feel that anyone who complains about being told eating beef is bad for the environment is just two kids in a raincoat. Good luck proving me wrong!

        • ProfezzorDarke@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The other thing is that cattle needs much more space. From all the fields that we could use to grow food, a large part ends up as cattle fodder.

          • TauZero@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s about efficient use of land space, not related to GHG specifically other than tangentially regarding deforestation. Also elsewhere in this thread cattle was accused of being inefficient precisely because they sit in warehouses and eat cereals instead of grass. If cattle can roam pastures and eat grass, that’s an equivalent amount of cereals that did not need to be grown, farm machinery that did not need to run (on fossil fuels) to grow them, and a good amount of land possibly too hilly and rugged for any use otherwise put to productive human use through grazing.

            • tetraodon@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Too bad that’s not how it works. Because beef is profitable, ranchers have all the incentive slashing and burning rainforest to make more money.

              You subsidize this process every time you spend money on beef.

    • DouchePalooza@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      A cow also produces a lot of methane, a much worse greenhouse gas.

      Besides, the problem isn’t the grass from cows grazing, it’s the rainforests that go down all around the world to convert to farmland to produce animal feed.

      It’s much more efficient to use that farmland to feed humans than to feed cows and then feed humans (1kg of meat needs 25kg of feed)

      Disclaimer - I’m not vegan but I try to reduce my meat consumption overall, especially red meats.