Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#81

Post by emodendroket »

hycaria wrote: post #33
mrarjen wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, I think it would be more effective having this change on a production level where farmers and scientists possibly work together to make meat production more sustainable by for example beter utilizing and extending grass lands in barren regions. Trick is to not make the meat more expensive...

Why not ?! It seems the most effective way to change peoples habits is still prices.

If you fob off prices to consumers you do risk creating a two-tiered society where the one class consumes just as much meat as ever and the other no longer has it, which doesn't seem like an ideal/equitable solution.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#82

Post by emodendroket »

twostoned wrote: post #15
alex_duf wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like saying recycling is useless because no one recycles. You have to start somewhere

I don't disagree in principle, "Be the change you want to see in the world" and all that, but climate change from an individual level to me seems silly, or perhaps overwhelming. I have stopped really worrying about it in the Dr. Strangelove sense because it's out of control. We're supposed to sort our plastics and papers and yet all of our options available for purchase have been shipped, at least in part, from acros…

Right, yeah. If I jumped off a building tomorrow, thereby ending my carbon emissions forever, it would make zero difference.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#83

Post by emodendroket »

hycaria wrote: post #74
twostoned wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree in principle, "Be the change you want to see in the world" and all that, but climate change from an individual level to me seems silly, or perhaps overwhelming. I have stopped really worrying about it in the Dr. Strangelove sense because it's out of control. We're supposed to sort our plastics and papers and yet all of our options available for purchase have been shipped, at least in part, from acros…

It makes you think about it and sensibilize to it. Which probably failed by you considering : >On topic: I have little doubt there's a strong link between climate change in general and the production and consumption of livestock. The most common cow diet at the moment is 50kg of corn + 3 kg of soy + maybe 10kg (dry) of hay. Everyday. Do you think this grows out of the blue or uses arable land ? Also Europe imports so…

I don't get what you mean. It doesn't seem like you actually disagree with the snippet you're quoting, yet it seems like you're trying to refute it.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#84

Post by emodendroket »

hycaria wrote: post #67
nerdponx wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but people are attached to their chicken sandwiches, too. For most people in the US, at least, sandwiches (with a few specific exceptions) are supposed to contain meat. What else would you have, rabbit food on a bun?

Today I just ate one with tofu cooked in sauce and green beans (yeah soy has its own problems, at least in europe where we don't produce it). But you can also have beans / chick pea or even greens baked into fritters. I always liked the eggs mayo combo (adding tomato cucumber or whatever), but this is not vegan.

I mean, to be completely honest with you, at this point I do not want to eat a sandwich at all.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#85

Post by emodendroket »

ajeet_dhaliwal wrote: post #45
kelchm wrote: post #11

Actually, I think you'll find that people just really like the way meat tastes.

This is it. I'm in agreement with Anthony Bourdain here about vegetarian food in most places. If I lived in India, in particular Punjab it would be far easier to be a vegetarian because stuff actually tastes great (better than meat!) but elsewhere it's hard. Being half decent isn't good enough, the vegetarian food has to taste as good as or better than meat. The worst is places where the idea of a vegetarian meal is…

Or worse, replacing it with a substitute meat that "tastes just like meat!" (N.B.: it tastes and has a mouthfeel nothing like meat)

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#86

Post by emodendroket »

amelius wrote: post #23
kelchm wrote: post #11

Actually, I think you'll find that people just really like the way meat tastes.

I think we should consider a rule that everybody who wants to eat an animal, has to kill it themselves. At least that will solve the mental disconnect between reality and food consumerism.

Yeah and if you want light you should have to slaughter a whale and extract the oil yourself.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#87

Post by emodendroket »

cagenut wrote: post #50

Meat is a big one, but its the #3 - #5ish big one depending on how you look at things (at an individual westerner vs. other lenses). Roughly in order it goes - having more kids than adults (population growth) - living in a single-family detached home (land use sprawl + hvac inefficiency) - owning a car - flying - eating red meat (particularly beef & lamb) So yes by all means, eat less red meat, but after you've moved…

Oh, good news, you can just ditch the car and walk several miles to everywhere you need to go. Again, telling people to just start living like they're Benedictine monks is not a serious solution to the problem.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#88

Post by emodendroket »

peg_leg wrote: post #44
announcerman wrote: post #38

Only the elite should have access to meat in order to stop climate change, the rest will have to do with soybased fake meat substitutes. It's healthier too!

This is rather true.

That's far from the only possible solution, although it is essentially the one you create if your solution is to just jack up the price of meat.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#89

Post by emodendroket »

nine_k wrote: post #31
Yusho wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly why the rule of 72 should be thought more often. Just seeing how quickly the population can double at the current growth rate is an eye opener. 72 / 1.1 = 65 Years Meat isn't the problem, endless growth is.

Do regions with most growth also eat most meat, per capita?

No.

Re: People Don't Get the Link Between Meat Consumption and Climate Change (2016)

#90

Post by rhinoceraptor »

craigds wrote: post #71
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People love to neglect grass fed meat. Much of the planet is grasslands that require grazing animals. You put grazing animals on the land, move them around, and that’s it. The only real energy input is the sun. Compare that to monocropping which requires vast oil and pesticide/herbicide input, displaces local habitats, reduces the biodiversity of the planet.

Grass fed beef isn't a solution. Cows still produce a lot of methane. http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2017-10-03-grass-fed-beef-good-or-b...

That’s only one metric to compare. That doesn’t take into account the carbon sequestration from manure, topsoil formation, etc. from grass fed animals.

It also doesn’t take into account the massive energy use (and therefore, carbon release) of fertilizing, seeding, irrigating, harvesting and processing feed for conventional cattle.

So in total, I would expect grass fed meat to be much better than conventional meat, and possibly better than if we were to just eat crops directly.

Post reply on HN