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

Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 143 posts

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#111

Post by basetop »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #105
belorn wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low carbon production has higher marginal costs and tend to be small farmers which is the group that suffer first when prices drops. The high carbon beef is basically all import here in Sweden, and there is no deforestation issue from farming. From a environmental perspective we actually need more open fields to maintain bio diversity. When climate aware people stop buying beef the ratio of imported beef increase. In…

Swedish beef has to be sheltered inside and fed over winter, doesn't it? That's a fairly carbon intense activity.

As opposed to the swedish vegetables that flourish in the swedish winter?

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#112

Post by acqq »

rayiner wrote: post #78
agentultra wrote: post #28

This is a great article. Do I have to go vegan? No. But it would have the biggest impact if you did. Is organic farming the answer? No. It tends to use more land for less output (although maybe the health-foodies could get off the No-GMO bandwagon). I also appreciate that the authors recognize that for some people living in certain cultures and climates _have_ to eat meat and there's no shame in that. The bulk of the…

This is an awful article because it doesn't put numbers on the various alternatives. Without hard numbers, the discussion of alternatives is meaningless. Even going from an average diet to fully vegan will only reduce your food-related emissions by 40%, which only accounts for about 12.5% of your carbon emissions to begin with (in the US): http://www.greeneatz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/foods-ca... . Cutting your…

> the effect of every American undertaking an unprecedented lifestyle change all at the same time would be totally wiped out

It really wouldn't. You totally underestimate the "role model" influence the US has on the rest of the world. If the dynamics of the US market would change, all other markets would race to follow in the same direction. This would also be both supported and driven by the individuals across the globe, doing what is "fashionable." Humans are slaves of fashions, even when when is appears improbable.

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#113

Post by cageface »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #72
cageface wrote: post #52

There’s a bunch of good reasons you should reduce or eliminate meat from your diet, including environmental effects but also including your health and mistreating and killing intelligent creatures. If your diet requires people to do things to thinking, feeling animals that would be criminal to do to a dog, maybe having some bacon on your breakfast plate really isn’t that important after all.

I don't eat bacon. I also don't share your view on the ethics of eating other intelligent beings (from different species). Many other animals eat other animals, and for this they have to kill them and cause them pain. The pain comes from the fact that animals do not easily die, and our death is almost always painful and horrifying. But- why shoud humans be any different than other animals, when it comes to the ethics…

We are special in that we have evolved to be utterly dominant, which gives us privileges and responsibilities other animals don’t share.

Also, other animals kill out of necessity. We don’t need to kill to survive at all so why are we justified to do so?

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#114

Post by username223 »

rayiner wrote: post #77
misiti3780 wrote: post #59

I know this isnt going to be a popular opinion here, but I'm going to say it anyways -- we are simply not going eat our away out of this climate change problem, and we shouldnt even try, we should focus the efforts in other places Here is the current breakdown of the world's emissions as of 2018: 1. heavy industry (29 percent) 2. buildings (18 percent) 3. transport (15 percent) 4. land-use change (15 percent) 5. the…

Going from the average diet to becoming a vegan would save about 1 ton per person annually: http://www.greeneatz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/foods-ca... . The carbon footprint in the U.S. is about 20 tons per capita annually, so going from an average diet to full vegan would save just 5%. (Just cutting out beef would capture most of those gains, reducing CO2 footprint by 0.6 tons, or 3%.) Just eating less meat, or…

> Just cutting out beef would capture most of those gains

I was shocked when I read how much cows contribute to warming, and I have mostly stopped eating beef. "Don't eat beef, eat less dairy" and you're good when it comes to diet. That said, there are far more important factors contributing to your carbon footprint. This Ars Technica article from 2017 sums things up well: https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/10/emissions-eschmissio...

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#115

Post by belorn »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #105
belorn wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low carbon production has higher marginal costs and tend to be small farmers which is the group that suffer first when prices drops. The high carbon beef is basically all import here in Sweden, and there is no deforestation issue from farming. From a environmental perspective we actually need more open fields to maintain bio diversity. When climate aware people stop buying beef the ratio of imported beef increase. In…

Swedish beef has to be sheltered inside and fed over winter, doesn't it? That's a fairly carbon intense activity.

Since we are talking about climate change, it happens that the last couple of winters has been the mildest in ages and reduced the number of months that farmers need to keep cattle inside to between one and two months.

But it is more complex than that. We don't have deforestation issue from farming. Fields, even those that is just for hay are important for bio diversity and it is generally soils where other crops won't grow. We don't burn down old jungle forest to grow corn in order to feed cows that then get transported through half the globe. It is fields that if they get overgrown would remove the biotope that many species here depend on.

Highland cattle is the extreme end where they can basically live outside the whole year, and they do the job that people and motorized machines otherwise would need to do in order to maintain national reservations. I would be much interested in reading a study that compared the environmental effect of using forest machines vs letting cows keeping overgrowth down.

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#116

Post by thangalin »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #81
thangalin wrote: post #66

Excerpt from a book I'm writing: --- Life is experiencing an abrupt, widespread global species extinction event. Humans are destroying intricate webs of animals, plants, and microorganisms. These networks supply our food chain and sustain life on Earth; their annihilation from rapid deforestation and climate change is causing grave consequences: droughts, increased heat waves and wildfires, more frequent severe weath…

For clarity: your hard scifi novel will include images in its prose?

The hard sci-fi novel (from my profile) is on hold until the Impacts layflat coffee table book (quoted above) that links astronomy, the environment, and Earth's history is finished.

The hard sci-fi novel currently includes some diagrams and illustrations, too.

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#117

Post by username223 »

jamesgagan wrote: post #2

I know there will be comments saying that individual action is not enough to combat climate change, or that it's too late for that, but when governments are so slow to act and corporations will only change when their bottom line is at stake, it is left to individuals to take action. Going vegan is simply the right thing to do at this point.

> Going vegan is simply the right thing to do at this point.

We're pretty much screwed (but not extinct) at this point no matter what, but going vegan doesn't matter nearly as much as living in a smaller house (i.e. less concrete), or driving and flying less.

I mostly avoid beef and dairy, which are the main diet-based causes of global warming, but beyond that it's a rounding error.

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#118

Post by pureliquidhw »

eric_b wrote: post #85
yfdrea wrote: post #30

I switched to a plant based diet last year after reading similar articles on climate change and was surprised to see an additional set of benefits. I feel a lot healthier, my skin is clearer (struggled with frequent untamable breakouts), I save money, etc. Diet is a very individualized thing, so don't dramatically overhaul your entire lifestyle based off what a random stranger says on the Internet but if you haven't…

I first tried eating vegetarian to deal with some digestion issues. It made it worse. Especially spinach, broccoli and other high fiber foods. I switched to a 90% carnivore diet and everything cleared up digestion wise, and I also felt much better, healthier, and my skin cleared up. As you say, diet is very individualized.

What was your diet before? Anecdotally, most people I know who felt better after going keto-ish had horrible diets to begin with. Dramatic reduction in processed foods, beer, HFCS, etc.

Simply preparing food at home with fresher ingredients and being conscious of what you're taking in can account for much of the gains they experienced.

The vast majority of people on the planet don't eat 90% meat diets, but if we did it would be a disaster! I'm not saying it isn't the case with you, but anyone who experienced amazing gains shifting their diet to mostly meat should consider survivorship bias, and that the benefits are from cutting other things out, not adding tons of animal protein in.

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#119

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

cageface wrote: post #113
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't eat bacon. I also don't share your view on the ethics of eating other intelligent beings (from different species). Many other animals eat other animals, and for this they have to kill them and cause them pain. The pain comes from the fact that animals do not easily die, and our death is almost always painful and horrifying. But- why shoud humans be any different than other animals, when it comes to the ethics…

We are special in that we have evolved to be utterly dominant, which gives us privileges and responsibilities other animals don’t share. Also, other animals kill out of necessity. We don’t need to kill to survive at all so why are we justified to do so?

I don't see what dominance has to do with privileges and responsibilities. Besides, humans "dominate" only in a very narrow sense. Most of the biomass on the planet is not human. There are many species of insects and microorganisms that are much more "dominant" than we are.

Other animals don't necessarily kill out of necessity. For example, many animals perform surplus killing [1] - I personally know of two dogs who, together, entered a coop and killed about 40 chiken without eating any. In the same farm, dogs have often killed chickens and goats, which they just eviscerate without eating them.

Then of course there's the killing of young animals by older males- like male cats sometimes kill kittens, etc.

Besides, why is "need" to kill the only justification to kill? For example, if it's very difficult to survive without killing an animal, say because you're putting your health and that of your children at risk with a diet poor in animal protein- then why are you not justified to do it?

______________

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_killing

Re: Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

#120

Post by [deleted] »

acqq wrote: post #112
rayiner wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an awful article because it doesn't put numbers on the various alternatives. Without hard numbers, the discussion of alternatives is meaningless. Even going from an average diet to fully vegan will only reduce your food-related emissions by 40%, which only accounts for about 12.5% of your carbon emissions to begin with (in the US): http://www.greeneatz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/foods-ca... . Cutting your…

> the effect of every American undertaking an unprecedented lifestyle change all at the same time would be totally wiped out It really wouldn't. You totally underestimate the "role model" influence the US has on the rest of the world. If the dynamics of the US market would change, all other markets would race to follow in the same direction. This would also be both supported and driven by the individuals across the g…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN