Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

Post by tim333 » Sun, Jun 23, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

tyfon wrote: post #59

tim333 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dunno - if you look at the ozone hole business it was fixed by a global action to ban CFCs and the like. An individual stopping using aerosols or what have you wouldn't really have fixed things. With CO2 emissions we have a lot of individuals trying to make changes and again it's not really fixing things - CO2 levels keep going up. It's a bit trickier than the ozone thing though.

Banning CFCs etc did not require people to fundamentally change their lifestyles. Reducing carbon emissions does so and due to that it requires knowledge and action from the individual I think as a politician trying to change people who do not want to change is doomed. It is a lot trickier than the ozone issue and I think it requires action on all levels from the individual to the UN.

Post by sampo » Sun, Jun 23, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

nikehat wrote: post #74

sampo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meat production is almost as much as transportation, roughly 17%. That 17% includes all transportation related to meat production. If meat was replaced by plant-based foods, not all of that transportation could be eliminated.

Livestock consume far more feed grains (mostly corn) than they produce food on their own [1]. The transportation costs to feed them are greater than the transportation costs would be if we were to feed humans on plant based foods, so transportation would actually be reduced if we lowered the amount of animal products we consume. [1] http://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-800-mi...

Post by valw » Sun, Jun 23, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #76

midnitewarrior wrote: post #17

Telling a lie then saying 3 Hail Marys means you are forgiven for the lie, it doesn't fix the lie. As such, planting a tree to be forgiven for going on a flight that burns carbon-laden jet fuel doesn't fix what you did. Fossil fuels are excess carbon atoms sequestered safely deep inside the Earth. Unless you can find a way to put them back there, there's no fixing the situation. Planting a tree does capture carbon. H…

Nah, Dr Evil has me run the numbers and it turns out that killing six billion people, you have all their body mass rotting and putting carbon back into the atmosphere, add on top transport costs and so on - it just was not worth it. Seems much simpler to fix global politics and improve technology.

Post by JamesBarney » Sun, Jun 23, 2019, 3:51 PM UTC

elorant wrote: post #54

samcday wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're kinda just stoking my paranoia here. I hadn't dug too deeply into whatbuying "carbon offsets" for flights (as a eco-conscious consumer, that is) actually entailed. But I suspected it was basically just planting N trees to offset the carbon emission. To play devil's advocate, is it possible that planting the trees at least helps in the short to mid-term? So let's assume we don't run out of viable land to plant…

No, it doesn't. First of all, you have to account for deforestation which is already happening in unprecedented pace. So while you'll go around planning trees, in some other part of the world people are chopping them down to provide more land for agriculture or to support the demand for wood. So the overall net effect might be zero. Aside from that, the fact is that you need a shit ton of trees to negate climate chan…

Post by dillonmckay » Sun, Jun 23, 2019, 3:54 PM UTC

nikehat wrote: post #74

sampo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meat production is almost as much as transportation, roughly 17%. That 17% includes all transportation related to meat production. If meat was replaced by plant-based foods, not all of that transportation could be eliminated.

Livestock consume far more feed grains (mostly corn) than they produce food on their own [1]. The transportation costs to feed them are greater than the transportation costs would be if we were to feed humans on plant based foods, so transportation would actually be reduced if we lowered the amount of animal products we consume. [1] http://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-800-mi...