Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet • Hacker News Board

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#61

Post by glastra » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:06 AM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #46

glastra wrote: post #40

How about we don't change the diet but change where the food comes from? When talking about meat and damage to the environment, the only relevant figures are the ones associated with animal feed (e.g. water consumption per kg of meat). Pastured animals, by definition, don't eat feed coming from the monoculture industrial agriculture that is depleting the soil and consuming all those resources, and which is also used…

> When talking about meat and damage to the environment, the only relevant figures are associated with animal feed (e.g. water consumption per kg of meat). Cows fart.

It's the burps, actually.

And it's not nearly as dangerous as publicized.

Methane's lifespan in the atmosphere is much, much lower (think two orders of magnitude) than carbon dioxide [0], for example.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#62

Post by holstvoogd » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:06 AM UTC

Maybe we should also stop subsidizing the fossil fuel industry close to 1,000,000,000,000$ yearly.

Not saying we should not eat less meat or anything, just saying there might be more we could be doing if our governments weren't corporate/billionairs puppets mostly.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#63

Post by SmellyGeekBoy » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:06 AM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #41

sschueller wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you don't want to wait for the government to require this you can already start today. Buy only locally farmed organic meat. Don't go to fast food places or restaurants that don't specifically declare that their meat is organic and local.

Or just reduce your meat consumption.

Speaking as someone who took the same stance as the commenter you're replying to, reduced meat consumption was indeed a side effect in my case without it being a conscious choice - mainly due to cost and inconvenience.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#64

Post by the8472 » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:08 AM UTC

glastra wrote: post #40

How about we don't change the diet but change where the food comes from? When talking about meat and damage to the environment, the only relevant figures are the ones associated with animal feed (e.g. water consumption per kg of meat). Pastured animals, by definition, don't eat feed coming from the monoculture industrial agriculture that is depleting the soil and consuming all those resources, and which is also used…

No matter what you feed them, compared to other livestock animals cows are a fairly inefficient at turning feed into meat, meaning you need to dedicate more land to agriculture when it could be forest instead and thus a better carbon sink.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#65

Post by mklarmann » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:08 AM UTC

sschueller wrote: post #34

arethuza wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make much higher welfare standards for farm animals a requirement - making meat much more expensive, reducing consumption. Sounds like a win win to me.

And if you don't want to wait for the government to require this you can already start today. Buy only locally farmed organic meat. Don't go to fast food places or restaurants that don't specifically declare that their meat is organic and local.

Trouble with organic is that those cows live longer, hence cause about 60% more Methan emissions, till they are slaughtered.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#66

Post by vinay427 » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:09 AM UTC

_Microft wrote: post #47

AndriyKunitsyn wrote: post #3

How about we put a ban on UN officials’ private jets first?

Why? The emissions of a few individuals can be far higher than sustainable and it can still give a net-positive effect when their influence on society is great enough.

If their higher emissions aren't at least indirectly necessary for their high influence on society, then while it may be sustainable and net-positive, it isn't necessary justifiable because better options exist.

People with a "high influence on society," however that's measured, can't just do whatever they want because their existence is still net-positive.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#67

Post by maxencecornet » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:09 AM UTC

robin_reala wrote: post #32

It’s also worth pointing out that even if you don’t want to reduce the amount of meat you eat, changing the type of meat can have big effects. For example (and ignoring transport to the consumer), lamb produces about 35 kg CO₂ per kg of meat, beef 25kg CO₂ / kg, pork and farmed salmon 8kg CO₂ / kg and chicken 4kg CO₂ / kg.

This

If you really want to have an impact while still eating meat, just stop eating beef/lamb altogether

The amount of food and water needed to produce 1kg of beef meat is just insane

Eat poultry or fish instead

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio

>Cattle is the worst at something like 15:1. Aquaculture, specifically tilapia and catfish, is good at under 2:1

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#68

Post by the8472 » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:10 AM UTC

glastra wrote: post #61

saagarjha wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When talking about meat and damage to the environment, the only relevant figures are associated with animal feed (e.g. water consumption per kg of meat). Cows fart.

It's the burps, actually. And it's not nearly as dangerous as publicized. Methane's lifespan in the atmosphere is much, much lower (think two orders of magnitude) than carbon dioxide [0], for example. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane

The methane turns into CO2. Which means for the amount of carbon they release it's strictly worse than the same amount of carbon released as CO2.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#69

Post by trymas » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:10 AM UTC

Asmod4n wrote: post #6

In the last couple articles I've read to reduce your own carbon footprint I've found one thing is sadly missing most of the time: butter. It's way worse than beef. One kg butter blasts 24kg CO2 into the air before it gets to you, with beef it's around 13kg.

I would speculate that when compared butter vs meat consumption, butter would be consumed probably an order of magnitude less than meat.

Re: Eat less meat: UN climate change report calls for change to human diet

#70

Post by open-source-ux » Fri, Aug 09, 2019, 9:10 AM UTC

This report doesn't say you have to give up eating meat. It does say we need to reduce our consumption. This might mean eating meat once a week.

We are eating more meat today (at least in the industralised nations of the "West") than in any other time in human history thanks to intensive farming practices. People seems to think that this is the natural state of affairs and that's how we've always consumed meat. But go back a few decades and meat was never available in such abundance and at such cheap prices.

The ugly truth is we're simply too comfortable in our current lifestyles to make any changes that might challenge that comfort. Whether it's flying less (or even stopping altoghther) or eating less meat, the reaction is always resistance and sometimes even anger and outrage.

I've said this before: we love to point accusatory fingers at others for taking too little action over climate issues but never lift a finger ourselves. Are we all a bunch of hypocrites and simply not willing to admit it?