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

Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#81

Post by loblollyboy »

vzidex wrote: post #26
falcolas wrote: post #14

I'm going to say something very unpopular: If your plan to save the world includes requiring all 9 billion people to fundamentally change their lives (especially if its perceived as a degradation of their current quality of life), it's never going to work. Now I'll speak for myself. I will not go vegan, given the current offering of vegan foodstuffs. It just doesn't taste as good. I know it may be better for me than…

Current generation here (I'm 20). There's a lot of steps you can take without decreasing your quality of life - is that cut of steak _really_ that important to your quality of life? If, aware of the problem of climate change AND of the solutions, you choose to do nothing then you won't just be an asshole in the eyes of the next 20 generations, you're an asshole in the eyes of my generation too.

Current generation? So am I like dead or something (30)?

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#82

Post by vfc1 »

jakewins wrote: post #55
nicoburns wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody really eats tomatoes for the calories though. People (with meat-based or plant-based diets) use tomatoes for flavour and other nutrients.

Tomato pastas like pomodoro and putanesca were my go-to lunches before I learned about this, and tomato soups remain super popular, so I disagree that they are simply a condiment. Still, perhaps they are a bad general example. Perhaps a better one would be rice (~2g CO2e/kcal). There the problem is the massive methane emissions produced from the cultivation approach. Point being: There are huge differences between di…

It's precisely because feeding humans is so environmentally impactful that we should not be feeding mostly animals, only to eat them.

The CO2 impact of rice and grains in general can't be compared the impact of animal products, here is a graph - https://i0.wp.com/shrinkthatfootprint.com/wp-content/uploads...

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#83

Post by etxm »

Honest question: of all of the things people can do to make the world greener, why is it mostly (a subset) of vegans that look down their nose at other people?

You don’t see people driving electric cars pulling up at red lighted and giving people shit for driving an SUV

People in middle America don’t come into your city and shit on you for how far food has to drive to get to your ass.

People that grow their own food aren’t protesting your grocery stores.

Chill out.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#84

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

falcolas wrote: post #76
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your plan to save the world includes requiring all 9 billion people to fundamentally change their lives (especially if its perceived as a degradation of their current quality of life), it's never going to work. > Now I'll speak for myself. I will not go vegan I agree with your logic, people like you are why it will not work. When the shit hits the fan, I hope your grandchildren can reserve some empathy for their…

As has been pointed out in other threads, it will take more than two generations of people for the lives of humanity to really be changed. And, in all likelihood, humanity will simply use technology to adapt to the changed circumstances. My hypothetical grandchildren's grandchildren will be dead of old age well before humanity will have to do more than move from one city to another to preserve their way of life.

> And, in all likelihood, humanity will simply use technology to adapt to the changed circumstances.

That doesn't strike you as a convenient thing to believe because it means not having to give up anything? You remind me of smokers 20 years ago who assured me that medicine would cure lung cancer before they caught it so they didn't worry about it.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#85

Post by sprflyprgrmrguy »

mancerayder wrote: post #57
baxtr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much protein do you think a normal person needs? Valter Longo recommends ".31 to 0.36 grams per pound of body weight). That comes to 40 to 47 grams of proteins per day for a person weighing 130 pounds, and 60 to 70 grams of protein per day for someone weighing 200 to 220 pounds." Why would you really need meat at all if those numbers are correct? https://valterlongo.com/daily-longevity-diet-for-adults/

Normal person? What about abnormal athletes, or people who do weight training? How many peas are required if you want both a calorie surplus and 1 to 1.5 grams of protein per lb of body weight?

Seems to be 4g of protein per 85g (1/2cup) of peas. I weight ~72 kg (~160lb); recommendation is 1.5-2g of protein per kg, so I'd need 142g of protein per day on the high end, which equates to roughly 3017.5g, 71 cups, of peas daily.

Frozen walmart sweet peas are .84c per bag, each bag contain 4 servings, roughly $7.45 in peas per day.

For comparison, chicken breast @ 100g (3.5oz or .45 lb) is 31g of protein. I'd need 458g of chicken breast, around 2.25lbs. I can get it for $1.99/lb, but the better quality stuff is $6.99/lb, so $4.48 to $15.72/day. When I'm eating to put on muscle I buy the cheap crap and slow cook it and toss hot sauce on it.

Lentils are a better choice than peas, you'd probably need half as much. I'd rather eat chicken than copious amounts of a plant alternative, but I have started eating more lentils b/c they're not at all as bad as I thought they'd be. I hate peas though.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#86

Post by vfc1 »

jakewins wrote: post #58
vfc1 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean come on, a diet of 100% tomatoes does not make any sense, right? The bulk of human calories on a whole food plant based diet comes typically from beans, legumes chickpeas, soy, root vegetables like potatoes and sweet potatoes, starches in general, grains like whole rice, quinoa, etc. Then another good portion of the calories typically comes from fruit, and another good portion comes from vegetables and salads.…

You're right, it's a poor example. I guess I was thinking of tomato pastas and tomato soups, for instance. A better one, like you mention, is rice - again a crop with substantially worse carbon impact than chicken. Fruits are even more complex - if you get them in season, locally and actually eat them, they are fantastic. If you buy them out of season, due to their short shelf-life you'll find they are often air ship…

Meat is also shipped across the world a lot, like every other food. So the impact of transportation adds up to the impact of production, which is huge.

It's precisely because feeding humans is so resource-intensive that we should not waste so many resources feeding animals.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#87

Post by wysifnwyg »

NickBusey wrote: post #35
wysifnwyg wrote: post #6

Electricity, transportation, and manufacturing add up to about 80% of all GHG emissions. If you want your diet choice to have the biggest impact purchase locally produced and unprocessed foods.

I don't doubt this is true in the least, but do you have a source I could provide to others?

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#88

Post by falcolas »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #84
falcolas wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been pointed out in other threads, it will take more than two generations of people for the lives of humanity to really be changed. And, in all likelihood, humanity will simply use technology to adapt to the changed circumstances. My hypothetical grandchildren's grandchildren will be dead of old age well before humanity will have to do more than move from one city to another to preserve their way of life.

> And, in all likelihood, humanity will simply use technology to adapt to the changed circumstances. That doesn't strike you as a convenient thing to believe because it means not having to give up anything? You remind me of smokers 20 years ago who assured me that medicine would cure lung cancer before they caught it so they didn't worry about it.

I believe in it, because it's already happening. Air conditioners counter heat. Heaters counter the cold. The Venetians have proven that they can hold back storm surges, and live in a city slowly being flooded. The Dutch have proven they can hold back the ocean itself. We are capable of planting and harvesting crops on previously unfarmable land. Biodomes have been tested (and work) at a small scale, and show promise at their ability to scale up. We can desalinate and clean water at the cost of mere electricity - something we're making more and more abundant and less reliant on fossil fuels.

Moving from these technologies that exist today to live in a harsher world tomorrow is nowhere near as big a jump as curing cancer.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#89

Post by bfdm »

jakewins wrote: post #55
nicoburns wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody really eats tomatoes for the calories though. People (with meat-based or plant-based diets) use tomatoes for flavour and other nutrients.

Tomato pastas like pomodoro and putanesca were my go-to lunches before I learned about this, and tomato soups remain super popular, so I disagree that they are simply a condiment. Still, perhaps they are a bad general example. Perhaps a better one would be rice (~2g CO2e/kcal). There the problem is the massive methane emissions produced from the cultivation approach. Point being: There are huge differences between di…

In your examples, the tomatoes were the flavour element you enjoyed, not the main caloric driver. That was the pasta (probably wheat). Your example agrees with the GP.

Re: Going Vegan Won’t Save the Planet

#90

Post by biztos »

JoshMnem wrote: post #71

Going vegan isn't the only option. Humans need to give more consideration to edible insects. (seriously) See the history of eating lobsters for an example of how attitudes can change.

> See the history of eating lobsters[0]

Also, see lobsters themselves and ask why we are so freaked out about eating bugs.

Of course some people will refuse to eat both bugs and lobsters for the same religious reasons.[1]

[0]: https://oceanpointinn.com/blog/?p=74

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

Post reply on HN