Woah, didn’t know about cheese (although makes sense), coffee and chocolate.
Why do coffee and chocolate have such an impact?
YSK that apart from not having a car, the single greatest thing you can do for the climate is simply eating less red meat
Submitted 2 months ago by Wulri@lemmy.world to youshouldknow@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/3041d99b-25ff-4dac-8c2f-21bda6a1210d.png
Comments
Allero@lemmy.today 2 months ago
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
because this is per kilogram, not per serving. you don’t eat a kilogram of chocolate in a day
Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 months ago
Although if you regularly eat a kilo of red meat a day, you should probably talk to your doctor about those blood spots when you wipe your arse.
Allero@lemmy.today 2 months ago
True, but still Why is it so much worse than other plant-based foods?
Sphks@jlai.lu 2 months ago
Coffee and chocolate do not grow where you live. It needs to travel the oceans. (Unless you live in a country where it grows)
Allero@lemmy.today 2 months ago
Ocean travel us very fuel efficient, and also bananas don’t seem to have the same effect despite also coming from afar.
JiminaMann@lemmy.world 2 months ago
[deleted]usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
This graph is normalized per kg. Graphs look similarly per kcal as well
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
to some degree maybe, but even a doubling for most of these things still puts them way way way below the emissions of beef.
but things like beans are trivial to grow on a small local scale, if you can get your food from local farmers that aren’t using 500 tractors and tons of artificial fertilizer then it’s hard to even theoretically do better.
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
I have a steak maybe once a year, usually as a sudden or persistent craving. But other than that it was amazingly easy to convert to poultry for all my regular recipes. Very easy step to make without much thought.
Reducing dairy is my dietary wall.
thesystemisdown@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I like to go bottom up. If chocolate and coffee are off the menu, I’m not sure this life is worth continuing.
LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 2 months ago
Just looked through our past few menus. We only eat beef once a week by nature it seems.
bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Thats crazy!! I do eat it, but not very often. However I do a lot to offset it, but still. Hard to get other foods that make you feel full and get you protein like a good steak though.
Tattorack@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You should see the carbon footprint of concrete…
remon@ani.social 2 months ago
Yeah and it doesn’t even taste good.
match@pawb.social 2 months ago
what the fuck are they doing to make farmer shrimps worse than pork
Green_FieldS@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Still going to VOTE! Don’t know why that needed to be in there, next to car and red meat
kaitco@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I’m gonna drive my car…because that’s necessary, but I haven’t eaten meat (red, white, blue, whatever) for 20 years, so between that, not adding to the surface population, and not voting for complete jackasses, I think I’ve at least offset the driving.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
plenty of people have tried that, and the production of beef continues to grow.
usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Beef production is falling in some countries. For instance in Germany
In 2011, Germans ate 138 pounds of meat each year. Today, it’s 121 pounds — a 12.3 percent decline. And much of that decline took place in the last few years, a time period when grocery sales of plant-based food nearly doubled.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
ourworldindata.org/…/meat-production-tonnes?tab=c…
that hasn’t stopped the meat industry from growing.
gon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Convenient for me, that is.
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 months ago
The real biggest thing you can do for the environment would be reducing the global human population.
Humans do not produce anything for the environment, the mere existence of humans automatically causes harm to the environment. Humans take from the environment but give nothing useful back. If humans were deleted from the Earth, the environment would not be negatively effected. Even the most “environmentally friendly” human still damages their local environment by being alive.
But you know, killing people is pretty illegal basically everywhere, and extremely unethical in many, many ways. Unethical Pro Tips I guess? Please nobody actually do this.
Hubi@feddit.org 2 months ago
Why is there such a massive difference between beef from “beef herds” compared to “dairy herds”?
Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
You can’t get meat from a cow twice, you can get milk lots of times.
naticus@lemmy.world 2 months ago
What’s the carbon footprint of catoblepas?
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
As long as we can take the rich with us, let the baby burn 🔥🔥🔥
brachiosaurus@mander.xyz 2 months ago
why milk/cheese and beef dairy are two different charts?
backgroundcow@lemmy.world 2 months ago
No shade on people trying to make sustainable choices, but if the solution to the climate crisis is us trusting everyone to “get with the program” and pick the right choice; while unsustainable alternatives sit right there beside them at lower prices, then we are truly doomed.
What the companies behind these foods and products don’t want to talk about is that to get anywhere we have to target them. It shouldn’t be a controversial standpoint that: (i) all products need to cover their true full environmental and sustainability costs, with the money going back into investments into the environment counteracting the negative impacts; (ii) we need to regulate, regulate, and regulate how companies are allowed to interact with the environment and society, and these limits must apply world-wide. There needs to be careful follow-up on that these rules are followed: with consequences for individuals that take the decisions to break them AND “death sentences” (i.e. complete disbandment) for whole companies that repeatedly oversteps.
tdawg@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Does the graph include how palm farms are built on precious forest land that has since been burned down? and that the land primarily being burnt is some of the most important land for storing carbon and providing oxygen?
xeekei@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
I like chicken more anyway.
myotheraccount@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Nuts are nuts!
Jackhammer_Joe@lemmy.world 2 months ago
So are strawberries!
myotheraccount@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Can’t argue with that
rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Looks like the traditional Irish diet of potatoes, root veg, and onions is carbon-friendly af.
TwinTitans@lemmy.world 2 months ago
No thanks.
jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
how does hunted vs farmed meat compare?
visnae@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Mussles for life
pwalker@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
luckily u didn’t suggest to cut the cheese 😅 cheese is life, I can eat less beef but not my cheeeeeese 🙃
hodgepodgin@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
That one guy eating rapeseed oil:
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 2 months ago
What about ostrich?
WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Wrong:
www.epa.gov/…/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
Affidavit@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That is a lazy response. OP is talking about actions individuals can take and you provided a single word response with a link to overall climate change sources, most of which individuals have no control over (beyond voting).
WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I provided a link that directly disproves what OP is saying. How is it not helpful?
Agriculture is provenly about 10%. That still a lot, sure… but it’s not close to what these people would have you believe.
You’re totally fine to keep eating meat if that is what you enjoy in your diet. Don’t let them stonewall you into changing what you enjoy just to meet their standards.
If you want to seriously fight greenhouse gases, go after big industry. Agriculture barely scratches what they’re doing.