I thought it was overthrowing oppressive world governments and holding environmentally-damaging businesses accountable for their actions, hm.
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 3 weeks ago by Wulri@lemmy.world to youshouldknow@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/3041d99b-25ff-4dac-8c2f-21bda6a1210d.png
Comments
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
We can do both.
Valmond@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
People have done the personal responsibility thing since I was a kid at least, it just doesn’t work if there are no global rules who enforces it in some way (laws, prices, …)
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
I doubt it. They’re arresting families in the street and we just keep posting memes from the toilet. I’m not sure society has a line in the sand anymore.
Objection@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
How many oppressive world governments have you overthrown?
irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Populations are starving to death right now. From climate change and other stuff.
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
The media doesn’t consider anything a catastrophe until a rich person dies.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
When populations are starving to death in 2044
You don’t have to wait. Sudan, Yemen, Gaza, Haiti, Chad, Afghanistan, Syria… All undergoing starvation level famines right now.
0x0@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Cute.
I’d be more interested in adding private and commercial airliners, long-haul trucks and tanker ships to the list for comparison.AlfredoJohn@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
And oil production, manufacturing sectors, data centers, etc.
vivalapivo@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
It’s never about personal responsibility. You can smug about not eating red meat, driving electric or not having children, but it doesn’t change the reality: the climate is changing.
TheBeege@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
So… yes and no. Yes, most corporations aren’t mitigating their impact as much as they could, even if trying to maximize profit.
But something like consuming red meat… if people aren’t buying it, they’re gonna downsize operations. But that requires a huge change in the diet of a lot of people. So like… yes, but no? If enough people change, yes, but reality suggests that won’t happen, so no. I try to avoid beef, but I’m just one dude.
Here’s what I don’t get: methane is energy rich. Why the hell don’t they capture the methane and sell it? Yes, combusting it produces CO2, but CO2 has a lesser impact than methane, as I understand. So it’s a (minor) help for the environment and theoretically profitable. Why hasn’t this been done yet???
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Why the hell don’t they capture the methane and sell it?
It’s really hard. Most methane comes directly from the cow, and cows spend most of their time in air. The methane gets mixed in the air, in very small percentages. Extracting a small bit of methane from a lot of air is complex and energy Intensive, and methane is cheap.
So you’d spend a lot of money and power to produce very little money or power.
the_q@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Also it’s morally the right thing to do if you have the choice.
Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Ok, sure. Tangentally related, have you seen the ending to the show The Good Place?
skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
That show pissed me off so much. They actually straight up concluded that there is no ethical consumerism under capitalism, and then… just rewrote the universe’s metaphysics so that you get a pass for that, and American consumerism becomes standard religious doctrine
Ileftreddit@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Until Exxon and BP are no longer in business and global shipping transitions to zero emissions, there is nothing an individual human can do that will have an impact in any way on global climate. They problem is systemic, not individual
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
and these companies often secretly fund other groups or companies telling “you” the customers to reduce your carbon footprint, so they dont have to. and you know those recent climate protestors defacing property, funded by these groups.
Twelve20two@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
Just Stop Oil is funded by petrochemical companies?
threeduck@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
If everyone decided to stop eating meat today, 10-15% of the entire planets GHG gasses drop, an area the size of all of the Americas can be rewilded (animal ag uses 50-100x the land per kilo of food over plant based), we stop wasting 70% of our antibiotics on animals, the plastic left in the ocean drops by half.
Most things in life you have little control over: you can’t easily stop driving to work, you can’t easily remove all your plastic usage, you can’t easily cut back on your electricity usage.
But you CAN easily cut out animal ag. Like, today. You can just look up plant based recipes for dinner instead of the meat ones. This is entirely consumer choice driven, entirely.
Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 3 weeks ago
Okay. But as an individual we still have a choice. And knowing what clearly is worse, while having minimal impact on your life if not doing it. It doesn’t exactly feel like a smart decision, to have red meat/animal products in general. Can i at least call you dumb?
Ileftreddit@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I mean it’s really funny you asked permission to call me dumb, lol. “Carbon footprint” was a term invented by BP. The red meat industry is a methane polluter, but while we can estimate how much methane a cow produces, the oils and gas industry have no idea how much they lose. like they don’t even keep track of how much methane gets just wastefully vented into the atmosphere. youtu.be/K2oL4SFwkkw
JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Roughly true, but you’re eliding a very, very problematic activity into “travel”: aviation.
Per kilometer, flying is pretty carbon intensive (about the same as driving - basically: the extra efficiency of being packed into a tin can is offset by exponentially higher wind resistance at high speed). The problem is that airplanes allow you to burn up massive distances really quickly.
A single transatlantic flight will blow a 2-ton hole in your personal carbon footprint. That’s 10-20% of an average European’s annual footprint - or 100% of a sustainable footprint. For anyone who flies more than once a year (i.e. likely a bunch of people here), cutting down on flying is likely to be the single biggest thing you can do for the climate.
PlaidBaron@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
People always conveneintly leave out flying. Flying is one of the single worst things you can do.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
i feel like flying is something you either do fairly regularly, or you haven’t even considered setting foot on a plane for 10 years.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
I find it really hard to give up, personally. If I didn’t fly I would basically never see my family.
Jack@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Tonnes of CO2e, averages:
1.60 a roundtrip transatlantic flight 2.40 one year car use 58.60 one year for every child you have
JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
That’s helpful. These estimates do tend to vary a bit depending on assumptions (type of plane or car, what occupancy etc). The 2t I quoted was slightly high. My point was that there’s no other way to emit 1 tonne in 6 hours.
johsny@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Sure. Imma keep using my jet though.
catty@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
YSK this is BS. You ain’t gonna stop corporate-created climate issues by eating one or two fewer cows.
MITM0@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Here have an upvote
pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
i’ve replaced beef in my diet with kangaroo for exactly this reason… it’s not the same, but it’s great in its own right and contains a load of iron. makes cutting beef out much easier
bonus: roo populations have to be managed otherwise in modern australia they tend to multiply uncontrolled and it’s a problem, so it’s either eat the meat or waste it… roo meat isn’t farmed
threeduck@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
Roos are culled mostly because they compete for pasture availability and water access for livestock, especially because we reduced their predators (again, to protect animal livestock).
It’s certainly better to eat roo than cow, but a diet that doesn’t include killing animals at all is objectively better.
pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
a diet that doesn’t include killing animals at all is objectively better.
assuming animals wouldn’t be killed either way, yes… but even if they’re killed for other livestock, that’s going to continue regardless of eating them or not so the difference is practically nothing
and also, something is better than nothing… i think for most people not eating meat just isn’t going to happen. subbing out beef for roo (and chicken and pork) is a very good trade, and i’ve switched a lot of people to do the same. it’s pretty easy to convince people to do that. it’s very difficult to convince people to eat exclusively vegetarian
dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This is why I’m mostly okay with hunting deer, here in the US. We displaced their predators so it’s on us to make up the balance. I say “mostly” since, like others are saying in this thread about taking habitat away from kangaroos, the better answer is to give them an actual functional ecosystem to live in.
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Americans are trying to ban it.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
We have the same problems in America, but with deer, and the same solutions to that problem.
But those same nutjobs who want to ban roo meat also want to ban deer hunting. Because they are idiots.
pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
i heard about that… it’s wild lol… and their argument is basically “it’s cute”
Dasus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I myself eat venison, moose and reindeer. Sometimes horse when it’s off-season, but that’s kinda janky as it’s not really game, but the incentives for “farming” horses don’t really exist so…
Anyway, my local butcher’s has some frozen 'roo. I’ve had some on a pizza when drunk once, but don’t really recall it that well for my BAC was kinda high. I do remember feeling a tad absurd eating a pizza with kangaroo on it while a guy rode past on a unicycle. I’m not imagining that, although I may have also been high at the time.
Anyway, my point is how’d you compare 'roo to beef in texture and taste?
I hated lamb for instance (and generally don’t buy it because the morality is horrible, just had a chance to taste and didn’t like). Venison, moose, reindeer, horse, all awesome. Reindeer most gamy, moose second, then venison and horse on a pretty similar level. All really lean usually.
pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
how’d you compare 'roo to beef in texture and taste
it’s pretty gamey, so i wouldn’t say it’s a direct replacement… i do like a roo bolognese though: adds a bunch of depth
imo roo steak is absolutely amazing though
it’s very low fat, so you have to cook it fast and not well done etc otherwise it gets really tough really quickly
oh also roo curries are incredible too!
i’ve heard that roo it pretty close to venison in taste, but haven’t tried venison so not sure
Jamablaya@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Plus it’s delicious, it either tastes exactly like white tail deer or perhaps i was scammed
pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
i’ve heard it does taste like that yes, but haven’t tried myself because idk where to get venison in aus! roo is literally available in mince, diced, steaks, sausages, etc in supermarkets here :p
HappySkullsplitter@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
kapulsa@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
Yes, that is great on an individual level.
But the best thing to do overall for our environment and climate is supporting protest movements, especially those employing nonviolent civil disobedience. Per pound/dollar/euro, they reduce emissions the most. But if you can, attend events in person.
This should not neglect that we need both individual and system change and they depend on each other. You should reduce your meat consumption and advocate for a world where everyone reduces meat consumption (and even become vegan or at least vegetarian).
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
Bombing a refinery with a drone might help stop oil.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
proceeds to never bomb a refinery
GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
But how am I supposed to get to work at the co2 factory in my house sized truck on time when those fucking hippies glue themselves to the road??
DancingBear@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
This is all bullshit… if you live in grasslands, importing fresh produce from South America is not more green than just eating beef.
ThisIsNotHim@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
If I’m remembering right, transportation of a food item makes up no more than 2% of the total carbon emissions for that food item.
Eating local produce can have a big impact on the quality and freshness of food, but has comparatively small environmental impacts. It won’t make beef greener than beans, no matter where you choose to get each from.
0x0@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Per pound/dollar/euro, they reduce emissions the most.
I’d go for drowning billionaires in oil drums.
Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Not eating red meat is so fucking easy now. If I can be an old man who went to school uphill in the snow both ways for a second, I dropped meat 20ish years ago in the deep south, and holy fuck talk about an impossible diet. Even the vegetables had meat in them, and that is not a joke.
This is obviously going to depend on your area and how much of a food desert you’re in, but I’ve never seen so much access to so many kinds of meat replacements in average grocery stores and not just bougie upscale places. Tofu, tempeh, fake meat everything! Which isn’t even a big part of my diet, but I love having the option when I want something new.
grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
Ten years ago I got caught by surprise bacon in frigging Pennsylvania. I’d done the “make a vegetarian meal out of sides” thing while visiting my parents.
The restaurant named all the cheeses in 5-cheese macaroni and cheese but didn’t mention that bacon was also mixed in. My mom parent-pressured me to not send it back and I ate it, suffering the gastrointestinal consequences later.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Being alive is bad for the environment.
gerowen@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You can’t survive around here without owning your own car. The nearest Walmart to me is a half hour drive at 60mph and we don’t have taxis in any of the towns around me. That’s 7 hours of walking, each way. No buses or trains either. The closest store of any kind to me is about 2 hours each way if I walk.
dropped_packet@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
A lot of the anti-car sentiment comes from urban, or European communities where population is a lot more dense.
Rural America will be the absolute lowest priority, because there are fewer people spread farther out. Anyone who wants to make someone feel bad about that is just a dick.
TheRealAsmodeus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
That’s intentional
Jamablaya@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Jesus. Noe of this actually matters, the cargo ships dwarf the output of a continent
threeduck@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
The entire worlds cargo ships emit 3% of the planets GHG emissions.
Animal agriculture is 15-20%. It’s equal to the ENTIRE transport sector (cars, trucks, boats, planes etc).
As a consumer you can’t easily change your cargo ship usage, or cars or planes, but you can absolutely change your diet, literally today.
I did! And I grew up on a dairy farm in rural NZ.
hans@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
all of agriculture is only about 20%. animal agriculture is just a facet of that
Jamablaya@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Oh look a Lying Fuckwit appears.
RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Which continent? Antarctica? It wouldn’t surprise me, but it seems like an entirely useless comparison to make.
Maalus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Not really, check out their claim on google. Ships are polluting a shitton. They have huge engines that run on the crappiest fuel known to man. It’s so bad, that they have to switch to diesel by law when comming close to the shore / port so as to meet any semblence of environmental law. Something like the top 10 ships pollute more than all cars on Earth combined (exhaust gasses, not tire wear / brake dust).
BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
IDK why you’re getting downvoted, large cargo ships can emit the same amount of co2 as 50 million cars maritimepage.com/cargo-ship-co2-emissions/
Perhaps the people downvoting you are the same kind of people without a sense of proportion, who think that turning off an LED light bulb saves the environment.
It could also be that you don’t provide a solution. So here it goes: want to cut co2? Buy locally produced goods. If you live in the northern hemisphere strawberries aren’t in season in January, and it’s a good chance that neither are tomatoes or avocado.
remon@ani.social 3 weeks ago
IDK why you’re getting downvoted
I mean, your own source kind of debunks what the previous poster said …
Maalus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They’re getting downvotes for “not like it matters”. Every little bit matters and “limit eating red meat” helps too. You don’t need to completely stop.
Also the claim sounds weird to people who don’t know facts about shipping and how horrific it is for the environment. Most people think “plane bad” not “ship bad”.
Jamablaya@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
My solution might involve genociding redditors and every second lemmy “genius”
RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Tronn4@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Save the planet! Eat Deez Nutz!
BigBenis@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I’ve got a special trick where I can make pretty much the entire internet rage at me. Check it out:
I’m vegetarian.
Tautvydaxx@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
Are bilionairs white meat?
lemmylommy@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You are right of course, but „per kg product“ is not a fair comparison when it comes to how the population is fed. Cheese (3000-4000kcal/kg) vs. milk (500. kcal/kg) is the best example for that.
pineapple_pizza@lemmy.dexlit.xyz 3 weeks ago
For me, this wasn’t too hard. Cheese on the other hand…that will be a challenge
jnod4@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Accounting for emissions per kilogram isn’t that fair, can we account for emissions per 1000 kilocalorie? Or emissions per protein?
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
question, how come beef is so cheap it’s it takes so much resources?
if it’s just subsidies, then we should get rid of them
Jhex@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
so how many fewer burgers do I skip to compensate for one of Musk’s jet joy rides?
Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Billionaires have the carbon footprint of 30k families and this one here is saying I have to give up my car and my burgers.
What a stupid post to get blocked over.
Dagnet@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Not having kids is a whole order of magnitude more impactful. Or even just having one kid instead of 2 or 3+.
ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 3 weeks ago
I’ve been the bane of chickens all my life…
Flagg76@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
No the single greatest thing you can do is not having children.
JaceTheGamerDesigner@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
We could really use a movement to get more people to try adding beans, peas, and tofu to their grocery list. I wasn’t able to stick to not eating meat, but sticking to eating less meat by adding alternatives to my grocery list turned out to be quite easy.
whome@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
I get that individuals aren’t the problem impact wise but couldn’t it be the case that if the majority of people life a more sustainable life it will be easier to create laws that put stop the real poluters bc people are in support of such regulations?! If the majority of people think the existence of billionaires is immoral, it will be easier to tax the rich…
MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
It does not even need to be a majority. Actually doing it makes you more believable when you promote any sort of action. It also works as a sort of promotion in itself. As in people can see you cycle, not eat meat or have solar panels on your roof. By doing it, you also create demand for the alternative, like for example solar panels, bicycles or vegan products. That makes those alternatives easier and cheaper to purchase. It also makes it politically easier to ban something, as part of the society is not impacted at all.
In the end calling somebody an idiot, for promoting individual action due it not being an attempt to change society is just dumb. After all anybody who does that promotion tries to bring other people to do something. At that point it really is no longer the action of an individual. Honestly it really is a simple way to lobby against such actions on a bigger scale.
11111one11111@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Im not basing this comment on any research but even wiping out the entire .01% tax bracket’s carbon emissions, I dont think it puts even a dent in the industrial sector’s carbon emmissions. There arent many feasible options for producing food and goods for 8 billion people and reducing a significant amount of emmissions without having a plan that makes you sound like you are a evil villain out of the book/2006 movie “Angels and Demons.” Not implying that its futile or anything. Im just saying its easy to talk about but impossible when actually scaling any plan to account for prioritizing environment over keeping 8 fucking billion people fed, clothed and happy lol