The reason why is that rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gasses than driving cars!!!
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20772&Cr=global&Cr1=warming
This is a long overdue report and wake-up call for the world. How long can we keep eating in the excessive way we currently are??
There is enough in this world for every man’s need, but not enough for every man’s greed." -Gandhi It's been a known fact for quite a while now. Also, the resources required to raise cattle is much more than if we simply lived on a vegetarian diet.
greenhouse gas emmissions are just one result of this imbalance. ill health in societies with a high meat consumption per capita are well documented. animals farmed for consumption are now so pumped full of chemicals to increase productivity that these substances have already entered the food chain - to our own detriment. and a big part of the world population is still starving, partly because of our mis-management of vegetative resources.
They're a bit behind the times =/
| icecool wrote: |
| and a big part of the world population is still starving, partly because of our mis-management of vegetative resources. |
Wrong.
Some of the world population is still starving, mostly because of poverty, disease, and very inept/corrupt/tyrannical governments (and sometimes corporations and organized crime as well) that perpetuate those two conditions.
Fixed.I agree with the notion that only one factor can not solve problems and now to go back to a healthy wnvrioment is very difficult. Vegetables are all grown using pesticides and fertilizers which make them engineered than naturally grown.
Plastics and other industries are known for thier danger for green house effect and many other threats to environment. Just cattles and thier meet is now a very tiny part of the catalysts to detoriating evvironment if it really is after all.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| icecool wrote: | | and a big part of the world population is still starving, partly because of our mis-management of vegetative resources. |
Wrong.
Some of the world population is still starving, mostly because of poverty, disease, and very inept/corrupt/tyrannical governments (and sometimes corporations and organized crime as well) that perpetuate those two conditions.
Fixed. |
The whole biofuels "movement" didn't make things any better.Addiction to meat is like addiction to cars. Counter-productive, polluting, harmful and not in our own best interests.
| peaceupnorth wrote: |
The reason why is that rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gasses than driving cars!!!
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20772&Cr=global&Cr1=warming
This is a long overdue report and wake-up call for the world. How long can we keep eating in the excessive way we currently are??
There is enough in this world for every man’s need, but not enough for every man’s greed." -Gandhi |
Well they should say then eat less "red" meat as they are just talking about cattle and not poultry.
and one thing I have to say about the vegetarianism drive talking about environment ...if all humans turn to vegetarian diet they would be eating more farm produce and looking at the amount of meat consumption , if every meat-eater turns vegeterian there would be a huge excessive demand for the farm produce -->which means more farm land needs to be developed---> cut forests and trees for more farm land ---> shrink the already dying forests --> doesn't look all that encouraging for environment to me | peaceupnorth wrote: |
| ...if all humans turn to vegetarian diet they would be eating more farm produce and looking at the amount of meat consumption , if every meat-eater turns vegeterian there would be a huge excessive demand for the farm produce -->which means more farm land needs to be developed---> cut forests and trees for more farm land ---> shrink the already dying forests --> doesn't look all that encouraging for environment to me |
If the food-grains which are burnt in Europe and America for fuel are diverted for human consumption we wont have to clear any more land to produce more food.
Anyways there should be a balance between meat and vegetable consumption.... thats how nature also functions
... in balance.
| surdy wrote: |
and one thing I have to say about the vegetarianism drive talking about environment ...if all humans turn to vegetarian diet they would be eating more farm produce and looking at the amount of meat consumption , if every meat-eater turns vegeterian there would be a huge excessive demand for the farm produce -->which means more farm land needs to be developed---> cut forests and trees for more farm land ---> shrink the already dying forests --> doesn't look all that encouraging for environment to me |
I don't think so, actually. See, cattle is fed tons of grains that could be eaten by people, and the land that the cow food is grown on could be used for growing people food. It would be more efficient, not less.Wrong. The problem here isn't that we can't make enough food.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| Some of the world population is still starving, mostly because of poverty, disease, and very inept/corrupt/tyrannical governments (and sometimes corporations and organized crime as well) that perpetuate those two conditions. |
Fixed.
Mugabe, anyone? What I hear is that the whole dont-eat-meat-thing is really exaggerated. Another fact not mentioned is that the protein in meat is of higher quality than what you can get from veggies and other not-meat-options. I really hope it won't come down to there being a lack of meat. It is sooo goood too!
| LimpFish wrote: |
| What I hear is that the whole dont-eat-meat-thing is really exaggerated. Another fact not mentioned is that the protein in meat is of higher quality than what you can get from veggies and other not-meat-options. |
Who you hearing that from? Sounds like meat industry propaganda. Okinawa has the highest concentration of 100 year olds in the world, and they eat almost no meat, get their protein from tofu. | liljp617 wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | icecool wrote: | | and a big part of the world population is still starving, partly because of our mis-management of vegetative resources. |
Wrong.
Some of the world population is still starving, mostly because of poverty, disease, and very inept/corrupt/tyrannical governments (and sometimes corporations and organized crime as well) that perpetuate those two conditions.
Fixed. |
The whole biofuels "movement" didn't make things any better. |
can you qualify that statement please?
when you say biofuel movement do you mean the developed countries use of feedstock - animal and human - into what is known as either ethanol or bio-diesel to replace gas for mainly transportatiuon?
if so
1st. this is well off topic and a totally different issue altogether
2nd. a misinformed statement.
cheers | surdy wrote: |
Well they should say then eat less "red" meat as they are just talking about cattle and not poultry.
|
The studies have probably been done only with cattle, and a reduction in cattle would probably be the easiest change to make. But I'm sure that poultry, too, make greenhouse gases, and they certainly use food that people could eat. On the other hand, poultry is probably healthier food for people than cattle, although that may be my opinion mostly because of propaganda. | handfleisch wrote: |
| LimpFish wrote: | | What I hear is that the whole dont-eat-meat-thing is really exaggerated. Another fact not mentioned is that the protein in meat is of higher quality than what you can get from veggies and other not-meat-options. |
Who you hearing that from? Sounds like meat industry propaganda. Okinawa has the highest concentration of 100 year olds in the world, and they eat almost no meat, get their protein from tofu. |
And fish and other sea products.....Raising cattle causes LOTS of co2 emissions. Cattle also waste energy (you losse some energy as you got up the food chain)
But eatinb meat doesnt make other people starve, it is actually transporting the food to Africa or wherever it is. Because thier land is too dry ect ect for them to grow things.
It is also "MEDC's" selling arms to "LEDC's" which creates war which means farmes are damaged and thw workforce is killed.
Whatever we consume, including food must be done in a responsible and considerate manner.
I don't believe we should stop eating meat, we should just eat less red meat and more poultry, fish is also a good alternative.
irresponsible clearing of forests and the biofuel debacle are major contributors to global warming so I would start there, not trying to stop people eating meat. The meat production process could surely be made more efficient also, particularly transportation and cold storage.
Did you guys not read the article I posted? It actually answers a lot of the points you all put up (like the use of fossil fuels etc). The experts at the UN make it very clear that raising of animals for meat is a HUGE source of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. Read it guys & girls, it is interesting.
As for fish, please read this article!. And then, please, read this one. After reading these, my friends, can you really say that fish is a sustainable and viable food source?
| This is posted elsewhere and I think it is appropriate to quote myself, so I don't have to repeat what I already wrote: |
| The main environmental issue with meat eating is the AMOUNT of plants and land and water and petroleum it takes to feed, house, medicate, transport, slaughter, process, refrigerate, ship to grocery store wrapped in plastic, refrigerate and finally cook each food animal. Something like 70% of America's grain harvest goes towards livestock feed... if I'm not mistaken. Getting one's nutrition directly from plants is MUCH softer on the earth, any way you look at it. I agree that agriculture is often very destructive, but look at it this way.... one acre of land can grow enough plant food to feed at least 10 people for a year if it's planted with diversity and the land is good. If it is pasture for cattle... I'm no expert, but by all accounts one acre, even of good land, is not near enough to graze a single cow for a year. |
| peaceupnorth wrote: |
Did you guys not read the article I posted? It actually answers a lot of the points you all put up (like the use of fossil fuels etc). The experts at the UN make it very clear that raising of animals for meat is a HUGE source of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. Read it guys & girls, it is interesting.
As for fish, please read this article!. And then, please, read this one. After reading these, my friends, can you really say that fish is a sustainable and viable food source?
| This is posted elsewhere and I think it is appropriate to quote myself, so I don't have to repeat what I already wrote: | | The main environmental issue with meat eating is the AMOUNT of plants and land and water and petroleum it takes to feed, house, medicate, transport, slaughter, process, refrigerate, ship to grocery store wrapped in plastic, refrigerate and finally cook each food animal. Something like 70% of America's grain harvest goes towards livestock feed... if I'm not mistaken. Getting one's nutrition directly from plants is MUCH softer on the earth, any way you look at it. I agree that agriculture is often very destructive, but look at it this way.... one acre of land can grow enough plant food to feed at least 10 people for a year if it's planted with diversity and the land is good. If it is pasture for cattle... I'm no expert, but by all accounts one acre, even of good land, is not near enough to graze a single cow for a year. |
|
Well the way they are going with genetic modifications to plants, I'm worried about the plants I'm eating. Don't know what to trust any longer. Most fish have too much mercury in them, animal flesh is toxic, so is their farming. Perhaps you have forgotten about pollution from oil, into rivers, oceans, in the air everywhere. Think we need a World Committee BS Detection Team to sift through all of this. We have to drink water these days from plastic bottles that may even be worse for us in the end than contaminated water from taps. What's left to eat and drink?I definitely agree that we are running out of options, I don't even consider the "organic" section organic anymore. Ever ate a cucumber that didn't even taste like one?
We are definitely ruining our planet, but we don't care, it's been going on for almost a century now.
Our generation is very greedy and irresponsible, from knowing that we have salmonella in our peanuts and we still ship it, to dropping nuclear weapons on Japan. Sure, maybe our generation will be gone in 30 years or so... but have we ever thought about what will happen to the next generation? Also known as our children?
And for the icing on the cake, we are complaining that rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than cars and it causes global warming, and we pollute our rivers like it's a joke... yet our own governments do absolutely nothing to regulate it?
| Nick2008 wrote: |
| And for the icing on the cake, we are complaining that rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than cars and it causes global warming, and we pollute our rivers like it's a joke... yet our own governments do absolutely nothing to regulate it? |
Agreed, this is the most worrisome of all, if they are not using all the money they can find to bail out big banks, it is worrying about health care, sort of crisis management all the time, and not looking at the big picture. All of it being short-term solutions, long-term pain and as you said, most worrisome of all is that Governments are doing very little for actively sorting out environment issues, and ironically it is the Governments that are the worst culprits who are doing virtually nothing to save the environment.I this is a non-issue. In Europe, farmers hooked up their cows waste, and the methane from decomposing crops they produce and burn it in a small power plant on their farm to create electricity. If we do it in the West as well, then we can help make farming more economically viable. (Hopefully, Xcel will get a subsidy from Obama's Budget, I mean if big oil can get it, why can't they?) If it is cheap enough, India will follow...
http://business.smh.com.au/business/waste-not-with-moopower-20090306-8rfp.html
http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_11848033
People need to eat, beef and the milk from cows are a staple for Billions. If you are going to shift people from meat, to alternatives, then you are just moving the carbon from one industry to another because people still need to eat. As far as I am concerned, the study is incomplete and just pretty much confirms what we already know. Cows produce lots of gas, eat, a lot, and don't do very much. Unfortunately, so do most humans... blame the cows? LOL | LumberJack wrote: |
| I this is a non-issue. In Europe, farmers hooked up their cows waste, and the methane from decomposing crops they produce and burn it in a small power plant on their farm to create electricity. |
How about human waste being recycled that way ... maybe they can have special pipes in all the buildings going to an electricity generator in the building, rather than sewage pipes out of the building .... Just imagine the savings that would be 
Its being done - Sustainable farming can be done with human waste.
http://www.arghyam.org
Right, but it still has to be transported first, my suggestion was to burn the waste on site for fuel for generators. Maybe it is not feasible, probably will be too smelly? 
| deanhills wrote: |
| How about human waste being recycled that way ... maybe they can have special pipes in all the buildings going to an electricity generator in the building, rather than sewage pipes out of the building .... Just imagine the savings that would be |
Haha! Then the UN would say we should eat more meat! 
| deanhills wrote: |
| How about human waste being recycled that way ... maybe they can have special pipes in all the buildings going to an electricity generator in the building, rather than sewage pipes out of the building .... Just imagine the savings that would be |
Read up on "humanure".
At first it sounds crazy, but really it makes a lot of sense. Dealing with human waste is a huge problem! | Libby wrote: |
Read up on "humanure".
At first it sounds crazy, but really it makes a lot of sense. Dealing with human waste is a huge problem! |
You're right, humanure can become a valuable resource like oil ... Start with our governments.... they are full of crap | LumberJack wrote: |
| Start with our governments.... they are full of crap |
They will probably be able to generate electricity for the whole of their cities ....
