Comment by jaschen@lemm.ee on The necessary technologies

Not everyone can eat a pure vegan diet. We are omnivores. We don’t get to pick, we must eat it all to stay healthy.

So do it. While some people would argue vefpganism is ideal, the important part is “less meat”, especially less beef. I’d give kudos to anyone who eats one less beef meal per week: chicken is much easier in the environment than beef, or ne less meat meal,

The word Ideal is very generic. Ideal to who? What is ideal? Your health? The climate? Your bowel movement?

Meat contributes a ton of CO2. 15% of global output in just beef alone. Pork and Chicken is better.

Instead of pickering over words we could just acknowledge the underlying facts.

Those who can, and most people in western industrialized countries can, should reduce their meat consumption. For most of them veganism is a viable option, especially as there is easy access to doctors checking as well as supplements if there is difficulties.

There is no intrinsic need for animal protein or fats for a healthy diet.

The reduction of meat or even the total mandatory switch to all vegan diet won’t stop climate change since it’s such a small % in the total carbon footprint compared to our energy needs.

Your tribalism thoughts should be better focused on things like our need for clean energy like nuclear and solar.

I am neither vegan nor vegetarian, nor do i propose a mandatory switch to such diets. I also don’t mind people who primarily eat meat, as they are still traditional herders or hunters like in Central Asia or parts of Africa. But you know what these people don’t do? Fly on vacation twice a year, go on cruises, drive 20.000 km or more a year, consume 5 MWh of electricity per person and year…

The current way of animal farming with the current meat consumption results in about 10-17% of global GHG emissions. That is about the same emissions like all road traffic.

And unlike cars, where you could reduce the emissions effectively by using EVs, you simply cannot change a cow from emititting substantial amounts of methane, and the effects of the land conversion necessary for it’s feed.

Finally the argument, that X source of emission would be irrelevant to target since it is so small on the global scale is the prime whataboutism argument to not adress any emissions. “Oh our country is only making 1% of global emissions, we don’t have to change.” “Oh our industry could cut emissions in half in three years, but what about the other industry?”

People in western countries eat way too much meat. Any reduction to that is good, be it by reducing your meat consumption significantly or by switching to a vegetarian or vegan diet.

Vehicle emissions are closer to 25-30% of the total emissions. The mass majority of it is in passenger/truck vehicles. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions

I want to point out that cruises are not the problem. While it is a problem, it’s not significant enough to warrant mentioning.

Aviation contributes around 2.7%. Again, it’s a problem. I get it. But we need to focus the biggest polluters here first. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport.

That is energy production. Its literally the primary problem. It’s 79% of the world’s pollution. Everything starts here. Focus your anger here. Talk to your local representatives about this core problem. We need cleaner energy production, like nuclear, solar, wind or whatever magic shit smart inventors comes up with. We also need better battery technology to store said energy. We needed that yesterday. https://www.wri.org/insights/interactive-chart-shows-changes-worlds-top-10-emitters

If today we banned all fossil fuels, it would *instantly *fix climate change. While changing nothing else.

Can’t be said about meat production. Your effort quite literally does nothing for our climate. It’s the fossil fuel industry switching the blame from them to us, the people. We are not the problem. Our diet is not the problem.

Your rhetoric only divides us. Focus on banning fossil fuels.

Everyone needs nutrients they can digest. The source doesn’t matter under these conditions. Excluding rare medical cases, everyone can get all required nutrients from non-animal sources, ergo everyone can have and live a perfectly healthy life on a vegan diet.

Meat has more than just protein. It has so many micronutrients that your body needs that you would have to take a shit ton of supplements to just come close to it. Sure, you can survive without those micronutrients. But why go through all the trouble?

that you would have to take a shit ton of supplements to just come close to it

If you would’ve taken a dive into healthy vegan diets, you would know that this isn’t true.

But why go through all the trouble?

I thought we already established that in the comments here.

The climate of the memes of the climate!

Planet is on fire!

mod notice: do not hesitate to report abusive comments, I am not always here.

rules:

no slurs, be polite
don’t give an excuse to pollute
no climate denial
and of course: no racism, no homophobia, no antisemitism, no islamophobia, no transphobia

The necessary technologies(feddit.de)

The memes of the climate

!climatememes@lemmy.world

Community stats

Community moderators