I’ve read in an Article that meat production causes a lot of co² emission. Now I was wondering if we stopped eating meat completely, would that be sufficient to get under the threshhold of emissions what the planet can process? What is that threshold? Where are we now? How much does meat add to this?

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      That doesn’t Account for the deforestation caused by ever expanding beef pastures. It’s also unclear whether that slice includes the farming of soy, corn and alfafa grown exclusively to feed animals. And then there’s the “energy in agriculture and fishing” section that you probably missed. And let’s not forget how far meat has to travel, that’s in another slice in the energy section.

      So probably there’s a couple percent more on top of that.

      • undeffeined@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        You forgot ocean acidification from farm runoff and the overfishing destroying the oceans ecosystem.

    • affenlehrer@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s more than industry (including concrete) so I still think it’s relevant. Land use, waste (water, dead zones), disease and antibiotics etc. are huge problems as well.

      • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        I was answering OPs question, specifically:

        would that be sufficient to get under the threshhold of emissions what the planet can process?

        Would that (alone) be sufficient? absolutely not. I never claimed it couldn’t contribute towards greenhouse gas reduction.

        • PatrickYaa@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          I did not call OP a moron, I did not call anyone (specific) names. I expect the same courtesy.

          I did not say anywhere that stopping to eat meat (which is only half the problem, milk is another big one, etc.) would stop climate change. In fact, I highlighted that stoppong all carbon emissions is important.

          The individual decision to eat meat or not to is, as you correctly point out, more or less in vain. The important thing is, that a societal change needs to happen. Which is what my whole rant was about. Any (individuals) one action is not enough. The industrialization of it needs to stop.

          For the record, I am not vegan, i eat meat, drink milk and eat eggs. At least call me a hypocritical asshole.

      • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        we need to stop ALL CO2 emissions where they aren’t necessary and unavoidable. Meat consumption (in the current industrial scale) is.

        meat consumption doesn’t emit co2 though

        • PatrickYaa@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Sure it does. You use muscles to move the piece of meat from the plate to your mouth, to chew it, to digest it. That all uses CO2.

          Well, actually, it uses ATP, which has to be regenerated using cellular respiration, which emits CO2.

          Are you happy with that explanation and sidetrack that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand?

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            you think human breathing is a significant source of co2 emissions, and should be mitigated? how would changing the food being chewed change the emissions of breathing?