4 ms·
I think my extra arguments week pretty self explanatory. Species extinction and deforestation of the Amazon most ecologists would agree are bad. Of course nich
by marricks 10y ago
I think my extra arguments week pretty self explanatory. Species extinction and deforestation of the Amazon most ecologists would agree are bad.
Of course niche cases require niche solutions, but I think considering other huge factors is also important rather than blindly ignoring them to make animal ag look better. As I said, this is the Holocene extinction event, clearly what we're doing needs to change and reduction in land use and species extinction is a good starting point. How we handle reclaimed land is important to consider of course, but honestly seems like a luxury until we get there. Besides saying we should stick to CO2 the main thing I get from your comment is arguing for status quo, which isn't a solution.
- belorn 10y agoMy argument, as given above, is that we should have a environment cost table when discussion what action individuals should take to save the environment. Starting by reducing those actions that has highest cost and then go down the list. Status quo it is not, through it is an argument in favor of bikes and remote work rather than diet changes. Amazon deforestation is clearly a problem, and in the same way that IKEA stopped using wood that they got from that deforestation, so too can other markets that benefit from deforestation. There could be national bans or consumer boycotts of beef produced on cost of amazon forests, which would be a niche solution for a niche case.