11 ms·

I don't think people will stop consuming meat if you ask them nicely. You have to make decisions that will hurt the meat industry and make it infeasible. This

• mytailorisrich 7y ago
  There is no need to go from one extreme to the other. This is about eating "less" meat. People do not traditionally eat that much meat because meat used to be expensive and its supply limited. This is still the case in poor countries. In developed countries, people started to eat more and more meat as they got richer because we naturally like meat and because of clever marketing. We now eat too much meat, and also consume too much dairy (adults don't need to drink any milk and many don't digest it well, by the way). If people just stopped eating meat at every meal or every day, consumption would drastically drop without too much of a change in daily life. One solution would be measures to increase prices but that is a political minefield.
  • lol768 7y ago
    >adult don't need to drink any milk and many don't digest it well, by the way Never understood the obsession with drinking milk on its own (though I never liked the taste of it myself either). There's plenty of calcium to be found in other sources: kale, leafy greens, almonds, fortrified grains, beans/pulses etc.
    • close04 7y ago
      You're missing one solid reason to drink milk: some people like it. Most of the stuff we eat today is actually not about nutritional needs. And your argument can always be reshuffled. Swap milk with any one of the items you listed and one by one you can disqualify all of them from consumption. Variety is a good thing, meaning something should be eliminated because it's no good, not because there are alternatives. There's no requirement or recommendation to cover your daily needs with the least varied diet.
      • markstos 7y ago
        Of people I know who have reduced animal consumption, drinking cow milk and having it on cereal is one of the first things to go. In the early days soy milk was about the only alternative. Now there are so many dairy-free milk alternatives to try. The proliferation of grocery shelves is a testament to their growing popularity.
    • harimau777 7y ago
      This is a very niche reason, but one of the classic diets for beginner weight lifters who want to gain weight is to add a gallon of whole milk a day to their existing diet. For people that are trying to consume more calories and protein, I don't know of an alternative that combines comparable calorie & protein density, low cost, ease of consumption, and zero preparation time. More generally, I think that one of the big challenges with plant based diets is a lack of easily available calorie and protein dense foods. (I'm not saying its impossible to get enough calories and protein as a vegan, even as a bodybuilder. Just that it is not nearly as easy.)
      • growlist 7y ago
        I got a free sample of pea protein powder with some whey one time. It was truly disgusting!
        • ppseafield 7y ago
          Unflavored pea protein is pretty bad, but there are a ton of delicious vegan protein powder options out there.
      • gwm83 7y ago
        I haven't heard of this and I know a good number of weight trainers. Doesn't this give people massive squirts? Can anyone digest a whole gallon of milk in a day? Gross
      • wreath 7y ago
        I think you are referring to Mark Rippetoe’s suggested diet in his book Starting Strength. In which case, it is worth mentioning that this is suggested for skinny, 18 year old males and to be followed for the duration of the training program (months)
      • markstos 7y ago
        Even weight lifting is changing, with one of the top weight lifters being vegan: https://www.greatveganathletes.com/patrik-baboumian-vegan-strongman/ https://www.greatveganathletes.com/patrik-baboumian-vegan-st... Dairy in particular can be source of inflammation. One of the benefits of the vegan diets for athletes cited is a fast recovery time after workouts.
    • academic_nimrod 7y ago
      People aren't obsessed with it, it's just good. You ever had a cold glass of whole milk with a slice of chocolate cake? It's good for your soul.
      • lol768 7y ago
        I have, I wasn't much of a fan :P (Cow) milk just seems to have an unpleasant aftertaste to me. I get on well with oat milk, though.
    • growlist 7y ago
      One of the strangest things to me about lunch in the Netherlands: adult men drinking milk with their meal, this meal sometimes consisting of a chocolate hundreds and thousands sandwich O_o
      • radicalbyte 7y ago
        At least that's better than drinking buttermilk and a cheese sandwich :)
      • mrep 7y ago
        That is hilarious because I love to drink milk with sweet pastries and my girlfriend also thinks drinking straight milk is disgusting. It's hard to explain why, but I think the main reason is that I am not super into sweets and milk seems to counteract the sweetness. I also get heartburn frequently and milk tends to help my stomach not feel terrible like it would if I ate a sweet pastry by itself.
    • dmux 7y ago
      >Never understood the obsession with drinking milk on its own It's something that's been consumed for millennia. There are societies based on pastoralism where milk is a huge part of the diet. I'd hardly classify it as being an obsession.
      • lol768 7y ago
        >It's something that's been consumed for millennia. There are societies based on pastoralism where milk is a huge part of the diet. I'd hardly classify it as being an obsession. Obsession is probably the wrong word, but I'd still be curious as to the history behind it (and how long it continued into adulthood). Especially given its association with and place in a juvenile diet.
  • bigato 7y ago
    Given the extreme we are in yes, going to the other extreme would be a good thing. And even then, not enough. This is just one of the multiple changes that humanity need to bring about. I don't think people should be prohibited from eating animal products, but those who have the will to remove it completely from their diets would definitely be having a much higher positive impact on the environment.
    • mytailorisrich 7y ago
      It would be helpful, obviously, but it is not necessary and not realistic. Trying to go to an extreme is counter-productive because people won't follow. Convincing people not to eat meat at every meal or every day has a much higher chance of delivering significant results quickly.
  • aaron695 7y ago
    > One solution would be measures to increase prices but that is a political minefield. What's another solution? People will keep slaves if it's legal. Stopping the use of tax payer dollars to help people eat meat seems not that much of a minefield compared too?
  • kpU8efre7r 7y ago
    Exactly this. I will never go vegan or vegetarian but I mostly limit meat to only dinner and in smaller portions. My grocery bill is much smaller, it's healthier, and better for the environment overall. Pushing a full-blown switch to veganism as the only solution is not pragmatic.
  • fpoling 7y ago
    My grandmother told me that before the second world war for a typical peasant family in Belarus the meat meant a single chicken 2-4 times in a month for the whole family. Only on big celebrations few times in a year people could afford to slaughter a pig or a caw. Even eggs were considered expensive. Milk was more available as most families had a cow. The real staple food was potato and bread. In cities meat was more available as workers typically earned more. Option to eat meat each day was considered a luxury.
    • loceng 7y ago
      I think we should be pointing to science - which to date it hasn't been adequately done relating to diet, to see what diet is optimal, and how that varies per group whether that's by blood type, DNA/ancestral data, or other - while taking in the particular sensitivities of each individual as part of the research vs. making the reference points based on a structure of scarcity of what was available based on what people could afford; also having an idea of a person's current health state, how healthy their GI tract is and overall system needs to be taken into account as to how they may or may not respond to different diets - including not limited to how we're only just beginning to understand how gut bacteria and within the whole GI tract can strongly impact outcome.
    • diyseguy 7y ago
      Its interesting to hear anecdotal stories like these because they contradict the conventional wisdom nowadays that says you have to eat meat as protein every day - clearly that wasn't the case in prior centuries.
      • LegitShady 7y ago
        what was the life expectancy? what was the standard of living? trying to call back to 1930s belarus as an example to live from is crazy. It doesn't even logically follow that we should avoid meat because poor farmers in belarus didn't each much. Where's the logical argument?
        • berdon 7y ago
  • harimau777 7y ago
    A challenge that I could see with convincing people to adopt a more plant based diet is that there is a carbon cost associated with shipping food across the country, but in many parts of the US a plant based diet might be much less appetizing if it is restricted to local crops. For example, much of the country wouldn't have access to citrus fruits, bananas, pineapples, or avocados. Maybe a solution would be to tax food based on how long it was shipped but to exempt fruits and vegetables from the tax.
    • jbob2000 7y ago
      Na, that's a red herring. We can reduce our meat consumption and not replace it with anything. Americans are over consuming food, we can definitely reduce meat intake without needing to replace it with foods shipped in from out of county. Also, most of the US population is around the coasts. Shipping a bit of food inland to the people there isn't that big of an impact.
      • jnwatson 7y ago
        So you’re just asking humans to consume fewer calories? Good luck with that.
      • ben509 7y ago
        > Americans are over consuming food Overconsumption is generally less than 10% of their caloric needs, so they can't just drop a large source of nutrition.
        • mytailorisrich 7y ago
          Apparently, Americans throw away the equivalent of a third of the calories they consume, and interestingly a lot of fruits and veg. [1] Reducing waste would dramatically help the environment. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/18/americans-waste-food-fruit-vegetables-study https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/18/american...
      • corodra 7y ago
  • e12e 7y ago
    > There is no need to go from one extreme to the other. Global warming due to greenhouse gas is a reason to go to the "other" extreme?
  • hanniabu 7y ago
    > One solution would be measures to increase price, but that is a political minefield. It's only a political minefield because of corporate influence (dictation?) in politics.
  • magduf 7y ago
    >and also consume too much dairy (adults don't need to drink any milk and many don't digest it well, by the way) How much is "too much"? We don't need to drink tea or coffee either; do you propose getting rid of those too? For those of us who have no problems digesting it, what exactly is the problem with eating yogurt or drinking milk? Sure, consuming too much of those probably isn't good, but you can say that about literally any food. For people who don't digest it well, then of course I'd suggest not drinking it. The same goes for any other food: if you're allergic to peanuts, don't eat them. If you're allergic to shellfish, don't eat them. If you're allergic to bananas, don't eat them. If you're lactose-intolerant, don't drink milk unless you really like the taste and want to add lactase enzyme. I do agree that Americans in particular eat way too much red meat, but I think some people give dairy a hard time when I don't think it's that much of a problem compared to many other things. Most adults don't drink a lot of milk anyway; usually "dairy" for adults means eggs, cheese, yogurt, etc. I don't see the health problems with dairy the way I see with red meat either. For improving public health, we should instead be reducing how much red meat people eat, plus also reducing or eliminating stuff like HFCS, refined sugars, refined flour, alcohol, etc. >One solution would be measures to increase prices but that is a political minefield. What they should do is just eliminate the tax breaks that unhealthy industries enjoy.
• truthwhisperer 7y ago
  no the question is do we support from the "west" that everyone gets the same share of the cake which means we have to change dramatically our way of living or do we want to keep it for ourselves. If every CN or IN guys lives on the same standard as we in EU/USA the world will be gone in 60 seconds. Let discuss on that level instead of picking out all kind of less relevant topics each time.
• dkersten 7y ago
  Shift subsidies from meat to vegetables perhaps.
  • glastra 7y ago
    Which subsidies is meat getting? The ones that go to the agriculture industry responsible for feed? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy#United_St...
    • leethargo 7y ago
      I heard that corn farming is subsidized in the US, which is also used to feed cows?
    • dkersten 7y ago
      Sure, why not? From the same wikipedia page, a bit above what you linked, there's also this chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Meat_Atlas_2014_subsidies_animal_products.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Meat_Atlas_2014_subsidies... showing how many billions are spent on animal product subsidies. Unfortunately I had no luck finding the actual OECD reports, though (aside from the " Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2019" report, but that seems to just compare each country to the global average, rather than talking about different types of subsidies)
      • glastra 7y ago
        "[...] animal products and feed", straight from the image. Sadly, no distinction. I would assume that it's mostly subsidies to feed. I am unable to find any sources on subsidies to meat directly. I'm all for removing subsidies to monoculture agriculture.
        • dkersten 7y ago
          > I am unable to find any sources on subsidies to meat directly. Yeah, I searched around a bit (even outside of the US) and I'm having difficulty finding any proper data to back up or refute it. That's a pity, would have been nice to know either way. The best I found was data on subsidies given to individual farmers in my country (I'm not in the US), but unless I scrape the site and aggregate and categorise the data, its not really useful (and doing that is too much work for me). > I'm all for removing subsidies to monoculture agriculture. Absolutely. I don't even mind animal products receiving subsidies, I'm not vegetarian and certainly not vegan, but I do hope that non-animal products get a large chunk of the subsidy pie, personally.
• arethuza 7y ago
  Make much higher welfare standards for farm animals a requirement - making meat much more expensive, reducing consumption. Sounds like a win win to me.
  • sschueller 7y ago
    And if you don't want to wait for the government to require this you can already start today. Buy only locally farmed organic meat. Don't go to fast food places or restaurants that don't specifically declare that their meat is organic and local.
    • saagarjha 7y ago
      Or just reduce your meat consumption.
      • SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
        Speaking as someone who took the same stance as the commenter you're replying to, reduced meat consumption was indeed a side effect in my case without it being a conscious choice - mainly due to cost and inconvenience.
    • mklarmann 7y ago
      Trouble with organic is that those cows live longer, hence cause about 60% more Methan emissions, till they are slaughtered.
      • tom_mellior 7y ago
        > Trouble with organic is that those cows live longer Interesting. Do you have a source? I don't see a good reason for this off the top of my head.
        • dagw 7y ago
          At a guess cows that are grass fed and not given growth hormones grow much slower and thus take longer to reach 'slaughtering' weight.
• est31 7y ago
  I agree. Few years back I bought some tofu sausages to try out how they taste. They tasted interesting but not like real sausages. Definitely not a good replacement. Even if I made myself eat them because of moral reasons, ignoring how they taste, many people would still avoid them. As long as meat tastes better than its alternatives, people will use it. We need to bring good meat alternatives to the masses. The theoretical advantage that artificial meat has is the lower amount of resources needed. Over time, because of this it can get much cheaper than real meat, at least if you don't factor in skewing of the market due to government subsidies. Then, if they truly have comparable tastes, people will naturally choose those alternatives. This seems like the best strategy: If you force people to become vegan by law without giving good alternatives, you just make them angry at people who want to stop climate change. If you nicely ask them, some will switch but most won't. So I believe the best way forward is to invest into meat alternative startups and help them make their product as widely used and as cheap as possible.
  • mklarmann 7y ago
    Our studies have shown, that about 10% are first movers (willing to give up benefits, to become climate friendly eaters) and 80% will go with the default when it is acceptable. The last 10% would still need to be coerced actively by some kind of restriction.
    • est31 7y ago
      10% is a lot. It's enough to swing an election. And no idea what the 80% would think. Also, I'm interested in global solutions, not ones that are effective in one country only. Globally, there are varying degrees of support for fighting climate change. Especially third world countries want growth and say it's the responsibility of developed economies to fight it because we have polluted so much historically. The goal is to make it impossible for Bolsonaro to sell his meat to any country in the world.
      • andrenth 7y ago
        How about we make it impossible for Trump or Merkel or Abe or Xi Jinping to sell their coal-powered production to any country in the world? The question is rhetorical and is meant to show that 1) this proposal is not a “global solution”, as punishing a single country would hardly make any difference; and 2) you’re personifying a country’s exports, associating them to an administration you disagree ideologically with, to make it sound evil, and that is not rational nor productive.
• jdc 7y ago
  Methane tax IMO
  • glastra 7y ago
    Better dial down on the fiber intake, then!
    • C1sc0cat 7y ago
      And have regular blood tests and take your vitamins to keep your biochemistry at the right state.
  • elktea 7y ago
    "Combining isotopic evidence from ground surface measurements with the newly calculated fire emissions, the team showed that about 17 teragrams per year of the increase is due to fossil fuels, another 12 is from wetlands or rice farming, while fires are decreasing by about 4 teragrams per year. The three numbers combine to 25 teragrams a year -- the same as the observed increase"[1] The 'cows farting' story is not a major methane source. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nasa-led-study-solves-a-methane-puzzle https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nasa-led-study-solves-a-met...
    • dkersten 7y ago
      I don't have a source at hand, so grain of salt and all that... I read somewhere that grass-fed cows also produce a lot less methane than corn-fed cows.
    • hannob 7y ago
      What you're citing here is numbers for previously unexplained emissions, not total emissions. I.e. there was major uncertainty that scientists were measuring more methane than they expected, and these scientists tried to figure out where it comes from. The only thing your argument says is that for methane emissions from meat production apparently scientists had a pretty good idea about the numbers.
• jazzabeanie 7y ago
  From the article: “But it would indeed be beneficial, for both climate and human health, if people in many rich countries consumed less meat, and if politics would create appropriate incentives to that effect.”
  • dqh 7y ago
    For the most part I now only eat meat, eggs, cheese, some nuts, and non-starchy vegetables. Mostly meat, and mostly very fatty meat like Pork belly. At 40 years old i've never been healthier as an adult - I don't buy the argument that meat is bad for you.
    • buckthundaz 7y ago
      Same here. People should experiment for themselves. Give a 30-Day meat-based diet a try. http://meatheals.com/ http://meatheals.com/ https://justmeat.co/ https://justmeat.co/
    • uxcolumbo 7y ago
      Check out pcrm.org for some medical arguments why it's bad for you. But even if you think it's not bad for you, it's bad for: - the environment - bad for people having to work in slaughterhouses killing and gutting animals all day - bad for the animal
• CommieDetector 7y ago
  What gives you the right to control what people eat?
  • Nyandalized 7y ago
    I believe the government already has the right and power to control what people eat. People form the government, and people (ideally) choose the people to hold that power. In part I, too have the right to control what people eat through voting.
    • jfnixon 7y ago
      Great, that means we can vote to require meat at every meal. Don't like it? Too bad, so sad, we have the right to control what you eat.
      • saagarjha 7y ago
        You cannot force people to eat something.
        • CommieDetector 7y ago
          Then you can not force people _not_ to eat something.
          • gbear605 7y ago
            There’s an established precedent in (American) law that it’s generally okay to forbid an action but it’s not okay to mandate an action. For example, you can stop people from driving without a license, but you can’t make everyone get a license.
            • magduf 7y ago
              I hate to point it out, but ObamaCare is an example of the reverse: you're mandated to purchase health insurance, or else pay a hefty penalty fee.
• nexensis 7y ago
  That's not entirely true - veganism has made massive strides in the last few years simply because more information is becoming available about the environmental, ethical and (arguably) health issues surrounding our heavy meat consumption. Millions of people are already voluntarily reducing their consumption and now virtually every restaurant in the UK has vegan options, making it easier for more people to switch. I live in the outskirts of a relatively small, low-income industrial city and there are signs outside small shops and restaurants everywhere promoting their new vegan menus. A traditional pub near me has no fewer than 14(!) plant-based main courses. I'd love to see tax incentives that reflect the damage that the meat and dairy industry are doing (ending the massive government subsidies would be a good start), however the changes I've seen in the UK give me hope that the grassroots level can sway public opinion without forcing people to change via legislation.
  • hannob 7y ago
    Local perception versus global reality: Meat consumption is still growing. This can easily get clouded if you live in a place where you feel a new vegan place opens all the time. But this is very unevenly distributed. The UK is a place where vegan eating is strong, likewise Germany, Sweden and certainly a few other places. But even in very similar countries also in middle Europe - e.g. Denmark, France - vegetarianism is still very unusual.
• lm28469 7y ago
  Informing people might work for some [0]. That's how I reduced my consumption by 90%. If you truly want to do good and people are able to inform you that X is bad then you'll do your best to stop doing X. Also, good meat is expensive and cheap meat taste like shit so it's a good move for your wallet. [0] growing amount of people saying "I want to fight climate change but can't do anything myself"
• throwaway3627 7y ago
  Never going to happen without leadership to force people to change. People are too stuck in their ways, even though meat agriculture is terrible for these reasons: - antibiotic resistance - air, water and soil pollution - climate change - inefficient calorie, phosphorus and land utilization - pandemic evolution - and of course cruelty to animals Eating meat is a choice to doom yourself, everyone else and the planet. No amount of gradual incrementalism, hand-wringing incentives or rationalizations/self-delusions can substitute for vital action.
  • academic_nimrod 7y ago
    What you mean by "vital action"? Sounds authoritarian. Shouldn't people vote on these sorts of things, with democracy and all?
    • AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
      A matter of philosophy. Which is more important: the continuation of civilized human society, or democratic ideals? Personally, I'm not actually sure. The human race, like all things, is ultimately doomed so surely some consideration for values outside those of mere survival is necessary.
• digitalsushi 7y ago
  Whenever I worry about someone bioengineering a plague for humans to save the planet, the pragmatist in me realizes they could just do the same against cows and only end up being remembered as half evil.
• academic_nimrod 7y ago
  Got it - when democratic means don't work, switch to coercion and extortion. Wonder why people have such negative views of environmentalists.
• nkozyra 7y ago
  > I don't think people will stop consuming meat if you ask them nicely. Illuminating the moral quandary of meat consumption helps. It worked for me. Nobody had to ask me nicely, they just needed to help me to think about it and be self-reflective. Even if you believe there to be ethical meat consumption (a notion I find dubious in modern life), people can reduce consumption and have a big impact. Modern commercial meat and dairy production is a horrible process and most people are so insulated from it that you get used to thinking meat is just this product that comes from a factory.
  • luckylion 7y ago
    > Nobody had to ask me nicely, they just needed to help me to think about it and be self-reflective. My theory is that you have to be ready / have to already, deep down, made that decision and then just needed a little push. Since this is a major topic in many societies with vegetarians and vegans proselytizing, I doubt that the majority of meat eaters aren't aware - they just don't come to the same conclusions or like it too much to quit.
  • corodra 7y ago
    But most people don't see a general ethical issue with eating meat. We are omnivores after all. Hell, our hunter gatherer ancestors ate more meat than we do. Though, higher quality. It's the same with seeing a wolf eat a deer. Think they care? Same with a chimp finally catching a monkey and eating it (now those are horrifying videos to see, especially since chimps love eating monkeys). Snake to a mouse. Fox to a hare. Cat to a bird. Shark to a seal. Cheetah to a gazelle. Osprey to a fish. At that, a lot of herbivores also kill and eat other animals (ground nesting birds being the popular victim). Mostly for the calcium in their bones. But still. But if broccoli could scream would you stop eating it? Circle of life. Just the way it is. However I do agree, there are a lot of commercial farming practices that need to be ended. Even if it means higher prices.
    • ppseafield 7y ago
      A lot of people have a problem with eating dog meat. Wolves that eat deer don't also breed them to the point where they contribute to climate change. Hunter gatherer folk don't breed them to a point where they are a significant factor in climate change. As carnivores wolves don't really have a choice to not eat meat. You do, though. With a couple of different choices at the supermarket or simply ordering different choices on the menu, you can help cut down our global emissions.
• blunte 7y ago
  Sadly, I think the only thing that will make a big impact in changing people's consumption will be related to antibiotic resistant mass-contamination events. A few back to back meat recalls in the US got me to try vegetarianism 8 years ago. The animal welfare element only developed after I started learning about the new diet I was on. It also helps to promote stories of very healthy vegetarians (especially pro athletes). My favorites were Carl Lewis, Herschel Walker, and Venus Williams. There are many more out there. The key is to find decent, not too complex recipes. Dropping a slab of meat on the grill is so easy and results in such a tasty primary component of a meal; but making an interesting vegetarian meal requires more effort (at first). Once you know some good recipes, you get to the point where the only time you miss meat is when you're at a festival and you smell barbeque :).
• the_gastropod 7y ago
  Absolutely! I think you hit the nail on the head. I went to an Israeli restaurant the other day, and (I'm guessing?) all the meat was kosher (read: expensive). Their menu prices seemed to be exactly how they should be. Vegetarian options were in the ~$7 range, and meat dishes were in the $35 range. This kind of pricing still makes meat dishes accessible to anyone that wants them, but gently nudges behavior in a more sustainable direction.
  • TheBeardKing 7y ago
    I hate when I go to Qdoba and the same bowl with Impossible meat is $9.99, while beef or chicken is $7.99. So now I have to pay more and eat less healthy?
    • uxcolumbo 7y ago
      Can you point me to some sources that say plant=based meat is less healthy than animal based meat?
      • TheBeardKing 7y ago
        Nutritionists vary on the following aspects, as the research isn't definitive, so I'm not going to give an opinion, just list the facts: the new meat alternatives have less protein, more sodium, more carbs, and more saturated fat. Take that as you will.
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    • saagarjha 7y ago
      I’m sure the vegetarian bowl without meat substitutes is cheaper.
• mparramon 7y ago
  This is starting to happen in the EU already: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49281111 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49281111
• srean 7y ago
  Apparently the Indian way is death by lynching on suspicion of cow slaughter with govt doing a 'wink wink' I was looking the other way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_vigilante_violence_in_India_since_2014 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_vigilante_violence_in_Indi... The govt's behavior is not motivated by climate.