4 ms·

There's a good chart with a short text summary at Our World in Data: https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sect

There's a good chart with a short text summary at Our World in Data: https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

Jetgocl 5y ago
> Grants from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
- parski 5y ago
  Among many other grants, sponsors, donors and contributors such as the UK government and the WHO. What's your point?
DoingIsLearning 5y ago
This is really really cool. So looking at the world data the global warming effect of the whole world livestock production is 5.8% which is aproximately the same as the methane emissions of accidental leaks in the Energy sector industries. It seems logistically much easier to solve the problem of coal mining leaks and Oil and Gas methane leaks created by a few multinational conglomerates, than to try and curb a fractured meat industry spread through multiple (often developing) countries.
- elite_hackers 5y ago
  You think repairing literally millions of abandoned leaking natural gas wells is easier?
  - DoingIsLearning 5y ago
    I don't really know but my gut feeling is that you can sit down with the 99.9% of those well owners at a single OPEC or IOGP meeting. However, you would struggle to enforce any meat industry curbing measure with the millions of meat producers spread across many developing countries.
    - morsch 5y ago
      If you think it's easier to focus on developed countries, North America and Europe are responsible for 1/3 of the global meat production (~110 million tons/year). China is another 80 million tons. On the consumption side, and leaving aside the micro-nation of Hong Kong, the US lead the per capita meat consumption charts with 124 kg/year, with other high-wealth countries close behind. (China: 61 kg/year.) The developing countries don't have to be a particular priority, at this point. https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production
    - elite_hackers 5y ago
      They don’t have owners, they are abandoned. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-drilling-abandoned-specialreport/special-report-millions-of-abandoned-oil-wells-are-leaking-methane-a-climate-menace-idUSKBN23N1NL https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-drilling-abandoned-sp...
      - DoingIsLearning 5y ago
        TIL. But even after insolvency there must be a way to enforce personal liability on whoever was in charge of the company that drilled the well in the first place.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  Or if people drive 33% less. Or heated their home 50% less. But why not stop the accidental leaks while eating less meat while driving less while using energy efficient houses? It’s a lot easier to blame an industry you can’t control than make a few decisions at home. Tell your politicians to hold the mega corps accountable while proving you care by avoiding beef and driving less and turning the AC on less.
  - DoingIsLearning 5y ago
    Indeed wholeheartedly agree, it was not my intention to single out a particular industry and participation is key since like you said transportation and energy are two main causes for which we do have control over. It was just interesting that the percent contributions where really similar between the two when intuitively I would expect Oil/Gas/Coal methane leaks to have a marginal climate impact.
- morsch 5y ago
  Maybe? Why wouldn't you try both?
- bafumio 5y ago
  I'm not sure if I'm missing something but right now the global goal is 0 co2 by 2050 which already means hitting 1-2 degrees increase. Every measure right now, which doesn't hurt us, doesn't do anything right now to solve the problem. Mexiko has a drought strongest of the last 30 years, permafrost is unfreezing, etc.
senectus1 5y ago
be interesting to see what the predicyions would be if another World War broke out and we pretended that nukes wouldn't get used. I'm guessing that the 73% of GHG from industry and energy production would jump to 90% during war 0.o edit: Holy snapping duck crap. a quick google search bought up some really horrifying links: https://www.wri.org/data/greenhouse-gas-emissions-over-165-years https://www.wri.org/data/greenhouse-gas-emissions-over-165-y... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_war I'm no human hating greeny but this makes me feel sick about us in general

There's a good chart with a short text summary at Our World in Data: https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

Jetgocl 5y ago

> Grants from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

parski 5y ago
Among many other grants, sponsors, donors and contributors such as the UK government and the WHO. What's your point?

DoingIsLearning 5y ago

This is really really cool. So looking at the world data the global warming effect of the whole world livestock production is 5.8% which is aproximately the same as the methane emissions of accidental leaks in the Energy sector industries. It seems logistically much easier to solve the problem of coal mining leaks and Oil and Gas methane leaks created by a few multinational conglomerates, than to try and curb a fractured meat industry spread through multiple (often developing) countries.

elite_hackers 5y ago
You think repairing literally millions of abandoned leaking natural gas wells is easier?
- DoingIsLearning 5y ago
  I don't really know but my gut feeling is that you can sit down with the 99.9% of those well owners at a single OPEC or IOGP meeting. However, you would struggle to enforce any meat industry curbing measure with the millions of meat producers spread across many developing countries.
  - morsch 5y ago
    If you think it's easier to focus on developed countries, North America and Europe are responsible for 1/3 of the global meat production (~110 million tons/year). China is another 80 million tons. On the consumption side, and leaving aside the micro-nation of Hong Kong, the US lead the per capita meat consumption charts with 124 kg/year, with other high-wealth countries close behind. (China: 61 kg/year.) The developing countries don't have to be a particular priority, at this point. https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production
  - elite_hackers 5y ago
    They don’t have owners, they are abandoned. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-drilling-abandoned-specialreport/special-report-millions-of-abandoned-oil-wells-are-leaking-methane-a-climate-menace-idUSKBN23N1NL https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-drilling-abandoned-sp...
    - DoingIsLearning 5y ago
      TIL. But even after insolvency there must be a way to enforce personal liability on whoever was in charge of the company that drilled the well in the first place.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
vineyardmike 5y ago
Or if people drive 33% less. Or heated their home 50% less. But why not stop the accidental leaks while eating less meat while driving less while using energy efficient houses? It’s a lot easier to blame an industry you can’t control than make a few decisions at home. Tell your politicians to hold the mega corps accountable while proving you care by avoiding beef and driving less and turning the AC on less.
- DoingIsLearning 5y ago
  Indeed wholeheartedly agree, it was not my intention to single out a particular industry and participation is key since like you said transportation and energy are two main causes for which we do have control over. It was just interesting that the percent contributions where really similar between the two when intuitively I would expect Oil/Gas/Coal methane leaks to have a marginal climate impact.
morsch 5y ago
Maybe? Why wouldn't you try both?
bafumio 5y ago
I'm not sure if I'm missing something but right now the global goal is 0 co2 by 2050 which already means hitting 1-2 degrees increase. Every measure right now, which doesn't hurt us, doesn't do anything right now to solve the problem. Mexiko has a drought strongest of the last 30 years, permafrost is unfreezing, etc.

senectus1 5y ago

be interesting to see what the predicyions would be if another World War broke out and we pretended that nukes wouldn't get used. I'm guessing that the 73% of GHG from industry and energy production would jump to 90% during war 0.o edit: Holy snapping duck crap. a quick google search bought up some really horrifying links: https://www.wri.org/data/greenhouse-gas-emissions-over-165-years https://www.wri.org/data/greenhouse-gas-emissions-over-165-y... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_war I'm no human hating greeny but this makes me feel sick about us in general