4 ms·

This is terrible advice. So first of all, scientists that study phenomena that started before 1870 are “real” scientists. Not having absolute certainty over so

This is terrible advice. So first of all, scientists that study phenomena that started before 1870 are “real” scientists. Not having absolute certainty over something doesn’t mean yours or my opinion has the same weight as a significant amount of evidence that points to a trend over time. Secondly, telling people to eat less meat, and adjust their thermostat does basically nothing to combat climate change. The amount an individual affects the climate is absolutely trivial compared to the amount that corporations affect the climate. As far as I can tell, most of these actions are best for making people feel like they are making a difference, while doing nothing in reality. It is much more effective to increase accountability over corporations affect on the environment than individual humans.

jdavis703 5y ago
Most of the companies that are claimed to be the biggest polluters are energy providers. This is energy that is ultimately used to produce meat, drive cars and cool our houses. Consumers can either consume less or they can pay more for low/no carbon goods, which has the side effect of lowering consumption.
- dv_dt 5y ago
  Goverments need to push a massive funding for accelerating our transition of energy to renewable sources. While in parallel pushing for low carbon manufacturing and agriculture techniques to be put into use by corporations.
- TheAceOfHearts 5y ago
  When dealing with systemic issues of this magnitude taking individual action is often insufficient to affect meaningful change. Some people simply can't afford it or the options are inaccessible due to geographical constraints. A good example of this is exposure to harmful plastics. As an individual it's impossible for me to fully avoid all plastic exposure to my body and food.
lucb1e 5y ago
> telling people to eat less meat [...] does basically nothing to combat climate change Are you sure? The main source of deforestation is to use the land for livestock[1], as far as I know the reason is that previously-poor countries are getting rich enough to buy meat (semi-)regularly. Yet you say that eating less meat will do nothing but make you feel good? Seems to me it would help against deforestation if nothing else. But is deforestation bad in the context of climate change? [2] > Averaged over 2015—2017, global loss of tropical forests contributed about 4.8 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year (or about 8-10% of annual human emissions of carbon dioxide). 10% of our current emissions is deforestation?! The change in forest cover, so the extra consumption of meat (not the current consumption)? Frankly this number seems too high. The source of this source checks out at least[3] and it also seems to match with this .gov site [4] at first glance. But I've spent 20 minutes on finding numbers now, it's someone else's turn. I'd be happy to know if it's wrong. Until such time, please check your facts before talking to other people about just leaning back and letting someone else solve the problem because your contribution "does nothing in reality". Some things like plugging out chargers when not in use are indeed feel-good. Other things that we all do are not. Each individual contribution is obviously meaningless, but we're not talking about Jesus cutting out his individual meat consumption and thereby saving us all, nor do we all have to play Jesus either. Skip meat one day of the week where you would normally have meat, and you already decrease your consumption by >10%. Or replace half your beef-based meals with poultry, that also saves a shitton of CO2e. Obviously this is not the only thing we need to do. But let's not put on blindfolds and just continue what we've been doing until now while the rest of the world also wants to start doing that. [1] "agriculture accounts for around 85% of deforestation worldwide. And while this can mostly be attributed to meat production (beef in particular)" https://onetreeplanted.org/blogs/stories/deforestation-causes https://onetreeplanted.org/blogs/stories/deforestation-cause... [2] https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/deforestation/ https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/deforestation/ [3] https://www.wri.org/insights/numbers-value-tropical-forests-climate-change-equation https://www.wri.org/insights/numbers-value-tropical-forests-... [4] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emiss...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

jdavis703 5y ago

Most of the companies that are claimed to be the biggest polluters are energy providers. This is energy that is ultimately used to produce meat, drive cars and cool our houses. Consumers can either consume less or they can pay more for low/no carbon goods, which has the side effect of lowering consumption.

dv_dt 5y ago
Goverments need to push a massive funding for accelerating our transition of energy to renewable sources. While in parallel pushing for low carbon manufacturing and agriculture techniques to be put into use by corporations.
TheAceOfHearts 5y ago
When dealing with systemic issues of this magnitude taking individual action is often insufficient to affect meaningful change. Some people simply can't afford it or the options are inaccessible due to geographical constraints. A good example of this is exposure to harmful plastics. As an individual it's impossible for me to fully avoid all plastic exposure to my body and food.

lucb1e 5y ago

> telling people to eat less meat [...] does basically nothing to combat climate change Are you sure? The main source of deforestation is to use the land for livestock[1], as far as I know the reason is that previously-poor countries are getting rich enough to buy meat (semi-)regularly. Yet you say that eating less meat will do nothing but make you feel good? Seems to me it would help against deforestation if nothing else. But is deforestation bad in the context of climate change? [2] > Averaged over 2015—2017, global loss of tropical forests contributed about 4.8 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year (or about 8-10% of annual human emissions of carbon dioxide). 10% of our current emissions is deforestation?! The change in forest cover, so the extra consumption of meat (not the current consumption)? Frankly this number seems too high. The source of this source checks out at least[3] and it also seems to match with this .gov site [4] at first glance. But I've spent 20 minutes on finding numbers now, it's someone else's turn. I'd be happy to know if it's wrong. Until such time, please check your facts before talking to other people about just leaning back and letting someone else solve the problem because your contribution "does nothing in reality". Some things like plugging out chargers when not in use are indeed feel-good. Other things that we all do are not. Each individual contribution is obviously meaningless, but we're not talking about Jesus cutting out his individual meat consumption and thereby saving us all, nor do we all have to play Jesus either. Skip meat one day of the week where you would normally have meat, and you already decrease your consumption by >10%. Or replace half your beef-based meals with poultry, that also saves a shitton of CO2e. Obviously this is not the only thing we need to do. But let's not put on blindfolds and just continue what we've been doing until now while the rest of the world also wants to start doing that. [1] "agriculture accounts for around 85% of deforestation worldwide. And while this can mostly be attributed to meat production (beef in particular)" https://onetreeplanted.org/blogs/stories/deforestation-causes https://onetreeplanted.org/blogs/stories/deforestation-cause... [2] https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/deforestation/ https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/deforestation/ [3] https://www.wri.org/insights/numbers-value-tropical-forests-climate-change-equation https://www.wri.org/insights/numbers-value-tropical-forests-... [4] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emiss...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]