5 ms·

At that point it would be better to supply the demand for fish with fish farms where they are bred to be eaten rather than pulling fish from the ocean. You coul

At that point it would be better to supply the demand for fish with fish farms where they are bred to be eaten rather than pulling fish from the ocean. You could (truthfully) advertise as environmentally friendly, you would probably turn a profit, you actually would have fewer toxins than ocean fish, and ocean fish would be proportionally fished less. Much more straightforward of a process than conspiring/bribing countless people to spread disinformation and giving credit to conspiracy theorists.

myshpa 3y ago
Still few problems with this. - intensive fish farming can lead to environmental issues, such as water pollution from fish waste, excessive use of antibiotics and chemicals, and the depletion of wild fish stocks used for fish feed - some farmed fish species require a substantial amount of wild-caught fish to produce a relatively small amount of farmed fish - the conversion of natural habitats like mangroves and wetlands into fish farms can lead to habitat destruction and loss of critical ecosystems that support various species - in densely packed fish farms, diseases spread rapidly among fish populations, leading to mass mortality events. The use of antibiotics to control diseases can also contribute to antibiotic resistance, posing risks to human health - introducing non-native or genetically modified fish into local ecosystems can disrupt the balance of the ecosystem and lead to unintended consequences We have to switch to plant based diets. It seems to me that nothing else will stop the environmental destruction, in this case overfishing, which alone threatens us with empty oceans in 2040's. And it would solve the problem with warming oceans too. Rapid phase-out of fossil fuels, together with a switch to a plant-based diet, would free up a land area the size of Africa. When reforested, this area would store so much carbon that we'd be able to store our entire 1.5C carbon budget in those forests and initiate a new "little ice age."
- aaron_m04 3y ago
  > We have to switch to plant based diets. > It seems to me that nothing else will stop the environmental destruction, in this case overfishing, which alone threatens us with empty oceans in 2040's. There are two things I can say about this: 1) We won't (unless/until forced to). 2) There are other sources of destruction that will continue even if most people switched to a plant-based diet.
  - myshpa 3y ago
    1. just remove the subsidies, the market will take care of the rest 2. what other industry is more destructive than animal ag?
    - scubadude 3y ago
      how does shipping and air travel compare? I think they dwarf animal ag
      - myshpa 3y ago
        Animal ag is not just emissions, though ... it's much bigger beast. Also deforestation, biodiversity loss, eutrophication, soil erosion, water overconsumption, zoonotic diseases, overfishing, reforestation potential of pastures ... Estimates of just emissions from animal ag are somewhere between 14.5-26%. All transport is 16.2% (road 11.9%, aviation 1.9%, shipping 1.7%, rail 0.4%). https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36980531 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36980531
- pirate787 3y ago
  >We have to switch to plant based diets. INCORRECT. We're on the cusp of a revolution in lab-grown fish and meat. It will be healthier, more humane, and better tasting, than the current system.
  - myshpa 3y ago
    No. All meat in labs is grown in 1.5 L plastic bottles now, and they have like 5 of them in the whole lab. It may take decades until it's ready to replace meat on the scale and price needed. We (and the environment) unfortunately don't have that much time.
  - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
    that and fusion - any day now#
- wolpoli 3y ago
  All of these issues you listed could be mitigated with government regulations and a set of to be defined practices for sustainable fish farming. I am not sure why these issues lead to the conclusion that we have to switch to a plant-based diet.
  - myshpa 3y ago
    See Seaspiracy and Cowspiracy

myshpa 3y ago

Still few problems with this. - intensive fish farming can lead to environmental issues, such as water pollution from fish waste, excessive use of antibiotics and chemicals, and the depletion of wild fish stocks used for fish feed - some farmed fish species require a substantial amount of wild-caught fish to produce a relatively small amount of farmed fish - the conversion of natural habitats like mangroves and wetlands into fish farms can lead to habitat destruction and loss of critical ecosystems that support various species - in densely packed fish farms, diseases spread rapidly among fish populations, leading to mass mortality events. The use of antibiotics to control diseases can also contribute to antibiotic resistance, posing risks to human health - introducing non-native or genetically modified fish into local ecosystems can disrupt the balance of the ecosystem and lead to unintended consequences We have to switch to plant based diets. It seems to me that nothing else will stop the environmental destruction, in this case overfishing, which alone threatens us with empty oceans in 2040's. And it would solve the problem with warming oceans too. Rapid phase-out of fossil fuels, together with a switch to a plant-based diet, would free up a land area the size of Africa. When reforested, this area would store so much carbon that we'd be able to store our entire 1.5C carbon budget in those forests and initiate a new "little ice age."

aaron_m04 3y ago
> We have to switch to plant based diets. > It seems to me that nothing else will stop the environmental destruction, in this case overfishing, which alone threatens us with empty oceans in 2040's. There are two things I can say about this: 1) We won't (unless/until forced to). 2) There are other sources of destruction that will continue even if most people switched to a plant-based diet.
- myshpa 3y ago
  1. just remove the subsidies, the market will take care of the rest 2. what other industry is more destructive than animal ag?
  - scubadude 3y ago
    how does shipping and air travel compare? I think they dwarf animal ag
    - myshpa 3y ago
      Animal ag is not just emissions, though ... it's much bigger beast. Also deforestation, biodiversity loss, eutrophication, soil erosion, water overconsumption, zoonotic diseases, overfishing, reforestation potential of pastures ... Estimates of just emissions from animal ag are somewhere between 14.5-26%. All transport is 16.2% (road 11.9%, aviation 1.9%, shipping 1.7%, rail 0.4%). https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36980531 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36980531
pirate787 3y ago
>We have to switch to plant based diets. INCORRECT. We're on the cusp of a revolution in lab-grown fish and meat. It will be healthier, more humane, and better tasting, than the current system.
- myshpa 3y ago
  No. All meat in labs is grown in 1.5 L plastic bottles now, and they have like 5 of them in the whole lab. It may take decades until it's ready to replace meat on the scale and price needed. We (and the environment) unfortunately don't have that much time.
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  that and fusion - any day now#
wolpoli 3y ago
All of these issues you listed could be mitigated with government regulations and a set of to be defined practices for sustainable fish farming. I am not sure why these issues lead to the conclusion that we have to switch to a plant-based diet.
- myshpa 3y ago
  See Seaspiracy and Cowspiracy