|
|
#1
12-27-2006, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Livestock a major threat to environment
This group:
Livestock a major threat to environment Came up with this report: Livestock’s long shadow An NY Times editorial: Meat and the Planet From the editorial: But what is even more striking, and alarming, is that livestock are responsible for about 18 percent of the global warming effect, more than transportation’s contribution. The culprits are methane — the natural result of bovine digestion — and the nitrogen emitted by manure. Deforestation of grazing land adds to the effect. So going back to the horse and buggy would be worse than driving automobiles I guess. How come the folks decrying the use of fossil fuel don't seem to mention this very often regarding livestock? At least that's my perception. 
|
|
#2
12-27-2006, 06:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Livestock a major threat to environment
You know what you're doing has no real poin? No one wants to go back to the horse and buggy.
|
|
#3
12-27-2006, 06:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Livestock a major threat to environment
I'm not doing anything. For all the talk about how fossil fuels have lead to global warming, apparently fossil fuels are better for the environment than the modes of transportation used in yesteryear. Thus the automobile represents an advancement by doing less damage to the environment. I assume that global warming is looked on as being undesirable by most.
Edit: The other point that should be obvious is that it seems that being a vegatarian would be more important to fighting global warming than using less fossil fuel. Maybe it's me but I don't seem to read or hear that point being made very often.
|
|
#5
12-27-2006, 06:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Livestock a major threat to environment
Cool. Wouldn't you agree that rejecting meat in our diets would be more important than driving a Prius (use whatever example you desire about using less fossil fuel) in having a positive effect on global warming?
|
|
#7
12-27-2006, 07:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Livestock a major threat to environment
[ QUOTE ]
Cool. Wouldn't you agree that rejecting meat in our diets would be more important than driving a Prius (use whatever example you desire about using less fossil fuel) in having a positive effect on global warming? [/ QUOTE ] Wouldnt work. All of the beans we would have to eat to replace the protein we normally get from meat would lead to us replacing livestock as the gaseous threat.
|
|
#8
12-27-2006, 07:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Livestock a major threat to environment
How has the world livestock population changed over the past 200 years? Why is that?
Americans eat the most beef and drive the biggest cars. Who is going to make us pay for the externalities? Nobody can.
|
|
#9
12-27-2006, 08:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Livestock a major threat to environment
Of course cars are better for the environment than livestock, this should be self evident. Think about how much energy it takes to make a car go 100 miles versus how much energy it takes a horse to go 100 miles. I don't think anyone intelligent has ever made the argument that we should all go back to horses and buggies to help the environment.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
