But the livestock sector is responsible for about 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, through cows producing methane and production processes - comparable to all the direct emissions from cars, planes, ships and other transport.
I'm rather certain that climate change folks would like to see regulations strengthened against ranchers and farmers to mitigate some of these effects.
I know you're just trying to call people hypocrites, but did you stop for a second to think about why you're doing it? And what you look like when you do it?
Hmm? Beef is one of the most energy intensive animal proteins we eat, but its also really popular. Its intensive on water too. How would regulations make the raising of beef more efficient?
You can't legislate them to stop farting methane. And I doubt housing an entire stock of cattle indoors and filtering the air is energy efficient. What are these regulations you speak of that if only we'd put pen to paper magically beef is not as energy and water intensive as it is?
The heavy impact on the environment of meat production was known but the research shows a new scale and scope of damage, particularly for beef. The popular red meat requires 28 times more land to produce than pork or chicken, 11 times more water and results in five times more climate-warming emissions. When compared to staples like potatoes, wheat, and rice, the impact of beef per calorie is even more extreme, requiring 160 times more land and producing 11 times more greenhouse gases.
Hmm? Beef is one of the most energy intensive animal proteins we eat, but its also really popular. Its intensive on water too. How would regulations make the raising of beef more efficient?
You can't legislate them to stop farting methane. And I doubt housing an entire stock of cattle indoors and filtering the air is energy efficient. What are these regulations you speak of that if only we'd put pen to paper magically beef is not as energy and water intensive as it is?
What is the point of this thread? Other than trolling, of course.
I eat beef almost every day but I hate myself for it.
Carbon/greenhouse emissions tax.
Easy peasy.
The trend of vegetarianism— along with the perceived health and social pitfalls attached to meat eating—may have a side effect: emotional and mental problems. In a new article, Women's Health reports that indulging meatless diets, while having undeniable health virtues, may also come with risks that include depression, panic and obsessive compulsive behavior.
The publication cited anecdotes along with Australian and German studies showing that people who consumed plant-based diets were more prone to depression, panic attacks and anxiety. Doctors who spoke to Women's Health acknowledged the link between a lack of animal proteins and a rise in emotional problems.
Women's Health cited the experience of a Columbia University psychiatrist who treated a physically active 35-year-old woman who's energy had "flatlined" and was suffering panic attacks after embracing vegetarianism. After adding meat back into her diet, the woman's energy rebounded and she saw her instances of emotional breakdowns plummet.
The nutritional value of eating meat has always been controversial, but the debate has taken on a new veneer in recent years. Consumption of beef, pork and chicken continues to grow—more than 170 million tons of beef and pork are produced annually around the world, according to the USDA.
So beef becomes $20/lb
Then what about stuff like this?
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/05/vegetarian-diets-may-hike-mental-health-risks-report.html
I guess because nobody is thinking anymore. The beef issue I think drives home the point that things are the way they are for a reason.
People need to eat just like people need cheap transportation to their jobs to put food on the table in the first place.
You guys are inclined to like tech solutions like electric cars and such but that is only the fun side of the equation.
ES wants only the rich to eat beef.
ES wants only the rich to eat beef.