• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

We all suspected it was coming. Climate. Agriculture.

"In addition, about half of all emissions of methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases, come from cattle and rice fields "

Yikes. Thats a fuck ton of food supply.

edit: you posted the same link twice BTW
 
Cut our food emissions in half, or cut our population in half.

You know which one I would choose, starting by ending our population increase.
 
Jaskalas said:
Cut our food emissions in half, or cut our population in half.

You know which one I would choose, starting by ending our population increase.
Click to expand...

tenor.gif
 
whm1974 said:
Good luck getting the majority of Americans even cutting back on meat. much less giving it up.
Click to expand...
K1052 said:
Just eating a lot less beef would be helpful. Its greenhouse gas footprint is enormously larger than chicken or pork.
Click to expand...

People won’t give up meat.
Go ahead and keep poor people from eating meat.
There’s nothing we can do.
I saw Al Gore eating a steak.

Anything I’m missing?


Seriously though it turns out the amount of methane cows produce is not set in stone.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesal...ssions-from-cows-scientists-look-to-the-ocean

Some preliminary tests show that changing their feed by adding a small amount of seaweed can cut methane production.

A high dose of seaweed, equivalent to 1% of their feed reduced methane in the cows breath by over half when compared to the regular feed. (95% of cow produced methane comes from burps as opposed to farts)

So change the feed, reverse population growth via poverty reduction, reduce meat intake and I don’t see that the future has to be meatless.
 
I'm ready for my bug steak, bug burger, bug protein, thank you. I especially can't wait for my bugdogs, bugoni w goat cheese pizza, etc.
 
Gotta find a way to capture the methane from those burps and farts those cows produce as an clean energy source like raising cattle in domed positively ventilated "barns"?.

Large scale aquaponic/hydroponic rice production facilities in greenhouses can reduce the methane now being produced by the rice fields?
 
tweaker2 said:
Gotta find a way to capture the methane from those burps and farts those cows produce as an clean energy source like raising cattle in domed positively ventilated "barns"?.

Large scale aquaponic/hydroponic rice production facilities in greenhouses can reduce the methane now being produced by the rice fields?
Click to expand...
Not practicable, steer spend 70-80% of their lives grazing, the remainder is on a feedlot eating grain prior to slaughter. Trying to "enclose" this is laughable.
 
Thebobo said:
There are the new meat alternatives now being sold at grocery stores, restaurants and even fast food joints. I just had some beyond meat sausages and they are damn good and the burgers are tasty as well. There is hope.

https://www.beyondmeat.com/products/

https://impossiblefoods.com/
Click to expand...
Yea, I work at a distributor that handles Impossible product, have not tried it myself but it's selling well. It's not available for retail purchace yet but Burger King is adding it to their menu very soon, I've heard good things so far.
 
Not only would cutting out or reducing our beef intake be better for the environment it will save the country billions in healthcare costs by reducing heart disease, diabetes and cancer. Then everyone could have access to free or low cost health insurance.

I would also be providing free or low cost birth control for everyone nationwide no matter what state you live in. Condoms will be hanging from your X-mas tree if I had my way.
 
Jaskalas said:
Cut our food emissions in half, or cut our population in half.

You know which one I would choose, starting by ending our population increase.
Click to expand...
The world population will reach 10 billion before the increase can stop.

What we need to plan for, rather than killing people off, or lowering their standard of living, neither of which can actually succeed anyway, is how to be more efficient with our use of resources through technology. Because, you see, killing people off or lowering their standard of living actually increases birth rates and thus the population. Counterintuitive, I know, but it's true. A dead person is replaced with a new baby. Poverty encourages parents to have more children to do the work. While reductions in mortality and in poverty are proven to lower birth rates.
But, even if the birth rates were lowered to just enough to maintain the current population, it will go up to 10 billion before the increase can stop.
 
blackangst1 said:
tenor.gif
Click to expand...
The flaw in Thanos' plan isn't necessarily the cruelty, but that it would be all for nothing. All else being equal, a mass mortality event (that doesn't end in extinction) is always followed by a population boom.
So if half of humanity were suddenly wiped out by a one-time event, that lost half would be replaced by new births within a generation or 2.
 
Look, there isn't enough time in the week to be concerned about...

Guns
Job being eliminated
Retirement survival
White priviledge
Minimum wage
Equal pay for sexes
People coming over the boarder
Feminism
Korea nuking us
Russia nuking us
Ebola
Cancer
Taxes
Healthcare
Salmonella
Listeria
Asteroids hitting the planet
Killer ticks
Dog licks
Texter while drivers
Drinkers while drivers
(and I'm sure I forgot many other things in the news feeds daily)

...to be concerned about farting cows.
 
I learned that millions of years ago. There was a period where life was so rich all over the planet that the methane over those millions of years caused the earth to heat up called the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum, which occurred about 56 million years ago. . The ocean temperature was much warmer than it is today.
That said, by comparison we are fine.
 
HeXen said:
I learned that millions of years ago. There was a period where life was so rich all over the planet that the methane over those millions of years caused the earth to heat up called the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum, which occurred about 56 million years ago. . The ocean temperature was much warmer than it is today.
That said, by comparison we are fine.
Click to expand...

Interesting analysis. So in comparison we are fine? Can you tell me what the agricultural output of say California was during the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum vs now? Or say how much infrastructure changes for the ports around NY, LA, and Galveston would cost due to the change in sea level?
 
HeXen said:
I learned that millions of years ago. There was a period where life was so rich all over the planet that the methane over those millions of years caused the earth to heat up called the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum, which occurred about 56 million years ago. . The ocean temperature was much warmer than it is today.
That said, by comparison we are fine.
Click to expand...

What was the sea level 56 million years ago?
 
ImpulsE69 said:
Look, there isn't enough time in the week to be concerned about...

Guns
Job being eliminated
Retirement survival
White priviledge
Minimum wage
Equal pay for sexes
People coming over the boarder
Feminism
Korea nuking us
Russia nuking us
Ebola
Cancer
Taxes
Healthcare
Salmonellal
Listeria
Asteroids hitting the planet
Killer ticks
Dog licks
Texter while drivers
Drinkers while drivers
(and I'm sure I forgot many other things in the news feeds daily)

...to be concerned about farting cows.
Click to expand...



Yeah, you forgot about about college loan payoffs, reparations and social justice.

I’m waiting for the impossible steak.

Interesting that nobody is talking about rice which is still a staple in Asian countries
 
Lanyap said:
Yeah, you forgot about about college loan payoffs, reparations and social justice.

I’m waiting for the impossible steak.

Interesting that nobody is talking about rice which is still a staple in Asian countries
Click to expand...

Right now people are talking about restaurants serving fake guacamole because avacados have went through the roof.
 
Vic said:
The world population will reach 10 billion before the increase can stop.

What we need to plan for, rather than killing people off, or lowering their standard of living, neither of which can actually succeed anyway, is how to be more efficient with our use of resources through technology. Because, you see, killing people off or lowering their standard of living actually increases birth rates and thus the population. Counterintuitive, I know, but it's true. A dead person is replaced with a new baby. Poverty encourages parents to have more children to do the work. While reductions in mortality and in poverty are proven to lower birth rates.
But, even if the birth rates were lowered to just enough to maintain the current population, it will go up to 10 billion before the increase can stop.
Click to expand...

Who the !@#$ said kill people?

America's birth rate is BELOW REPLACEMENT RATE. Our population would not increase at all. Except we import over a million people every year. Currently to the tune of 100+ million within our lifetimes. Our population increase is the primary stress factor in our environmental crisis. Our mitigation efforts are thwarted by it. Yes, we need sustainability, but that cannot be achieved without a stable population.

And a lower standard of living is already occurring. We make less money than our parents and grandparents. Our costs are increased compared to theirs. We work harder and get less for the return. As time passes and we have more people and fewer natural resources, our quality of life / standard of living IS going to drop and there is nothing you can do to change that. Anyone championing our population increase and says our lives are not negatively impacted is living in denial.

We need to STOP our population increase, which necessarily means that (at some point in the future) our population will be "cut in half" compared to what it will be if we do nothing. That is how we save the future of our country, and eventually learn how to cope with sustainability and then show other nations how to follow in our footsteps. It's a step by step movement and it starts here at home.

Efficiency will only get us so far if we top 400, and 500 million people in this country.

US fertility rate is below level needed to replace population
Additionally, provisional data on births that the CDC published in May noted that the nationwide total fertility rate "has generally been below replacement since 1971." ​

United States Census, 1970: 203 million.
Wouldn't that be nice?
By prioritizing growth, we've been failing to secure our future. We need to do better. Growth must be stopped.
 
It's not just the methane that cows produce, it's the staggering fuckton of rainforest and other forest that is cleared in order to house them, vast useless field to grow corn that is completely inedible for humans, just to feed (and poison) cows for meat production. It's a double-whammy of creating atmospheric poisons and removing our best natural defense against CO2.

and yes, this is of course all under the umbrella of humans causing climate change. It's all part of it, just as it always has been. If a moron says no, ask them if cows would be clear-cutting rainforests and happily eating corn mash on their own at mass industrial scales.

One side of the mouth talks about how great and adaptable we are at controlling our world: the animals, the land, the waters and mineral resources, all for our benefit! ....the other side denies any possible human influence on the planet that provides all of those things. It's amazing how easy it is to fuck with the conservative brain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top