I'm really sick of these TBTF corporations doing whatever they want. They do something illegal that causes a lot of harm and if they are caught they just cruise the waters of ignorance to safety and then rinse and repeat.
We are just sheep...
This is true for almost anything. Food industry is a huge greenhouse gases producer which indirectly causes pollution and some deaths. Meat, which might be considered a luxury, is the top ingridient in many dishes, environmental impact is higher for producing meat that that of driving cars (globally). Just heating causes pollution and death.
Our reliance on fossil fuels will in 100 years cause a lot of indirect deaths.
People aren't sheep. They just don't care.
That's a pretty tall claim. Have you got a citation? I'd also argue that there are ways to grow meat much more environmentally friendly and not all that more expensive than traditional feed lots.
> People aren't sheep. They just don't care. Sheep care, at least for their babies and each other.
You're a fool if you believe this. Sheep don't plan their environment in any kind of meaningful way, they just wander around eating. If you cut the field in half and move the sheep from side to side and actually manage their grazing you can get more production per acre than if you just leave the sheep to themselves.
Without the farmer intervening and selling sheep off, they'd quickly outgrow the feeding capacity of their naive grazing strategy, continue having babies, and start causing deaths from malnutrition.
Please learn about natural systems a little bit before spouting things that sound insightful but which are actually devoid of any reality.
FAO of the United Nations - report 2006 http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM
There are newer reports but I just want to point out how long the information is out.
This is the direct citation:
> The livestock sector is a major player, responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is higher share than transport.
What's also a little bit comforting is that the impact is reducing (production is getting more and more efficient). Although as Chinese became rich and started eating meat insanely fast doubling the consumption of the USA, same might happen to peoples of India and Africa.
Increase of demand might neutralize the efficiency increase.
> You're a fool if you believe this. ...
Well, this is not really sheep I had in mind. I was thinking more of the free roaming - no owner - kind of animals.
> Please learn about natural systems a little bit before spouting things that sound insightful but which are actually devoid of any reality.
I completely do not get how my half-assed comment about sheep escalated to your comments about my education (or lack of).
So burning wood from clearing brush in your backyard would be gross CO2 emissions, but burning gas in the chainsaw would be net emissions (at least until people start synthesizing fuel from CO2 and water).
http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/in-defense-of-the-cow-h...
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss574
http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/catalog/39886
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep10892
https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-redu...
> Well, this is not really sheep I had in mind. I was thinking more of the free roaming - no owner - kind of animals.
Those animals too will not plan their reproductive urges around the environment so they will also tend to overpopulate and underpopulate in cycles. I don't really consider that caring, that's just nature taking its course.
> I completely do not get how my half-assed comment about sheep escalated to your comments about my education (or lack of).
If you want to be sarcastic, make it obvious. You made a lot of matter-of-fact statements prior, so why shouldn't I take it at face value? Show empirically that sheep do care, or say that you meant it sarcastically. Internet comments don't make it obvious that you're smirking.
No one is arguing that the environmental impact can't be reduced. I'm just saying that people are blind and don't care about deaths caused by having a car, but they are also blind and don't care about deaths caused by eating meat.
Yes, not everyone buys their meat from bad sources, I'd definitely like for it to become a majority.
Unfortunately, there's not enough land for that, I'd rather eat bugs.
> If you want to be sarcastic, make it obvious.
Yes I agree that my comment about sheep was entirely unnecessary, as was this whole discussion, I removed it.
Basically he argues that yes you can. There are a few reasons this makes sense.
1. All food comes from the sun to begin with (except for what diesel you add in via plowing, etc)
2. There aren't huge variations in different plant's ability to perform photosynthesis (might be 2x, might be 5x, but probably not 1000x)
3. This means it doesn't matter too much if you grow the grain, harvest it, transport it, feed it to cows or if you just grow grass and let them eat it
4. Grasses grow according to a S-curve meaning that there's an optimal height to grow a grass up to, and harvest it down to, for maximal production which is entirely different than annual crops
I'd really encourage you to watch the video, though, if you can stand it because it's very enlightening.
Nitpick, but all energy we use comes from the Sun (ok, ultra-nitpick, some come from the previous star, but we're talking nuclear reactions in Earth's core here) - all fossil fuels, as well as wind and hydro are nothing but accumulated and transformed solar power.
If VW will emerge out of this relatively unscathed it will create a dangerous precedent and the and the auto industry will have learned nothing. Personally I try to do the right thing, like trying not buying gas provided by BP or Chevron if possible and I can tell you rigth now that my next car will not be a VW.
Owning a car kills people indirectly, be it VW or not. Yes they deceived with a purpose but people accept the direct and indirect deception, be it in eating meat, or driving botched/normal cars. This is always the way it is.
One can have so many conflicting opinions and attitudes inside one's head, one can be mad about VW but not mad about the highly subsidised food industry, or transportation industry in large.
It's just the way it is. Yes, as you've said, almost everyone is ignorant about the bigger picture.
I was just trying to say that by looking at everything else I'm not at all surprised/shocked/disappointed with people's behavior. It's the way people are, and it always was as it is today, it might sound fairly pessimistic, but an average person needs a car to travel around quicker, needs meat to nurture their palate, needs heating to avoid the inconvenience of dressing several layers of clothes in their home. Given all of these entirely personal, individual, selfish needs it is no surprising at all that the majority doesn't care / see the bigger picture.
I am not fooling myself, i know this is our 'reality' but people act sometimes with great selflessness. I refuse to think that we can't rise above our selfish needs.
People have short memories for this stuff.