People don’t see industrial meat as a key cause of global warming
madrebrava.org
madrebrava.org
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...
https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector
The article asks why the average person does not list industrial meat production as a top 5 emitter of greenhouse gasses, but the sources above actually dont state it is not a top 5 emitter. The original article doesnt quote what they think the top 5 are.
I fully realize technocratic solutions will probably not ever be implemented, but really wish the emissions were just taxed at the same rate as other sources of emissions so I didnt have to make piecemeal decisions based on info thats impossible to know on a personal level.
Agriculture is 4th there, animal ag is 80% of agriculture (by land).
It's all approximations anyway.
Emissions from Animal Agriculture—16.5% Is the New Minimum Figure
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352100490_Emissions...
"For emissions from animal agriculture, we have a potential range between 16.5 and 28.1% based on the FAO GLEAM 2.0 estimate presented here and Poore and Neme- cek. Given the shortcomings of the second FAO report, the number may not be as low as 16.5%, which should be seen as a new minimum."
And last but not least, these are just the emissions ... there is no reforestation potential of pastures, biodiversity loss, other forms of pollution, ... the list is too long.
I realize they are all approximations, but nonetheless doesnt seem like livestock agriculture is in the top 5 in most estimations.
You posted that link first ;) That graph is accompanied by descriptions, which are helpful in deciphering it.
> total agriculture contributions as 18.4% of total contributions and livestock at 5.8% total contributions
"Livestock & manure (5.8%): animals (mainly ruminants, such as cattle and sheep) produce greenhouse gases through a process called ‘enteric fermentation’ – when microbes in their digestive systems break down food, they produce methane as a by-product. This means beef and lamb tend to have a high carbon footprint, and eating less is an effective way to reduce the emissions of your diet."
"The overall picture you see from this diagram is that almost three-quarters of emissions come from energy use; almost one-fifth from agriculture and land use [this increases to one-quarter when we consider the food system as a whole – including processing, packaging, transport and retail]; and the remaining 8% from industry and waste."
So those 5.8% are just gases emited by those animals / from manure.
We'd have to add a part of land use, deforestation, wastewater, chemicals and energy to get the complete number.
The page was written in September 2020; we have more recent studies, I've posted one earlier, which gives the potential range for animal ag. between 16.5 and 28.1%.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352100490_Emissions...
https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/food-agriculture-environm...
In 2013, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations estimated that livestock production accounted for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Though the analysis was based on data from 2004 and 2005—over 15 years ago—it remains the most widely cited estimate of livestock’s global carbon footprint ...
More recent data and science indicate that livestock may contribute a wider range of emissions, potentially more, potentially less. For its part, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has released a new, lower estimate that livestock produce 11.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Peer-reviewed studies have put the figure higher, at up to 19.6% of emissions.
...
Ultimately, it’s unlikely that researchers will agree on a single estimate of livestock’s global contributions to climate change. That figure is a moving target, shifting depending on the year, the method of estimating the warming impact of methane, and many other factors. But one thing is clear: we won’t be able to avoid the worst impacts of global warming without tackling emissions from livestock.
- Nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions: N2O is released from manure management and the use of nitrogen-based fertilizers in feed crop production. N2O is another potent greenhouse gas with a significant impact on global warming (global warming potential of about 265-298 times that of CO2 over a 20-year period).
- Deforestation: Large-scale meat production often leads to deforestation to create space for grazing and growing animal feed crops. Trees play a vital role in sequestering carbon, and their removal results in additional carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere.
- Transport and processing: The meat industry involves transportation, refrigeration, and processing, which require energy and release additional greenhouse gases.
- Water and resource use: Raising animals for meat demands significant amounts of water and resources, contributing to the overall environmental footprint.
Animal agriculture is the leading driver of deforestation, biodiversity loss, eutrophication, oceanic dead zones in coastal areas, soil erosion, and more.
Abolishing animal agriculture would free up an area the size of Africa, enabling large-scale reforestation and rewilding. This would allow us to store our entire 1.5C carbon budget, thus reversing climate warming and biodiversity loss.
https://www.fao.org/policy-support/tools-and-publications/re...
Tackling Climate Change through Livestock. A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas_emissions_from_...
For the civilization as we have now the plants are enough and plentiful.