this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2025
195 points (99.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5818 readers
817 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
your first link doesn't speak to your claim at all. your second link depends on the same author.
Here's a link to the research article itself with all the data from which they drew their conclusion: https://josephpoore.com/Science%20360%206392%20987%20-%20Accepted%20Manuscript.pdf
they are misusing the LCA data. since it was gathered through disparate methodologies, it can't be combined as they have done.
edit: regardless, this paper doesn't support the claim you made.
They aren't, but I don't feel like going into it with you. I will use a simpler data-point to prove that my initial claim was correct.
Livestock and their byproducts account for at least 32,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, or 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. If everyone went vegan, that would remove the majority of greenhouse gas production. So put simply, it would be the "biggest" thing everyone could do to reduce CO2 emissions.(That is just CO2, there are many other horrible things related to animal agriculture.)
Sources: Article: https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/study-claims-meat-creates-half-of-all-greenhouse-gases-1812909.html
The paper: https://www.fao.org/4/a0701e/a0701e00.htm
your article makes a claim unsubstatiated by the paper itself. and the paper is almost 2 decades old, and does not, itself, make any claim about the best way for anyone to reduce their GHGe.
they are. their reference papers state this explicitly
This is just false. The biggest source has long been fossil fuel burning, not agriculture, and that remains true even when you include fossil fuel use by agriculture.
On top of that, meat and dairy are only part of agriculture; a big chunk of methane emissions from agriculture come from rice farming.
A huge cut in meat (and dairy) consumption is going to be needed to get to net zero emissions, but it's not a majority of what is needed. People recommend it strongly in large part because ending meat consumption doesn't cost people money, so everybody can do it.
Please don't repeat false claims here.
there is no causal mechanism by which anyone going vegan reduces any ghg production
This is unfortunately not true. There are several mechanisms through which meat production increases greenhouse gas emissions:
Both of you need to cool it here.
those are all problems of production. production doesn't decrease because anybody goes vegan. veganism has been around since the '40s, meat production has only increased since then with a few exceptions that have nothing to do with people being vegan.
Almost nobody has gone vegan during a time period where the population affluent enough to afford regular meat on a regular basis has increased many times over.
If a meaningful chunk of the affluent population went vegan, we'd absolutely see a lot less meat produced. At the individual level, it's going to make a very modest difference, but that's how mass changes start.
there's no reason to believe it makes any difference at all.
Oh Okay, you're just out of your mind. Thanks for confirming that so I don't have to waste my time anymore.
that's simply not true. GHGe for all of agriculture come out to about 20% of total GHGe.