SoylentNews

Urgent Need to Reduce Meat and Dairy Consumption to Meet Climate Targets, Says Expert

posted by chromas on Tuesday November 27 2018, @11:23PM   
from the beat-it,-don't-eat-it dept.

Phoenix666 writes:

Phys.org:

Dr. Helen Harwatt, farmed animal law and policy fellow at Harvard Law School, advises that getting protein from plant sources instead of animal sources would drastically help in meeting climate targets and reduce the risk of overshooting temperature goals.

For the first time, Dr. Harwatt proposes a three-step strategy to gradually replace animal proteins with plant-sourced proteins, as part of the commitment to mitigate climate change. These are:

1) Acknowledging that current numbers of livestock are at their peak and will need to decline ('peak livestock').

2) Set targets to transition away from livestock products starting with foods linked with the highest greenhouse gas emissions such as beef, then cow's milk and pig meat ('worst-first' approach).

3) Assessing suitable replacement products against a range of criteria including greenhouse gas emission targets, land usage, and public health benefits ('best available food' approach).

Harwatt further elaborates that recent evidence shows, in comparison with the current food system, switching from animals to plants proteins, could potentially feed an additional 350 million people in the US alone.

You can eat plants or insects, but not meat.

---

Original Submission

• Re:elephant in the tent Re:elephant in the tent (Score: 2, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday November 28 2018, @07:07PM (3 children)

  by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday November 28 2018, @07:07PM (#767418) Journal

  no one has demonstrated that it has serious consequences over the next century.

  The Trump administration just did, and then tried to hide the fact.

  Trump Administration’s Strategy on Climate: Try to Bury Its Own Scientific Report [nytimes.com]

  The 1,656-page National Climate Assessment, which is required by Congress, is the most comprehensive scientific study to date detailing the effects of global warming on the United States economy, public health, coastlines and infrastructure. It describes in precise detail how the warming planet will wreak hundreds of billions of dollars of damage in coming decades.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		0
  Troll=1, Informative=1, Total=2
  Extra 'Informative' Modifier		0
  Karma-Bonus Modifier		+1
  Total Score:		2

• Re:elephant in the tent (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday November 28 2018, @08:03PM

  by khallow (3766) on Wednesday November 28 2018, @08:03PM (#767443) Journal

  And this claim of hundreds of billions of dollars of damage is based on what evidence? Even if we took the report at face value (ignoring such things as public flood insurance), that's not much per year, particularly given how the US economy could grow in the mean time.

  Parent

• Re:elephant in the tent Re:elephant in the tent (Score: 1, Disagree) by ChrisMaple on Wednesday November 28 2018, @08:03PM (1 child)

  by ChrisMaple (6964) on Wednesday November 28 2018, @08:03PM (#767445)

  Trump does not have control over most of the bureaucracy, a substantial portion of which is out to destroy him. The climate report is just one more lying shot from their diseased cannon.

  Parent

  • Re:elephant in the tent (Score: 2) by tibman on Wednesday November 28 2018, @10:20PM

    by tibman (134) on Wednesday November 28 2018, @10:20PM (#767535)

    So, you think the report would be different if we had a different president? The world doesn't revolve around Trump.

    --
    SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.

    Parent