Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Thursday March 23 2017, @02:17PM   Printer-friendly
from the soylent-ftw dept.

The last decade or so has brought ample evidence that Americans are gradually changing their diets, driven by health concerns and other factors.

But a new study points to one change that is starker than many have thought: Americans cut their beef consumption by 19 percent — nearly one-fifth — in the years from 2005 to 2014, according to research to be released on Wednesday by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The environmental group found that consumption of chicken and pork fell as well, though less drastically, as Americans ate more cheese, butter and leafy greens.

The council is hailing the plummeting popularity of beef as a victory in the fight against climate change, because greenhouse gases are produced when cattle are raised. The group estimates that the resulting reduction in pollution would equal the emissions of 39 million cars, or about one-sixth of the number of cars registered in the United States in 2015. (Some of those environmental benefits, the group says, were erased by increased consumption of other foods that also create emissions.)

The research, which is based on data from the Agriculture Department and calculations using the same methodology as the Environmental Protection Agency, found that changes in the overall American diet reduced emissions by the equivalent of pollution from 57 million cars — despite population growth of about 9 percent.

I switched to eating people. Mmm, tasty.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by CoolHand on Thursday March 23 2017, @05:44PM

    by CoolHand (438) on Thursday March 23 2017, @05:44PM (#483301) Journal

    Another way is to have 19% less meals on wheels (starve seniors). 19% less school lunches (starve kids at school). 19% less food stamps (starve kids at home).

    I don't think you can say 19% less of X is equivalent to a 19% drop overall in beef consumption. In many examples you cited, the persons may acquire and eat beef in some other way. Additonally, all those examples are only a subset of the entire population, whereas the 19% drop was for everyone...

    --
    Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2