❌ #20 To decrease agricultural emissions, we should encourage vegetarian diets Factory farming is bad, but the carbon footprint of livestock is horribly overstated by those who don't understand the relevant stocks and flows.
I agree with you on every other one. I just am not sure I get this one. Deforestation & agricultural land conversion, energy costs to feed vast ruminant populations (which is highly inefficient over a plant-based diet), methane emissions from such ruminants (mostly cattle), transportation energy, etc. It seems to be a major focus of multiple studies of agricultural impact on climate (Drawdown, WRI, UNFAO).
Could you explain your thought process here?
Land degradation is a real concern, but methane breaks down much more quickly than carbon dioxide. Moreover, energy and resource costs aren't nearly so bad once you account for what gets recycled in even modestly sustainable livestock operations.
I eat a mostly vegetarian diet and would politely encourage anyone else to do the same for environmental, humane, and health reasons, but the idea that livestock are an important driver of climate change compared to fossil fuel emissions just gets too little scrutiny.
You are right, it takes about 12 years for methane to break down which is less than the 20-200 year impact of CO2. However, a couple of big things: A. Methane has a
climatic impact of any methane molecule released today is 100 times more heat-trapping than a molecule of carbon dioxide B. Even if we had 12 years to wait (we don't) until all the methane we emit today is gone, WE KEEP EMITTING IT AND MORE EACH YEAR! On a pretty large scale too!
2 - Energy Recycling Farms doesn't make it so bad for the climate. Well, the net impact is. According to the UN FAO,
animal agriculture is responsible for 18% of the total release of greenhouse gases worldwide and livestock account for an estimated 9% of global CO2 emissions, estimated 35-40% of global Methane emissions and 65% of NO2 emissions. If there are some sustainable farms that don't have a net-negative climate impact, please let me know. I'd love to check them out.
3 - Agriculture getting too much attention. Project Drawdown estimates that if just half the world reduced their meat intake to 57g of meat a day - about a pound a week - there would be a net decrease in emissions of 66.5 gigatons of CO2 (and CO2 equivalents) by 2050 - per year that's 2.217 Gigatons a year (or the equivalent of UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Canada COMBINED). And that's just meat CONSUMPTION, not even the vast inefficiencies in agriculture & livestock that make it such a producer of GHGs.
If you're interested, I would highly recommend reading the
WRI Sustainable Food Futures report on this issue. Fascinating stuff.
Poll
