this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
181 points (91.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

6440 readers
891 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: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

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
silence7@slrpnk.net
181
A sustainable diet leaves room for two chicken breasts a week, study says (phys.org)
submitted 1 day ago by RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works to c/climate@slrpnk.net
114 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

255 grams per week. That's the short answer to how much meat you can eat without harming the planet. And that only applies to poultry and pork.

Beef cannot be eaten in meaningful quantities without exceeding planetary boundaries, according to an article published by a group of DTU researchers in the journal Nature Food. So says Caroline H. Gebara, postdoc at DTU Sustain and lead author of the study."

Our calculations show that even moderate amounts of red meat in one's diet are incompatible with what the planet can regenerate of resources based on the environmental factors we looked at in the study. However, there are many other diets—including ones with meat—that are both healthy and sustainable," she says.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Has any society in human history been able to afford eating meat regularly? My great great great great grandfather’s journals talk about a lot of stew and veggies and he was wealthy enough that he founded a small city. We never ate that much meat.

[–] bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 hours ago

Yes, Inuit for example have a diet largely based on fish and meat. Steppe herders like mongols are another example of a culture with regular meat consumption.

Medieval Barcelona had a higher meat consumption than today. The article also gives other examples of high meat consumption from medieval England and Vikings.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 4 points 23 hours ago

Subsidies and very, very cruel industrialization (torturous conditions).

If laws were just and corporate socialism was just, it wouldn't be possible for most people.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Typically we don't need to eat meat when we are wealthy; we eat unsustainable meat when there is a famine because we must.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s more that they aren’t killing a cow that produces milk

[–] Syd@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Cows don't just produce milk like chickens lay eggs.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

I know. If your cow can birth calves and produce milk you aren’t going to kill it just yet.