this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
135 points (90.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43880 readers
1423 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Most positive effects on the planet but not humans?
Cattle, they're a major source of greenhouse gasses, as are all the industries built around growing, processing, and transporting them.
absolutely
https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food
https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000010
That would be such a boon for the planet. The biomass of cattle (that is, if you piled them all on a scale and got their weight) far surpasses the biomass of wild mammals. All wild mammals, land and sea, combined. (They're only about 4% of total mammal biomass.)
Cattle, and the things you describe, are the result of human intervention...