this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5310 readers
1 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith


Related communities:


Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Tyson claims that its new “Climate-Smart Beef” program, to be supported with taxpayer dollars, has managed to cut 10 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions from a tiny fraction of its cattle herd.

The 1.5 billion cows farmed worldwide for cheeseburgers and ice cream sundaes each year accelerate climate change in three main ways: they eat grass and/or grain, like corn and soy, causing them to burp out the highly potent greenhouse gas methane; they poop a lot, which releases the even more potent nitrous oxide, as does the synthetic fertilizer used to grow the grain they’re fed; and they take up a lot of land — a quarter of the planet is occupied by grazing livestock, some of which could be used to absorb carbon from the atmosphere if it weren’t deforested for meat production.

Among other practices, Tyson also lists “pasture rotation,” which entails moving cattle around more frequently with the goal of allowing grass to regrow, which can provide a number of environmental benefits, but many climate scientists are skeptical it can meaningfully reduce emissions.

When asked what benchmark the USDA uses to approve a 10 percent emissions reduction claim, the agency again said I would need to file a FOIA request, and didn’t answer questions about its verification process in time for the deadline for this story.

Meat and dairy production account for at least 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, leading many environmental scientists to conclude that eating more plant-based meals is one of the best actions people can take to fight climate change, and that governments could do much more to steer us in that direction.

In a recent online survey, conducted in partnership with market research consultancy firm Humantel, Vox polled consumers about which parts of the food sector they think contribute most to climate change.


The original article contains 1,494 words, the summary contains 304 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Important quote missed in the summary:

But even if we give Tyson and the USDA the benefit of the doubt, there’s a stubborn truth about beef: It’s so high in emissions that it can never really be “climate-friendly.”

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Agreed. Entropy exist, but fortunately my priority is a cool society built for humans and their culture. So bring on the culinary delights, bring on Fois Gras. A society that cannot support that for every one is a society that has lost it's purpose. I don't exist to live in a dark closet and eat insects. I live to enjoy my life here, to enojoy my family, fireworks, freedom, and travel. Let's figure out how to make the things that are worth living for sustainable and get rid of things that Capitalism has imposed upon us (like car commuting culture).