It should also be noted that not all dairy production is equal. New Zealand, for example, produces milk with a much lower carbon footprint (https://www.dairynz.co.nz/media/5794851/carbon-footprint-of-...). The formula isn't a secret. Grass fed cows produce less methane and CO2. There is also amazing research on reducing methane production by up to 98% by supplementing the diet of cows with seaweed (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-30/seaweed-a....).
The point being, advocating for abstention is rarely a winning strategy. Instead we should use technology and policy to improve our production methods. Then we can save the environment and continue to enjoy products we consider to be important to our lifestyles. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
The burps are not everything.
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23738600/un-fao-meat-dair...
"many peer-reviewed studies, ... put livestock emissions at between 14.5 percent and 19.6 percent of the world’s total"
"... it doesn’t factor in the significant climate benefits we’d get if we freed up some of the land now dedicated to livestock farming and allowed forests to return, unlocking their potential as “carbon sinks” that absorb and sequester greenhouse gases from the air.
Scientists call this the opportunity cost of animal agriculture’s land use. Because animal farming takes up so much land — nearly 40 percent of the planet’s habitable land area — that opportunity cost is massive ...
"One study found that ending meat and dairy production could cancel out emissions from all other industries combined over the next 30 to 50 years."
> we can save the environment and continue to enjoy products we consider to be important to our lifestyles
No, we can't.
Without Changing Diets, Agriculture Alone Could Produce Enough Emissions to Surpass 1.5°C of Global Warming (2018)
https://www.wri.org/insights/without-changing-diets-agricult...
Now, whether it's carbon tax that'll force e.g. beef to go to its true cost, or climate change, that I don't know.
'Cows Toilet Trained'Industrial agriculture is pretty horrible for the environment and also unsustainable for long term soil management. But it is what we need at the moment to feed the world's population.
Not true. The American food system is incredibly wasteful, and people are getting sick from diseases associated with western diets and overeating, like diabetes and heart disease. People eating traditional eastern diets use less resources and have less diet related illnesses.
Industrial farming is not helpful or needed. The only thing it's good for is putting money in some people's pockets.
- Cramming thousands of animals together with their excrement and humans who work with it creates a convenient pandemic pathogen bioreactor
- Antibiotic resistance by abusing the same substance (just a different supply chain) to make animals grow faster at the expense of antibiotics ceasing to work in people
- Climate change, roughly 10%
- Pollution of air, water, and soil (Ever see what pig farmers do with shit? They liquify it and spray it in the air in shit lakes.)
- Inefficient use of agricultural land and resources that could feed more people and more cheaply
There are so many vitamin D pills that are much cheaper than milk, and much better for the environment while having the same function.