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.
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.