Tofu-eaters please don't gloat
Photos: Kevin Law, Essex/Flickr
Every time I hear an American talking about how eliminating meat will save the planet, I have to remind them that though being vegetarian has both health and environmental benefits, it is no carbon panacea. 
link:
| « Previous DIY virtual reality goggles | Next » Rising ocean levels: Detailed flood maps online |
Comments(21)
Posted By Cannibal Lechter - Wed, Dec 02 2009 at 5:23 PM ESTWe should eat the Vegans
They consume corn and soybeans AND they use up fossil fuels in the daily lives. Reducing the number of Vegans would not only ease some of the deforestation but would also lower humanity's overall carbon footprint.
Posted By Jeff - Wed, Dec 09 2009 at 5:12 PM ESTQuestionable Beef:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn4VYghL2EgEnter your comments here
Posted By Jeff - Wed, Dec 09 2009 at 5:14 PM ESTtry this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn4VYghL2Eg Enter your comments here
Posted By Steve - Wed, Nov 18 2009 at 7:44 AM ESTAnimal Haters
I believe it is better for a lamb to have lived and been eaten than never to have lived at all. The simple fact is if you did away with the eating of meat then the humble sheep, cow, pig and to a lesser extent the goat would all but die out on this planet. If we are not eating them we are not going to be breeding them to eat. And as the most extreme views see even using Milk and Wool as bad for the animals where will these domesticated animals find a home in your Vegan utopia. Simple.... More
Posted By Wes - Tue, Nov 24 2009 at 10:03 PM ESTLOL Steve
LOL that was awesome...great comment Steve...people can get so mean-spirited and vitriolic in these comments sometimes, your humorous comment was refreshing.
LOL @ sheep, cows and pigs will go extinct if we stop eating them :)
thank you for brightening my day
Posted By Sam - Thu, Nov 12 2009 at 11:04 AM ESTPETA
I am a member of the People for Eating of Tasty Animals and I grew up in a farming community. My family hunts and growing up we found that every year we had less wooded areas to hunt and the animals had less areas to live and hide. Why was this happening? Because, as soy based foods and biodiesel become more popular the price of soybeans goes up and farmers clear as much land as they can to produce as much soy as they can. Native grasses produce a lot more Oxygen than soy plants, but if a.... More
Posted By TK - Wed, Nov 11 2009 at 11:54 AM ESTDon't deforest lands, use land that is already deforested
Well, I'm a vegetarian for the animals first. If being a vegetarian helps the environment that is good, and that seems to be what some people say. However, my priority is the sentient beings life, and as a Buddhist it's my duty to respect these animals and to not cause any harm to them.
Not all people who are vegetarian or vegan do it for health or the environment, so I wouldn't knock all vegans or vegetarians.
The health part or environmental part of being a vegan or.... More
Posted By Cortland - Mon, Nov 09 2009 at 5:16 PM ESTWe still got to eat
It is true that much of the soybean and corn produced in the US goes to the meat industry for feed. However, as humans we still need protein in our diets. Soybeans and other protien rich plants would be used to substitue our diets. So, even if the US decided to go meatless we would still have a great deal of pollution due to the shift in agriculture to produce more plant products. Farming, as we know, is a huge contributor to pollution (water, soil, and air). I think that pollution problems.... More
Posted By Tye Block - Thu, Nov 05 2009 at 3:09 PM ESTAnimal suffering!
How about the slaughter of the poor animals? . What a horrible life!!
Posted By VeggieTart - Thu, Nov 05 2009 at 12:44 PM ESTnice try, but
As others have said, a hell of a lot of corn and soybeans grown in the U.S. go to feed animals who are raised for food. If more people went vegetarian, fewer soybeans would be grown, and that means less forestation.
Posted By Justin - Wed, Nov 04 2009 at 3:15 AM ESTMeat's okay
It's the industrialization of it that's bad. They just need to make it like they used to and people don't need to eat so much of it. You just don't need nearly as much protein as you think. And it's way too cheap as it is.
Posted By Doc Wheat - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 10:43 PM ESTElasticity
Say half of North Americans decided to stop eating meat, or at least beef. The price of beef would plummet. So poor people around the world would be able to eat more meat! And McDonald's(R) would be there to sell it to them. Cutting meat consumption is more complicated that it seems.
Posted By Bernard Brown - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 10:22 AM ESTlower intersection of supply and demand
Yes, you would see more people priced into being able to meat, but with the lower prices fewer producers would be willing to produce. When you shift that demand curve back, you land at a lower intersection with the supply curve.
Posted By Ian S. Carter - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 9:56 PM ESTAnimal Feed
You do realize the second major component after corn to animal feed is soybeans, right? This is due to it's high protein content and cheap price, and follows the basic nutritional hierarchy of carbs>proteins>fats. Protein makes up about 20% of feeds. Yeilds vary per location and season, but soybeans average about 40-50 Bushells/acre and corn 160-180/acre, or about 25% that of corn.
Of the field corn grown in the country, about 45% goes to feeding animals, and 20% goes to ethanol.... More
Posted By Dina - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 6:06 PM ESTForgetting an important point
The majority of soy that is grown in the US and South America is to feed animals that humans consume for food. Eating less meat or none, would create less deforestation.
Posted By Ian S. Carter - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 5:49 PM ESTAnimal Feed
You do realize the second major component after corn to animal feed is soybeans, right? This is due to it's high protein content and cheap price, and follows the basic nutritional hierarchy of carbs>proteins>fats.
The US would produce more than enough soy to feed it's vegetarians if it weren't for animal feed, but farmers need a legume to fix nitrogen in between corn cycles assuming they aren't heavily applying nitrogen ferts every year.
Posted By ron - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 5:33 PM ESTwhat eats the soy?
what is the soy grown for, animals or people? isnt that a little fact youre leaving out? also, the amount of grass fed beef is probably less than 1% of the total of all meat consumed in the US so its laughable to hitch your ride to that wagon.
Posted By Karey - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 2:37 PM ESTRe: Gloat Away!
Bernard-
I don't think the author would disagree with the fundamentals of eating lower in the food chain, and that it does impact land use and carbon emissions. He even says he'd put it in the top 5 actions to take to reduce climate impact.
He's just saying that there are probably bigger fish to fry. Taking out meat and eating more soy, at MOST reduces your carbon footprint by 6%, according to the chart he linked to. Cutting your transportation carbon footprint in half saves 14%.... That's.... More
Posted By Karey - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 2:32 PM ESTSmall edit
How many quarter pounders a week?
"According to the American Meat Institute (PDF) the typical American consumes about 65 pounds of beef per year (that works out to about ____ quarter-pounders a week). "
Posted By Bernard Brown - Mon, Nov 02 2009 at 8:21 AM ESTGloat Away!
If your alternative to eating soy products is entirely grass-fed beef, than you might have a small point about the deforestation caused by soy (and you're probably quite wealthy), but since the vast majority of animal products we eat (beef, pork, chicken and eggs) are grown with soy feed, eating lower on the food chain, even soy, results in a net DECREASE of soy grown to feed you.
It can be tricky to get your head around, bu the key point is that a large portion of the feed that.... More



Link

Stumble
Tweet











Weak Articule - Our meat industry is a PROBLEM!
I find it ridiculous that this article is even trying to reprimand people for informing others that our meat industry produces incredible amounts of pollutants and in unhealthy for our environment. The title of the article is not even followed up with any strong arguments against this fact. In fact, it gives the same examples, and only half way through, uses the oh so important word, "moderation." To say that soy bean growth used for tofu is any way near the amount of soy used to feed cattle.... More