backtop


Print 169 comment(s) - last by LiveVegan.. on Oct 8 at 4:25 AM

Calls for government to set consumption targets for meat, dairy, alcohol, and other food products.

The average person eats 21 meals a week. According to a new plan to combat climate change, 17 of those will be government-mandated as meat-free. Targets set by the plan would limit weekly consumption of beef would be limited to 1/4 pound. Chicken and ham would be similarly limited, with four modest servings of meat available throughout a week.

The report, sponsored by the University of Surrey, U.K., called for a return to old-fashioned cooking and shopping habits, such as walking to stores, buying only local produce, eating leftovers, and cooking in bulk, so that several meals can be prepared at once. More controversially, the report suggests people should "accept different notions of quality" in regards to food consumption, so that foods we now discard or use for animal feed can instead be directed to human consumption.

Drastic reductions in consumption of alcohol, dairy products, and sweets were also part of the plan.

The report's author, Tara Garnett, noted that voluntary campaigns were "doomed to fail" and strongly urged governments to mandate compliance through carbon trading and caps on greenhouse gas emissions. Ms. Garnett, who says "we cannot assume [the consumer] will necessarily make the right choice", advocates large-scale government intervention to ensure targets are met.

An investigation in the October edition of the Ecologist magazine advocated the developed world cut its meat consumption in half as a tool to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The head of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, also recently suggested people go at least partially vegetarian.

The report found that a fifth of all emissions were the result of the food sector, a value larger than that from the combined transportation sector. The majority of those emissions were from meat production.

Ms. Garnett is a research fellow at the Center for Environmental Strategy at the University of Surrey.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Over my dead body!
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/30/2008 12:50:30 PM , Rating: 4
I'll be damned if I'd let any government restrict my love for beef, chicken, fish, and pork. That &^%$ is just too tasty to limit.

Mmmmm, t-bone steak... damn, I'm hungry now.




RE: Over my dead body!
By Hellfire27 on 9/30/2008 12:58:59 PM , Rating: 4
If this goes through I will resort to cannibalism and eat every environmentalist I can find.


RE: Over my dead body!
By jadeskye on 9/30/2008 1:01:21 PM , Rating: 4
I'm in!

BBQ anyone? lets cook them on some coal or something really polutant just to rub some salt in the wound!


RE: Over my dead body!
By amanojaku on 9/30/2008 1:16:06 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
lets cook them on some coal or something really polutant just to rub some salt in the wound


Nice pun. ;-) I wonder if eating less beef will be a bad thing. More cows means more cow farts! Down with methane and CO2! lol


RE: Over my dead body!
By Oregonian2 on 9/30/2008 2:41:07 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe people will be fined $10 for each ... uh ... exhibition of flatulence.


RE: Over my dead body!
By amanojaku on 9/30/2008 8:08:53 PM , Rating: 5
I hope you people thought I was serious. Because I couldn't handle it if you thought I wasn't funny. I might have to kill myself... after I killed all the cows.


RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/08, Rating: 0
RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:52:07 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
just to rub some salt in the wound!


It'll add some flavor too.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Daemyion on 9/30/2008 5:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
Bottle of Chianti to go with that?

*slurp*


RE: Over my dead body!
By Webreviews on 9/30/2008 11:11:59 PM , Rating: 2
...and some fava beans...


RE: Over my dead body!
By elessar1 on 10/1/2008 6:41:40 PM , Rating: 2
Not in this life!!!!

Honestly, Chianti laks the "body" to be a nice wine to have with a steak...

You need at least some Malbec, os Cabernet Sauvignon.

On my own experience...a nice "Montes Alpha", from Colchagua Valley, Chile, is a nice wino to go with ;)

cheers...


RE: Over my dead body!
By zombiexl on 9/30/2008 1:04:23 PM , Rating: 3
Sign me up..


RE: Over my dead body!
By Archaos13 on 9/30/08, Rating: -1
RE: Over my dead body!
By Spuke on 9/30/2008 1:18:07 PM , Rating: 4
LMAO!!!! Government rationing of food? LMAO again!!!! Riiiiiiight!! How many privately owned guns are there in the US again?

As funny as this is, I find it likely that SOME areas in Europe and the US may agree to do something like this locally. But it won't fly if it's put to a vote.


RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:39:33 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
How many privately owned guns are there in the US again?


You say this like its a bad thing.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Spuke on 9/30/2008 1:55:39 PM , Rating: 5
It's definitely a good thing!!!


RE: Over my dead body!
By LostInLine on 9/30/2008 2:11:23 PM , Rating: 5
This is why we have the right to own guns. To fight the tyranny of government.


RE: Over my dead body!
By BadAcid on 9/30/08, Rating: 0
RE: Over my dead body!
By Grast on 9/30/08, Rating: -1
RE: Over my dead body!
By borismkv on 9/30/08, Rating: -1
RE: Over my dead body!
By crleap on 9/30/2008 4:29:23 PM , Rating: 4
When I can find my phone, call 911, explain where I am and what's happening, and have the cops show up to deal with it faster than a badguy can invade my home through a broken window, I'll surrender my guns.


RE: Over my dead body!
By gamerk2 on 9/30/2008 5:12:26 PM , Rating: 4
Actually, it was the conservative 4th circuit the ruled that the defense department has the right to put american citicens in gitmo. Just to let you know :D


RE: Over my dead body!
By marvdmartian on 9/30/2008 4:41:37 PM , Rating: 2
Meh.....forcing people to buy "locally" only restricts trade.

I live in a town where there's a rather large (read "old school, old money") family that owns the largest ranch in the area, and supplies all the beef to local restaurants.

A few years ago, an investor was wanting to build a new steak house here, but balked when he heard that after X amount of time, he would have to buy all his beef from this local supplier. He explained that the restaurant he wanted to put up supplied all the cuts of beef (frozen, shipped in), and that buying from the local vendor wouldn't be possible in his case. He was informed, in no uncertain terms, that he'd buy his beef locally, if he wanted to stand any chance of getting a building permit here.

What this did was cause him to go to the next large city, about an hour away from here, and build there.....where they had no such requirement.

If you want to encourage business growth, let there be some competition. Otherwise, you just end up with localized monopolies.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Ringold on 9/30/2008 9:34:01 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
If you want to encourage business growth, let there be some competition. Otherwise, you just end up with localized monopolies.


The last thing these people are interested in is economic growth.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Raidin on 10/1/2008 12:07:18 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like a job for the A-Team...

Daa da-daaa, da-daa daa, da-da-d-dad-daaa, da da-da-da daaaaa

...what was their number again?


RE: Over my dead body!
By PhoenixKnight on 9/30/2008 1:10:22 PM , Rating: 5
From what I've heard over the years, humans aren't very tasty, which is part of why animals avoid eating humans.

However, I've also learned recently that herbivores are much tastier than carnivores. If this is true in humans, then we should start with the vegan environmentalist extremists and work our way up from there.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Darkefire on 9/30/2008 3:45:33 PM , Rating: 5
Well, animals derive part of their flavor by their diet, i.e. corn-fed beef, chicken. I wouldn't think vegan environmentalist extremists would taste very good, then, since the amount of bullshit they swallow on a regular basis probably offsets any palatable flavor.


RE: Over my dead body!
By abzillah on 9/30/2008 3:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
Why eat the best first? Why not save the best for last, that way we can end the meal with a good taste?


RE: Over my dead body!
By ggordonliddy on 9/30/2008 5:26:16 PM , Rating: 2
WRONG!! Humans are very delicious. Especially the tender morsel regions.


RE: Over my dead body!
By lagomorpha on 9/30/2008 6:36:28 PM , Rating: 3
From what I hear, human meat is similar to pork in taste and texture.


RE: Over my dead body!
By djkrypplephite on 9/30/2008 2:40:01 PM , Rating: 4
Does anyone else see this as an empty big-government liberal cry? They don't give a shit about whether we eat meat or not, they just want this big government to have more control.


RE: Over my dead body!
By ebakke on 9/30/2008 3:22:55 PM , Rating: 3
See, I think they actually think this will be helpful. More than that, I think they truly believe this is essential to save the planet. That's what saddens me most.


RE: Over my dead body!
By shin0bi272 on 9/30/2008 3:34:44 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah and about half of the house of representatives thought 700billion dollars just handed to the sec of the treasury would save the economy too


RE: Over my dead body!
By tdktank59 on 9/30/08, Rating: 0
RE: Over my dead body!
By JustTom on 9/30/2008 6:26:20 PM , Rating: 2
Judging from most of the environmentalists I've seen I'll just as soon skip eating any of them. If you catch my drift...


RE: Over my dead body!
By hobbes7869 on 9/30/2008 10:47:01 PM , Rating: 3
honestly, i loved this, and this comment doesnt add anything, other then please make the rating higher, deserves a 6. Also, count me in on eating the environmentalists. I would start with all those crazies living up in the trees.


RE: Over my dead body!
By SpaceRanger on 9/30/2008 1:12:03 PM , Rating: 2
That beef brisket I smoked on Sat. sure tasted good for lunch..

The day the government tells me what I can, and cannot eat, is the day I die...


RE: Over my dead body!
By Spuke on 9/30/2008 1:19:33 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
The day the government tells me what I can, and cannot eat, is the day THEY die...

Fixed it for you.


RE: Over my dead body!
By therealnickdanger on 9/30/2008 2:06:27 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
The day the government tells me what I can, and cannot eat, is the day I die...

Well, they already tell you what you can't drink and smoke... The change will occur gradually.


RE: Over my dead body!
By othercents on 9/30/2008 3:47:42 PM , Rating: 1
Smoke?? HA they might say not to smoke, but they are secretly hoping we smoke more. The taxes for smoking keep our government a float and if everyone stopped the US would go bankrupt.

Other


RE: Over my dead body!
By lagomorpha on 9/30/2008 6:38:52 PM , Rating: 2
I think by saying "what we smoke" he was referring to the things that the government doesn't want us to smoke (eg Cannabis).


RE: Over my dead body!
By foolsgambit11 on 9/30/2008 3:32:41 PM , Rating: 2
They already tell you some things you cannot eat, and in that way, they implicitly tell you what you can.

Here, eat some of these 'magic' mushrooms. Oh, wait. The government won't let you.

I know, it's not the same thing - the reasons for that restriction would be different than the reasons for this one. But if you accept the legitimacy of the law against drugs, you implicitly accept that there are valid reasons (those of societal well-being) where the government can restrict your diet.

I do agree, this call for legislation won't fly.

Personally, I think we could see even better gains if we just forced sterilization of a substantial portion of the population. If there were half the people, the food-related climate change problem would be cut in half. </sarcasm>


RE: Over my dead body!
By shin0bi272 on 9/30/2008 3:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
They are also banning certain fats and fast food completely in cities like san fran. Cant eat that its cooked in oil. Cant eat meat because its murder (or whatever their tree hugging argument is). The more you sit idly by and not raise hell about something and get others to do the same the more stuff they tell you you cant do. If something they do aggravates you and you tell no one about it you can vote from now till the end of time and nothing will change. If you want to change the way washington or your state does things then get the word out. Thats really how things get changed not by voting for a fascist.


RE: Over my dead body!
By CommodoreVic20 on 9/30/2008 5:56:17 PM , Rating: 3
The government already tells you what you can and can't eat.


RE: Over my dead body!
By slawless on 9/30/2008 1:17:13 PM , Rating: 1
those of us who have followed the GW debate have always known there is another agenda. this just spells out part of it. no suprise.

Wait until they get to the point of discussing human overpopulation. soylent green anyone?


RE: Over my dead body!
By TheDoc9 on 9/30/2008 3:31:04 PM , Rating: 2
population control: the true goal of environmentalism.

Never underestimate these nutbags, if introduced slowly enough over 20 - 30 years anything is possible if we allow it.


RE: Over my dead body!
By nycromes on 9/30/2008 1:21:17 PM , Rating: 2
Another person using an issue to push their own personal agenda. I have a few friends who have abandoned the Global Warming/Climate change cause because of stories like this. They see a lot of it now for what it is, fear mongering to get people to behave the way some people desire.

I sure hope people are smarter than this, if you look hard enough I you could tie almost anything to "climate change".


RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:32:55 PM , Rating: 5
The day the government tries to tell me how much meat to eat is the day that I start loading up on ammunition.

I got two words for this study and anyone who believes in it.
F*CK YOU!


RE: Over my dead body!
By LostInLine on 9/30/2008 2:21:15 PM , Rating: 5
Why wait. It is never a bad time to buy. If the world goes to hell, you have protection for you and your family. If the gubberment bands a gun (or type of), especially the ones you have, they increase in value. Its a better situation than if you didn't have the guns in the first place.

Also, if you stock up on Guns and Ammo, you don't need to stock up on food. Others do that for you.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Ringold on 9/30/2008 9:45:32 PM , Rating: 2
I had dinner with a friend yesterday, and he's known I've run my own investment account since basically 7th grade. He said he'd lost his ass in a few things (Wachovia common shares, ouch!), and asked me what to buy.

I said a gun, and at least one box of ammo. He laughed, until he saw I was serious. :P

Not saying the sky is falling, afterwords I said sooner or later it'll be time to buy with both fists, but if a man doesn't already have one.. time to buy a gun.


RE: Over my dead body!
By nah on 9/30/2008 2:36:51 PM , Rating: 3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beef

quote:
A study released in 2007 by the World Cancer Research Fund reported “strong evidence that red meat and processed meats are causes of bowel cancer” and recommends that people eat less than 500 grams (18 oz) of cooked red meat weekly, and as little processed meat as possible. The report also recommends that average consumption in populations should not exceed 300 grams (11 oz) per week, stating that this goal "corresponds to the level of consumption of red meat at which the risk of colorectal cancer can clearly be seen to rise."[9] The Harvard School of Public Health recommends that consumers eat red meat sparingly as it has high levels of undesirable saturated fats.


And to think it's my favourite dish--


RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/08, Rating: 0
RE: Over my dead body!
By PhoenixKnight on 9/30/2008 3:25:53 PM , Rating: 4
Are you positive about that?

The only people who can really be sure about their colon health are politicians, who routinely have their heads up their own asses.


RE: Over my dead body!
By lukasbradley on 9/30/2008 3:47:54 PM , Rating: 2
Well done! Here's your black bean veggie burger reward.


RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 4:13:39 PM , Rating: 2
If it isn't then I'd rather die sooner and eat what I want then live longer and eat what I hate. I eat red meat damn close to every day. Days I don't I'm eating chicken. I also try to eat vegetables and plenty of fiber.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Gzus666 on 9/30/2008 4:53:57 PM , Rating: 2
That is the part that gets me, from your description, you eat sensibly. Yet the psychos will try to tell you that you will die of colon cancer. I love beef, pork, chicken fish, all delicious. Why does meat eating always seem to automatically lead to someone saying you will die from it? Balanced diet people, jeez. I eat fruit by the ton, vegetables at least a few times a day, and I am healthy as can be even with my large meat consumption (usually at least 2 times a day).

Now I want a nice steak, has been a little while...


RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 5:05:27 PM , Rating: 2
More recently I've gotten into blending up strawberries and bananas, mixing it with yogurt, ice, and milk, and making a smoothie of sorts. Some can call it gay if they like, but it tastes damn good and is plenty good for you. Basically a natural strawberry milk shake.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Gzus666 on 9/30/2008 5:37:26 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed, that sounds pretty damn good. I personally just eat the stuff straight, cause I love it. I usually eat a few pounds of fruit a day :). I can plow through a 3 pound bag of grapes without really thinking about it sometimes. But, I have always eaten fruit that way, ever since I was a kid. Same with vegetables, used to sit and eat an entire head of cabbage or just cut up bell peppers and plow through them.


RE: Over my dead body!
By walk2k on 9/30/08, Rating: -1
RE: Over my dead body!
By borismkv on 9/30/2008 3:29:38 PM , Rating: 1
Yep. Our grandkids will be running around happily, eating steaks, while you liberal population control eggheads die off in a single generation. Works great.


RE: Over my dead body!
By walk2k on 9/30/08, Rating: -1
RE: Over my dead body!
By Gzus666 on 9/30/08, Rating: 0
RE: Over my dead body!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 5:14:19 PM , Rating: 2
Yes because all of us who eat a lot of meat are dumbass, fat rednecks.


RE: Over my dead body!
By TheDoc9 on 9/30/2008 3:26:10 PM , Rating: 3
500 grams is just over a pound of beef, eat chicken and fish the rest of the week and you're set.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Cuddlez on 9/30/2008 3:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'll be damned if I'd let any government restrict my love for beef, chicken, fish, and pork. That &^%$ is just too tasty to limit.


When I read that I couldn't help but think of Penny Arcade:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/6/18/


RE: Over my dead body!
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 9/30/2008 4:33:56 PM , Rating: 2
to that I would add.....

"Drastic reductions in consumption of alcohol, dairy products, and sweets were also part of the plan."
Yea, because eating more beans is going to cut back on the amount I fart.... She and idiot and I'm not God therefor I can not cut beef, alcohol, dairy and some sweets out of my life.


RE: Over my dead body!
By Screwballl on 9/30/2008 4:43:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'll be damned if I'd let any government restrict my love for beef, chicken, fish, and pork.


agreed... being raised on meat and potatoes, I eat very little veggies or fruit and am perfectly healthy... restricting ANY food will cause a major uproar not only among the people but businesses, corporations and so on... this will never happen, to wide of an impact worldwide.


RE: Over my dead body!
By bigjaicher on 9/30/2008 6:34:16 PM , Rating: 2
Screw this! I practically eat five times their weekly limit per day.

Stupid super-liberals and neo-cons f*ing up the world. I wish that these people would take these limits would go and [insert long string of profanity here]. Seriously. I'm all for protecting the environment, but you need to remember that we're part of it. We're SUPPOSED to be affecting the environment. By not doing anything, we're severely changing the ecosystem. Think about it.

I think I'll continue enjoying my 5 food groups: beef, poultry, pork, fish, and beer.


RE: Over my dead body!
By bigjaicher on 9/30/2008 6:42:16 PM , Rating: 2
I just realized something. If this by some act of evil passes through law, meatatarians(c) from Wendys are screwed.


This is AMERICA.. we eat MEAT
By Jay2tall on 9/30/2008 1:27:56 PM , Rating: 2
We have canine teeth and incisors for a reason, to EAT MEAT. I am 6'8" and have a good workout routine. I also eat a modest helping of meat each day. Beef, chicken, fish, pork, seafood, etc. It's good for you. I think green house gas should be eliminated or reduced in other ways before we start looking in the food sector.

Now I know Methane is a big contributor to greenhouse gases, and cows do produce a lot. But I'm eating the cows... IM HELPING!




RE: This is AMERICA.. we eat MEAT
By FITCamaro on 9/30/08, Rating: 0
RE: This is AMERICA.. we eat MEAT
By archermoo on 9/30/2008 2:27:28 PM , Rating: 4
Homo Sapiens are omnivores, not carnivores. Which still means that meat is an important part of our diet.


By Oregonian2 on 9/30/2008 2:48:36 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, that's why a McBurger isn't just bare meat. It's been "Omni'ized". :-)


RE: This is AMERICA.. we eat MEAT
By PhoenixKnight on 9/30/2008 2:32:38 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah, but by eating cows, we're giving ranchers a reason to breed more cows, which results in there being more cows in order to meet the demand for beef. Unfortunately, the alternative to meat is to grow more crops, which will result in deforestation.

Maybe we should all just lick slime off of rocks for food.


RE: This is AMERICA.. we eat MEAT
By walk2k on 9/30/2008 3:10:49 PM , Rating: 4
"the alternative to meat is to grow more crops" ???

What the hell do you think cows eat?

More "crops" go into meat production than the food they provide. If you took the grain needed to grow 1lb of beef you could instead make 12lbs of bread and feed many many more people.

Why do you think they are cutting down the rainforests to grow cattle for fast-food meat production? It isn't because cows just don't like trees...


RE: This is AMERICA.. we eat MEAT
By glennpratt on 9/30/2008 3:25:10 PM , Rating: 2
I understand your point, but bread isn't exactly nutrient rich and 1lb of beef is a reasonable serving for 4 people.

I think it's an important problem, but let's not blow it out of proportion. Livestock isn't fed food quality grain that we would eat, many eat leftovers from other industries like beer and dairy production.

Really cows shouldn't be eating grain anyway, they are setup to digest grass, which doesn't need plowed land to grow. I've seen plenty of cows while hiking the wilderness of New Mexico, no deforestation needed.


RE: This is AMERICA.. we eat MEAT
By Gzus666 on 9/30/2008 5:09:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think it's an important problem, but let's not blow it out of proportion. Livestock isn't fed food quality grain that we would eat, many eat leftovers from other industries like beer and dairy production. Really cows shouldn't be eating grain anyway, they are setup to digest grass, which doesn't need plowed land to grow. I've seen plenty of cows while hiking the wilderness of New Mexico, no deforestation needed.


I believe some hippies heads just exploded because of this statement. Some people are just ridiculous. Maybe they want us just to adapt to eating rocks, so we never touch the environment, which apparently we aren't a part of.


Let the author of the paper know how you feel
By RabidDog on 9/30/2008 1:15:04 PM , Rating: 5
Ms T Garnett, MA
Research Fellow
Member of Centre for Environmental Strategy (CES)

Email: t.garnett@surrey.ac.uk
Telephone: +44 1483 686678
Fax: +44 1483 686671
(within the UK the +44 should be replaced by 0)

Postal Address
Ms T Garnett
Centre for Environmental Strategy
School of Engineering (D3)
University of Surrey
GUILDFORD
Surrey, UK
GU2 7XH




By Connoisseur on 9/30/2008 1:34:32 PM , Rating: 2
This woman's from the UK. There, they already sell mostly organic, locally grown food anyway and their portions are much smaller. A law like this wouldn't make a ton of difference IN THE UK. Here in the US however... we like our food big and cheap. I dunno about the rationing part but I personally can get behind the locally grown, organic foods. I can attest that they taste MUCH better and fresh than regularly grown food.

To append this statement, I'm vegetarian. Thus, the meat consumption part has no effect on me. But I can see why people would get mad at that...


RE: Let the author of the paper know how you feel
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:45:26 PM , Rating: 2
Please inform me of how I can locally grow a cow and I will be glad to. I'm not a Mexican either so I don't keep chickens in my back yard.


By fibreoptik on 10/7/2008 11:37:16 AM , Rating: 2
Oh cmon FATCamaro, you gotta have *some* room in between your trailer and lawn jockey collection for some chickens.

Think about all the money you'll save on eggs! You can use those savings to pay for NASCAR tickets! :)


By Spuke on 9/30/2008 2:12:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
locally grown food anyway and their portions are much smaller.
Define local. The VAST majority of the US's meat comes from the US. Most of our other food comes from here too.


By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:43:56 PM , Rating: 2
Oh she'll be getting a rather lovely email from me later.


RE: Let the author of the paper know how you feel
By ipay on 9/30/08, Rating: -1
By whiskerwill on 9/30/2008 11:44:17 PM , Rating: 2
Well mate, had you clicked on the report link, you would have seen he was telling the truth. The link to the Guardian newspaper story on the report even says the same thing.

Thanks for popping in and embarrassing yourself though. Do come back next week.


So can I buy more...
By zombiexl on 9/30/2008 1:02:30 PM , Rating: 5
carbon credits if I want to eat meat 21 times a week?

No doubt this is a way for poor people to get more money by selling their carbon credits to others.

If that is the case then this is no more than a forced redistribution of wealth system, disguised as a way to save the planet. Although most newer socialist and marxist type laws are...




RE: So can I buy more...
By Jimbo1234 on 9/30/2008 1:32:33 PM , Rating: 1
Sounds to me like 1983 communist Poland all over again. You want to buy some bread or meat? Better have your government issued coupon and wait in a 1/4 mile long line of a 1000 people when you know the store only has 50X loaves of bread and 5 pounds of meat.

There was no shortage. It was government fixed.

If this is where we are headed, than I'm going get myself on the terrorist watch list and f*** up all those a**holes making such laws.


RE: So can I buy more...
By chmilz on 9/30/2008 1:55:44 PM , Rating: 3
The whole carbon credit thing is a sham anyway. Where do these credits go? Who is being paid to produce less carbon with them? It's not like I can buy carbon credits and then feel good knowing some tribal village in Africa isn't producing carbon, since they've never produced it to begin with. This whole thing is stupid. </rant>

Here's what I'm gonna do: Buy meat. Eat meat. Poop. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.


RE: So can I buy more...
By zombiexl on 9/30/2008 2:36:18 PM , Rating: 3
You're going to lather, rinse and repeat your poop? :)


RE: So can I buy more...
By maverick85wd on 9/30/2008 2:55:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
if I want to eat meat 21 times a week?


That's what I'm talking about... the only thing that tastes better than meat and potatoes is meat and meat


College!
By JasonMick (blog) on 9/30/2008 1:03:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
eating leftovers, and cooking in bulk, so that several meals can be prepared at once


Sounds like my college days! :)

But seriously the U.S. gov't would never go for this as politicians want to keep their jobs. I doubt many other industrialized nations would either -- especially Britain. I mean every meal in Britain has meat in it pretty much.

I know this makes for a good story, very alarming and attention grabbing, but I think fear that some researcher's plan will be put into effect worldwide would be pretty irrational.




RE: College!
By zombiexl on 9/30/2008 1:08:56 PM , Rating: 4
You would think.. Although laws are passed all the times that are not at all what the people want. Many politicians these days think they know better than the rest of us and have to save us from ourselves.

My friend, we are witnessing the final days of a democracy. Nothing would surprise me at this point.


RE: College!
By Spuke on 9/30/2008 1:23:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
My friend, we are witnessing the final days of a democracy. Nothing would surprise me at this point.
Dude, put your fear away. This is something even our middle of the road, I don't want to get involved populace would not tolerate. And no politician would push this. It would be political suicide to do so. That's just reality.


RE: College!
By masher2 (blog) on 9/30/2008 1:19:16 PM , Rating: 3
The recently-defeated Lieberman-Warner Cap-and-Trade bill would have included provisions which have gotten us a considerable distance towards this. There would not have been hard limits on meat consumption, but the caps would have caused substantial increases in costs for meat production, designed to limit consumption.


RE: College!
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
When I could just see the title of your post I was thinking your message would be, "Maybe those who came up with this study should try attending it."


What was that movie with Stalone?
By Jimbo1234 on 9/30/2008 1:41:06 PM , Rating: 2
What was the name of that movie where Stalone played some cop that got woken up in the future or something and had to use the 3 shells to take a dump? This sort of reminds me of that where govt tells you when, how, what for everything. These extremists need to be kicked in the head to get the gears turning again and thinking like humans. Some might need more kicks than others considering that those gears are reall really jammed.




RE: What was that movie with Stalone?
By nycromes on 9/30/2008 1:44:12 PM , Rating: 2
The movie is Demolition Man


RE: What was that movie with Stalone?
By Jimbo1234 on 9/30/2008 1:50:58 PM , Rating: 2
Ahh, yes that's right. Demolition Man. It's not that far off from where this world seems to be going.


RE: What was that movie with Stalone?
By PhoenixKnight on 9/30/2008 2:22:45 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if we'll see the construction of the Arnold Schwarzenegger Presidential Library any time soon.


RE: What was that movie with Stalone?
By whiskerwill on 9/30/2008 11:45:09 PM , Rating: 2
Not without a congressional amendment, you won't.


By PitViper007 on 10/1/2008 3:48:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not without a congressional amendment, you won't.


I think you mean not without a CONSTITUTIONAL amendment. Quite a bit of difference there.


The solution
By AnnihilatorX on 9/30/2008 3:23:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think the solution is to invest heavily on lab-grown meat.

There are many benefits to this, and green is only a minor reasons.

For lab grown meat you have the following advantages:

1. No moral issues of animal cruelty
2. No environmental costs of growing food to feed a living animal.
3. You grow what you need. No energy is wasted in growing inedible parts like eyes, bones. (Although bones are good for brewing soups)
4. Can specially control quality of meat without running into moral issues (for those who know tender piglets chop are made by tying the legs of a piglet so the muscles can't move and grow tender)
5. No infectious diseases
6. Require much less land




RE: The solution
By jbzx86 on 9/30/2008 3:45:37 PM , Rating: 1
If we cut down on meat consumption, where in the fuck am I supposed to get the amino acids my body is incapable of synthesizing? Am I supposed to buy MORE supplements? This would cause a shortage of supplements and other life threatening diseases would become common place due to the lack of amino acids in our diet. There's a reason we are omnivores.


RE: The solution
By AnnihilatorX on 9/30/2008 6:24:37 PM , Rating: 2
Mate I think you were replying to the wrong article...


RE: The solution
By hobbes7869 on 9/30/2008 11:25:28 PM , Rating: 2
Damn, now you made me want tender piglet chops or what ever you call them, Plus tying their legs together just makes it easier to catch...


RE: The solution
By LatinMessiah on 10/1/2008 1:33:55 AM , Rating: 2
I'll grow you in a lab.


RE: The solution
By Jimbo1234 on 10/1/2008 11:05:44 PM , Rating: 2
LOL!


Is this a joke?
By japlha on 9/30/2008 12:58:10 PM , Rating: 2
No. Definitely not. I object. Ridiculous.

If this can of worms gets opened I can only imagine what would come next.

Vegetarian? You've got to be joking.




RE: Is this a joke?
By Sebec on 9/30/2008 1:03:06 PM , Rating: 2
Eating the aforementioned can of worms. :)


RE: Is this a joke?
By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:42:33 PM , Rating: 2
I believe one of the things worms release as they crawl through the ground eating soil is CO2. So eating them would count as eating meat.


RE: Is this a joke?
By SeanMI on 9/30/2008 1:42:20 PM , Rating: 2
"he head of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, also recently suggested people go at least partially vegetarian."

Wouldn't having a world full of vegetarians be just as bad (ok ok...definitely worse) as all of us eating meat? I mean come on...what do plants "breath"? CO2 right? Isn't that what they're trying to reduce? Seems to me eating LESS plants would be more beneficial :)


Is it just me...
By DtTall on 9/30/2008 12:57:14 PM , Rating: 1
It might just be me, but there seems to be a hint of irony in the fact that these ecologists want to reduce the number of animals in the world.




RE: Is it just me...
By amanojaku on 9/30/2008 1:20:39 PM , Rating: 2
Huh? Where did you get the idea that ecologists want to REDUCE the number of animals?


RE: Is it just me...
By DtTall on 9/30/2008 2:19:11 PM , Rating: 2
On a previous DT article (http://www.dailytech.com/Save+the+Planet+Buy+a+Hum... this quote can be found:

quote:
the world cattle population is responsible for some 18% of all greenhouse gases, a larger contribution than planes, trains, automobiles, and all other forms of transportation combined.


By only eating less meat this number would not decrease much. It is the cattle population that is contributing to the green house gas. Therefore to decrease the amount of greenhouse gas emissions we would have to decrease the number of cattle, not just stop eating them.

Unless you see a way to decrease greenhouse gas emissions by having more cattle, I think that a decrease in eating meat -- and therefore the number of cattle needed- is the only way to interpret this article.


RE: Is it just me...
By nycromes on 9/30/2008 3:11:25 PM , Rating: 2
Eating less of the cows will result in a cattle population boom. We need to eat more meat to reduce the greenhouse gas production.


Meat
By Ratinator on 9/30/2008 1:28:10 PM , Rating: 2
I'm a Meatatarian. It's a personal choice. You have to commit to it.

This is nothing more than an Animal Rights/Vegetarian way of promoting their lifestyle.

quote:
TextThe report, sponsored by the University of Surrey, U.K., called for a return to old-fashioned cooking and shopping habits


Hmmm I seem to recall old style habits entailed going to your back farm yard, shooting a steer, butchering it and then having meat and potatoes for almost every meal. Someone is out of touch with reality I think. Steak and eggs for breakfast baby.




RE: Meat
By Jimbo1234 on 9/30/2008 1:35:19 PM , Rating: 2
They like to force their views unsolicited onto other like those damn door to door bible thumbers.

I guess I'm going to hell because I enjoy my steak.


RE: Meat
By SilverShadow on 10/1/2008 12:33:03 AM , Rating: 2
I'm a meatatarian, and I'm a PC.


bulk cooking?
By zinfamous on 9/30/2008 12:50:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
and cooking in bulk


bulk meat cooking? I can get behind that...




RE: bulk cooking?
By ADDAvenger on 9/30/2008 12:54:21 PM , Rating: 3
But how big is bulk? 10 pounds? Alternator sized?


lol
By vapore0n on 9/30/2008 1:03:02 PM , Rating: 2
I bet PETA is jumping with joy out of this one




RE: lol
By JediJeb on 9/30/2008 2:20:53 PM , Rating: 3
Hey I belong to PETA( People for the Eating of Tasty Animals)


I wonder
By HighWing on 9/30/2008 1:34:41 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if the UN leaders that are backing this idea would still back it if they themselves would have to be restricted to it as well? Let alone the fact that I doubt any population would agree to this as a whole, I would be willing to bet anyone backing this besides the author is assuming that they are exempt from such an idea because they proposed it. I would like to see anyone backing this, to actually do it themselves for a month. And not just personal, but their whole family.




RE: I wonder
By Oregonian2 on 9/30/2008 2:50:38 PM , Rating: 2
You bring up a good point. Folk in rural Somalia and places like that are already on this diet. Works great doesn't it?


By middlehead on 9/30/2008 1:43:51 PM , Rating: 2
I would like to tell him to suck my balls.




By FITCamaro on 9/30/2008 1:49:05 PM , Rating: 2
I had a nice long laugh after reading this.


Eat insects
By gmw1082 on 9/30/2008 2:47:57 PM , Rating: 2
I read somewhere that some people think we should start eating insects as a source of protein. I think anyone who supports this meat reduction plan should be forced to adhere to a strict diet of insects (preferably venomous).




RE: Eat insects
By Oregonian2 on 9/30/2008 2:53:28 PM , Rating: 2
Would take many years of study and environmental impact statements before insect populations could be attacked in such a way that's counter to the natural order. Environmentalists would undoubtedly be against it.


By UNCjigga on 9/30/2008 1:31:15 PM , Rating: 3
"Our food doesn't suck enough. Let's increase the amount of offal we eat and make everything more bland"




Not all bad...
By TALENT on 9/30/2008 8:37:33 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The report, sponsored by the University of Surrey, U.K., called for a return to old-fashioned cooking and shopping habits, such as walking to stores, buying only local produce, eating leftovers, and cooking in bulk, so that several meals can be prepared at once.


These are all things people should do anyways. Things I do when I don't get too lazy. I find I lose weight and feel better when I do all my own cooking and don't eat out. Not only that but I save a lot of money.

Walking to the store (as long as it's within a few miles) is great too. You actually can meet your neighbors(it's amazing who/what you see when you go outside), get some air and exercise. Judging by the obesity epidemic in some parts of the world the extra walking will do people good.

As for the suggested portions... Well some people can definitely afford to eat less but I think this report takes it a little too far.

I doubt many people take this report serious. It's definitely on the fringe and that is of course why Asher posted it... His extremest views are as idiotic as this story. Why not post more blogs that support the causes you have championed and less that make you look like an environment hating zealot.




RE: Not all bad...
By carroll on 10/1/2008 4:35:45 AM , Rating: 2
i agree, i wouldn't take this too serious either. it's fun to see what kind of comments these sort of 'articles' evoke.

i don't go with that rationing scheme at all, no it won't work. however i think there's something amiss with eating habits for certain people.
i couldn't imagine a heavy worker (say civil engineering) on such a 'diet' or just eating salad ;) - on the other side a paper-pusher certainly wouldn't need to live on steaks and such all the time. a bit generalized there, i know.
i all ends with the individual, however. all that the 'goverment' can do there (if it was their job and i doubt that) is to promote education programs and so on. it's already done - but does it work? most people don't like to be patronized, so it might actually backfire i guess :)


meat rationing
By washingtonian on 9/30/2008 8:48:56 PM , Rating: 3
If my memory serves me correctly, India has about twice as many bovines as the U. S. and they don't use any of them for anything. If they are serious about livestock adding to global warming they should require those cattle to be slaughtered and exported to populations that appreciate a good piece of meat.




By blueeyesm on 9/30/2008 12:57:34 PM , Rating: 2
"... "accept different notions of quality" in regards to food consumption, so that foods we now discard or use for animal feed can instead be directed to human consumption. "

Or just cut down the portion sizes. I'm looking at places like restaurants. Their portion sizes are way too large.

Re-directing lower quality food just to say one can continue to have a huge salad is immature and greedy.




By EntreHoras on 9/30/2008 1:06:17 PM , Rating: 2
This is Baloney!!!




EPA Fascism versus America
By Ordr on 9/30/2008 1:08:11 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure this will get voted down, but I believe that it is appropriate and important:

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5267




By CatfishKhan on 9/30/2008 1:11:10 PM , Rating: 2
So does the allowed portion of meat have to be blessed by an ecological rabbi before we are allowed to eat it? (sorry if I offended any Jews, not sorry if I offended any eco-nuts)




didnt know today was april 1st
By kattanna on 9/30/2008 1:40:45 PM , Rating: 2
honestly, thats about all i can say about it. its a joke, nothing more.




By Kierphe on 9/30/2008 1:54:31 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously. It's the government's job to not only recommend, but mandate what you eat, how much you eat, and what quality it is? In the name of reducing carbon footprints?

I can be environmentally responsible without having my freedom--even BASIC, SUBSISTENCE freedom--restricted by the state. What on EARTH is this woman thinking?

"Nobody will listen to my opinion (it's doomed to fail)! The state should force people to listen!"




Soylent Green is the Answer!
By Lord 666 on 9/30/2008 1:56:00 PM , Rating: 2
Thats right, soylent green is people and by eating people we will save the environment.




By tastyratz on 9/30/2008 2:06:21 PM , Rating: 2
Then why were they made out of meat?

The only way I am going to save a cow is if I eat a hippie.

What a joke.




Down with meat my a**
By Dwayno on 9/30/2008 2:12:05 PM , Rating: 2
These environmentalist advocate a switch back to an farming society that only eat "faceless" vegetable. BIG problem...we can't feed the world on low energy grain farm. These farms require a high yield...high yield means high energy which increases energy demand (you have to farm more product and get it to more markets quicker). Do ya' see a pattern here?!
Also, more farmland means more deforestation...PERIOD!!!




New Energy Source
By DFranch on 9/30/2008 2:27:39 PM , Rating: 2
I think we meed to harness the methane as an alternative energy source. Think about it Methane powered cars. :) Somebody just needs to perfect the Fart Catcher (FC) Once the FC is developed then people can go off the grid by eating nothing but Beans.




I don't think so
By Bioniccrackmonk on 9/30/2008 3:09:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Drastic reductions in consumption of alcohol, dairy products, and sweets were also part of the plan.


Nathan Explosion puts it best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_FVCwpqJGc




On a serious note
By AnnihilatorX on 9/30/2008 3:16:36 PM , Rating: 2
This is not going to work.
It is a fact the food industry is a significant greenhouse gas contributor, but a compulsory meat rationing scheme is not going to work.
There is no developed system of meat rationing. It'd take more than a dime and several weeks to setup systems like this. And this idea sounds inane and insane to people.

It is however, far easier to tax productions of meat, so that you incur a higher sale price on meat to influence demand. Otherwise, I don't see how this can be done.




This sums it up.
By arazok on 9/30/2008 3:29:30 PM , Rating: 2
Gotta love this. The introduction of the report contains a quote:

quote:
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
Albert Einstein

The report then calls for the implementation of massive government regulation to control the food consumption of the general public.

My god man, how can somebody be so stupid?




By Bateluer on 9/30/2008 3:53:26 PM , Rating: 2
Not gonna happen, nut jobs.




DRV of meat
By FranksAndBeans on 9/30/2008 4:15:00 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.brass.cf.ac.uk/images/27102005_TG.jpg

The answer is simple. She obviously needs to start getting her serving of meat each night. Happiness tends to dissolve silly crusades.




Welcome to the new tomorrow!
By solah13 on 9/30/2008 4:37:08 PM , Rating: 2
Checking the calendar
By mindless1 on 9/30/2008 4:40:06 PM , Rating: 2
Is this April 1st? Man how time flies.




By soloman02 on 9/30/2008 5:05:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Drastic reductions in consumption of alcohol


Oh yea, that's gonna go over real well. Just look at how successful the last two prohibitions were ;).




By LatinMessiah on 10/1/2008 1:29:32 AM , Rating: 2
Then how are we going to get big and strong in order to fight their wars?




Well
By dickeywang on 10/1/2008 5:10:38 AM , Rating: 2
I can understand choose trains instead of cars for transportation for conserve energy, but I can't believe after so much technology progress we have made, it is necessary to go back to 10000BC when people ate raw meat.




Huh ?
By Landiepete on 10/1/2008 5:39:20 AM , Rating: 2
Apparently The Peoples Democratic University Of Surrey has recently acquired a new Politbureau.

It seems TWO possibilities offer themselves to the epople of Surrey :

1. Transport the whole university back to the place it evidently escaped from, i.e. North Viertnam
2. Declare the greater area as a health hazard and apply for Euro funding to sanitize the area, after which the land could be used to raise beef cattle.

Why must we suffer the reports of those looneys ? Where is the law that requires thes folks ramblings to be allowed out of their padded rooms ?

Peter R.




Its getting colder !
By barney rubble on 10/1/2008 6:57:13 AM , Rating: 2
As the antarctic seas cool and the south pole minimum temperature continues to drop as it has done over the last 50 years, the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO) has gone into cold mode resulting in cooler temperatures in the northern hemisphere too. It's the PDO that caused cooling between the 1940s and the 1970s resulting in the fear of global cooling, reversing in the 1970s raising fears of global warming. Not only this but the solar cycle is at minimum AND the solar wind pressure is at its lowest since measured (50years) allowing more cosmic rays through making more clouds. I think we're in for a very cold time and need to eat as many vegetarians as possible just to stay warm.




By klstay on 10/1/2008 8:45:42 AM , Rating: 2
A number of the suggestions are not unreasonable. The average person could do with a significant reduction in meat consumption as part of a healthier diet. Some of the other ideas are also of merit. Where it falls apart is the same place all of these notions get into trouble; they fail to trust the people. The result of which is the nanny state in which we now live.




Eat Kangaroos!
By ayat101 on 10/1/2008 9:20:23 AM , Rating: 2
This is stupid. While it maybe true that meat production releases a lot of greenhouse gases, the SOLUTION is that meat can be produced without producing these pollutants.

Kangaroos are easy to raise, eat less quality stuff than cows, have good meat, and because of their digestion, do not release anywhere near the level of methane cows do.

This makes me angry because the argument ties two UNRELATED issues to achieve a hidden outcome. People who propagate these views ARE NOT interested in preventing man made Global Warming, they are "animal liberationists". They are using MMGW to achieve their cause.

To reduce the impact of greenhouse gases from meat production, different animals should be raised instead. Plus how does stopping eating chicken help? Raising chickens does not release as much methane as from cows... so not only is this recommendation misleading in its intentions, it is outright incorrect with some.




By Staples on 10/1/2008 10:10:41 AM , Rating: 2
If a tax was leaved, then it would curb the consumption of such animals. If everyone who is saying "over my dead body" and other stupid things like that want to pay more, be my guest.

Seriously, if something like changing your eating habits will cause you a ton of distress that you'd probably die, then you have problems. Unfortunately, this is half of the US. Just like fat people believe it is so hard to lose weight. Poor people believe it is so hard to become middle class. This world is much to forgiving and that is why this segment of the population exists.

I would love to send these people to a poor country and see how hard it is. I mean, you don't have electricity or running water, that would probably kill off this these weaklings. Too bad there is no natural preditor because all these whinny babies would have been killed off.




Life changing show
By charlieee on 10/1/2008 4:29:11 PM , Rating: 2
There is a documentary or show called "Meet Your Meat" which shows the abuse of farm animals and chickens. If viewed it can permanently change a person's eating habits. Perhaps Google Video or Youtube has it available.




That makes sense
By eldardude on 10/3/2008 5:24:57 AM , Rating: 2
Yeh, that makes sense. Limit beef consumption so there will be more cows alive farting greenhouse gases.

I want to see the author of the report eats "Animal food".




over all the dead bodies
By TRUTH2U on 10/6/2008 8:45:10 PM , Rating: 2
U'LL B DAMNED IF U DON'T - DOH! 0;)x




Yeee HAW!
By fibreoptik on 10/7/2008 11:34:50 AM , Rating: 2
I'll be damned if I'd let any government restrict my love for high cholesterol, heart attacks, shortness of breath, climate change and NASCAR.

Oh yeah, and guns. Gotta have lotsa guns.




By LiveVegan on 10/8/2008 4:11:12 AM , Rating: 2
The meat and dairy contribution to global warming is the other inconvenient truth that Al Gore, major green groups and governments don't wish to address.

Some facts:
"Researchers at the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science in Japan have carried out a life-cycle analysis of beef production which shows that 'a kilogram of beef leads to the emission of greenhouse gases with a warming potential equivalent of 36.4 kilograms of CO2' (New Scientist, 21.7.07). To help you get your head around this, that's equivalent to the amount of CO2 emitted by the average car over a distance of 250 kilometres."

"Researchers at the University of Chicago have calculated the relative carbon intensity of a standard vegan diet in comparison to a US-style carnivorous diet, all the way through from production to processing to distribution to cooking and consumption. An average burger man (that is, not the outsize variety) emits the equivalent of 1.5 tonnes more CO2 every year than the standard vegan. By comparison, were you to trade in your conventional gas-guzzler for a state of the art Prius hybrid, your CO2 savings would amount to little more than one tonne per year."

Going vegan is something everyone can do to save the planet. Its easier than people think. Better for health, its ethical, its environmentally friendly and there are dozens of other major reasons why adopting a plant based diet will save the planet.




By LiveVegan on 10/8/2008 4:25:26 AM , Rating: 2
Check out these vids:

You can't be a meat eating environmentalist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWWNLvgU4MI

World Food Crisis: Is Meat Consumption a Major Cause
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcGFjo62LdI

Dr Rajendra Kumar Pachauri, an economist and environmental scientist who has served as the chair of the intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 2002 recently said

"Worldwide, livestock-farming is responsible for no less then 18% of total greenhouse gas emissions (Source: FAO, Livestock's long shadow, 2007).

Greenhouse gas emissions through meat production and associated land-use changes are one of the most important causes of climate change/warming. Yet people, especially in high-income societies, continue to eat large amounts of meat. This high meat intake not only has negative effects on the climate and biodiversity; it is also harmful for our health because it increases the risk of cardio-vascular disease, obesity, diabetes and other diseases of affluence. Hence, it is very important to limit our meat consumption. Eating less meat means less greenhouse gases will be emitted.

Because our food, and especially meat consumption is such a significant cause of greenhouse gas emissions, an essential means we have in the fight against climate change may very well be our fork. Each time you eat a vegetarian meal instead of a meat-based meal, you contribute to mitigation of emissions of greenhouse gases which cause climate change.

But of course one person can only do so much. It is also the responsibility of governments and industries to ensure that sustainable alternatives like vegetarian food are widely available and affordable. Several alternative
policies and options could lead to lower consumption of meat and climate-friendly lifestyles, which a society may decide on with its own wisdom. EVA has provided a menu of actions that could be adopted as provided below, and it is for communities and governments to decide how to consider
them."


Adopt a plant based diet, for yourself, for all sentient beings and the environment.




There's lies and then there's Michael Asher...
By ipay on 9/30/08, Rating: -1
By CatfishKhan on 9/30/2008 7:48:44 PM , Rating: 5
Given that it is 156 pages long, I doubt many people read all of it. That, however, includes you.

One page 110:

We then look at the nitty-gritty of getting people to do things differently: what do people think about
food, are people likely to change their behaviours voluntarily and how far should policy and
other efforts be devoted to persuading them to do so?

Then the answers come:

119:
Policy strategies would need to be put in place to manage consumer demand for livestock products

121:
Because food is so important to us in so many ways, it is difficult to get us to change our diets voluntarily.

...expecting people to ‘do the right thing’ is unrealistic.

The context within which people consume – political, social, economic – must therefore change.

The point we make here is that it is unrealistic to expect that conscious voluntary behaviour change will happen, to expect people to make complex decisions and then ‘do the right thing’ from the good of their hearts

125/126:
A policy approach that relies heavily on voluntary individual action is not just weak, but it does a real injustice to people in the developing world who will suffer the
worst effects of climate change.

134:
...measures to reduce public consumption of particular goods and services need to be situated in, and form part of, an overall policy context which seeks to reduce consumption in all areas of life.

149:
Government then needs to set out how it intends to achieve these cuts. Only a consumption oriented approach will do; that is, one that takes into account the embedded emissions of all the food we eat. Government needs to set out, perhaps using a Socolow Wedge type approach, roughly what percentage will come from technological improvements at each stage in the life cycle, and what percentage will come from changes in what we eat.

this is unrelated, but just weird
121: While behavioural lock-in is rightly highlighted as a barrier to sustainable consumption, it is interesting to note how varied individual habits are, suggesting that it is not the thing we do itself that is desirable (showering in the morning, tea with two sugars, sitting in a particular chair, crossing the road at a certain point), but the habitude of the habit, so to speak.

Must be a cultural thing -- I'm pretty sure most Americans, regardless of time of day, shower to get clean, not out of habit.


RE: There's lies and then there's Michael Asher...
By Ringold on 9/30/2008 11:35:57 PM , Rating: 5
It hints that government mandated policy designed to control peoples eating habits are necessary right in the abstract, page 4.

But hey, if baseless trolling makes him feel better about himself..


By fibreoptik on 10/7/2008 11:40:37 AM , Rating: 2
Your blind support of masher's slanted views is astounding.


"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke

Related Articles
UN IPCC: Shun Meat to Stop Climate Change
September 9, 2008, 1:29 PM
















botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki