Most folks don’t realize this, but a single pound of beef is responsible for about 100 pounds of greenhouse gas pollution.
That’s 50x worse than coal, on pound for pound basis.
That’s 50x worse than coal, on pound for pound basis.
Reposted from
Project Drawdown
"Beef is probably the most polluting substance you and I will ever have flowing through our homes." - Jonathan Foley
www.thestar.com/podcasts/sma...
@globalecoguy.bsky.social
#torontostar
#sustainableag
#bigbeef
www.thestar.com/podcasts/sma...
@globalecoguy.bsky.social
#torontostar
#sustainableag
#bigbeef
Comments
Emissions from cattle came from the grass they graze. Once humanity abandons beef eating, will the carbon stay in the grass? Or will it keep cycling between atmosphere and biosphere?
Obviously we have to reduce beef consumption to meet Paris Agreement targets, and obviously lots of this info has been twisted by the beef industry, but it's important to recognize the differences between biogenic and fossil emissions
I’m absolutely not sealioning. I’m an noob and I’d like for somebody to explain if/how ch4 creates new carbon that wouldn’t otherwise be sequestered in vegetation.
When cows eat grass, they release methane instead. And that's 80x more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2.
That's why it's a problem.
But the beef industry tries to confuse people on this. Old PR tactic.
Or is it too complex to explain in a skeet. If it is I understand, I appreciate you taking the time.
It's my favorite, but not that easy to acquire.
Suggestions?
As I understand the napkin numbers, just from a greenhouse gas perspective, that might be a significant reduction.
Am I seeing that right?
Also the moral question of eating other sentient creatures
But for Joe Hamburger, having a pork burger instead, not less burgers, just different burgers, spread over 10 million Joes, that would make a difference.
I was taught that short cycle carbon is steady state & cycles rapidly through the carbon system, and the danger lies in the mining of fossil fuels.
If only C affects greenhouse, then the fact that CH4 has a faster acting/more concentrated effect than CO2 is irrelevant since there are finite C atoms in the short cycle.
Therefore, the short cycle is a steady state buffer & only long cycle matters.
I'm literally asking to be educated.
What besides the carbon atom in a CH4 molecule causes greenhouse effect?
https://sustainability.stanford.edu/news/methane-and-climate-change-0#
https://naei.energysecurity.gov.uk/greenhouse-gases
The question is: does the greenhouse effect from CH4 emitted by cattle exceed the greenhouse effect from CO2 from rotting vegetation the cattle WOULD have consumed.
When it comes to this livestock climate issue, that's the only question that matters, no?