this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2023
181 points (87.6% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5245 readers
355 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What good is it going to do for 1-10% of the world population to give up meat? The rich can burn fossil fuels like they’re a moderate sized nation, but there’s only so much meat a person can eat. Considering that a large portion of global emissions come from eating meat, especially red meat, this is something that actually does make sense for the average person to do. Even more so when you consider the non-climate change advantages of mass reduction in meat eating, like freeing up the amount of land dedicated to raising meat animals or feed for meat animals.
Are you saying you’re not going to make changes until the rich do? Otherwise I don’t understand the point of these comments.
If they got rid of all that tomorrow the amount of meat eaten globally still would not be sustainable and would still use over 1/3rd of all habitable land on earth. Rich people are not the only people who eat meat.
Yes, but if I juat blame rich people for all ny problems, then I can feel smug while changing nothing
the weakest mindset available