[hunterjrj]

I can't see why the parent has been down voted:

"Meat production is a major contributor to climate change. It is estimated that livestock production accounts for 70 per cent of all agricultural land use and occupies 30 per cent of the land surface of the planet. Because of their sheer numbers, livestock produce a considerable volume of greenhouse gases (such as methane and nitrous oxide) that contribute to climate change. In fact, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has estimated that livestock production is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gases."

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can-do/food-and-our-plan...

(David Suzuki is a biologist and climate change activist here in Canada)

[zzalpha]

Because, as meat consumption produced less than a fifth of all greenhouse gas emissions, the claim that "it won't improve until the world population starts limiting its meat intake" is simply false.

Reducing meat production would help, certainly. But it ain't a blocking requirement to getting global warming under control.

As an aside, while I'm choosing to accept that 18% number, counting methane in that list is a bit misleading as, while it is a far more powerful greenhouse gas, it has a far shorter lifetime in the atmosphere than CO2.

[paavokoya]

>In fact, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has estimated that livestock production is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gases.

It seems like fixing 82% of the problem is more important and likely than eliminating an essential protein source from the human diet. But that's just my opinion.