|
|
|
|
|
by dbdr
3586 days ago
|
|
> livestock are responsible for 3.1% of US co2 equivalent warming (Wikipedia citing the US EPA) The same Wikipedia article also mentions FAO studies giving 14.5% and 18% globally. I wonder what explains the difference. Methodology? Ignoring the contribution of imports? Much higher emissions in the US compared to the world in other areas reducing the relative but not the absolute impact of livestock? In any case meat and animal products seem very relevant to GHG emissions worldwide, and they might be in the US once you reduce other waste. But it's indeed a good idea to focus on the major contributors and low-hanging fruits first. |
|