|
|
|
|
|
|
by cglan
1453 days ago
|
|
|
I don't have enough expertise to make anything other than a totally uneducated rebuttal. I'm honestly a little bit more optimistic than the author. I think he's on the money for a lot of things. The world economy is going get screwed because of energy and our leaders are dropping the ball. We're seeing the results in Sri Lanka but also in Europe. On the other hand, I think he does discount renewables more than needed. There is very little barrier to us rolling fields of solar panels and batteries other than purely a political one. There is also a lot of flex in the system. Simply removing meat and replacing it with chicken would save untolds amount of energy. Imagine if we were forced to live off beans |
|
|
Dietary adjustments would arguably help us more from a health and medical expense perspective. In terms of energy, agriculture apparently only uses around 2% of US energy consumption.
I’m not sure if that includes industrial energy which goes into producing fertilizer. If not, it would only bump up the percentage a fraction of a percent.
Even if we all eat beans, we won’t stop climate change.
I’m not saying the effort wouldn’t be worth it. Research shows unequivocally that eating more beans is a great idea. Well, eating more plants. The energy saving would be icing on top.
But then how are you going to employ the people who grow feed for livestock, and the people who raise livestock? If we all ate beans, we’d need fewer farmers. That’s a radical change we don’t have a plan or strategy for.