|
|
|
|
|
by dbingham
1383 days ago
|
|
These are only niche methods because we haven't invested in them and they hold an enormous amount of promise. The dialog around agriculture and sustainability all too often is akin to telling people to just cut their power consumption rather than discussing or exploring non-emitting sources of energy. You say I have some weird axe to grind, because I keep pushing back on people saying that meat consumption is a much bigger contributor to GHG emissions than it is. Yet you keep insisting that I'm somehow not accounting for a meat reduction as a piece of the puzzle when I have readily admitted that it should be a piece of the puzzle multiple times, and have happily conceded that it will be necessitated if we switch to the more sustainable, but less productive modes of producing it. I think I've made my point pretty clearly, and repeatedly. Seems to me like your the one with an axe to grind, one not supported by the data. |
|
My suggestion that people eat one less meat based meal per day is far less drastic that if all meat was produced with the methods you are advocating. Yet, you imply that I am the one calling for the drastic action.
Edit: let me ask you this, what are you actually proposing? Should the government ban meat that isn’t produced the way you suggest? If not, what are you proposing that will have a bigger impact than my suggestion that people eat one less meat based meal a day?