This article claims that it’s a net carbon sink. As population grows and there is less and less room for wasted resources, the choice must be made to stop eating meat.
My reply: <<
Karl Thidemann
Re: Sustainable…
That’s good to hear that AMP is a net carbon sink. The problem still is that you get 1/10 the nutrients from eating any type of meat. The rest goes to sustaining the animals. The population is predicted to grow past 9 billion, and if the predicted climate changes cause more desertification (there is already some), then there will not be enough food to feed the human population. Meat will have to be given up.
Furthermore the carbon capture and sequestration is going to have to be done by reforestation. This will further reduce the amount of land for food. And if the PPMs of CO2 is not reduced there will be no future of sustaining the human population. 60% by weight of mammals on earth is livestock. 36% are humans. Only 4% are the rest. The choice of reducing the demand for food has to be made — either humans or livestock. And you can be certain that humans are not going to draw straws and reduce themselves.
You may be a shill for the meat and dairy industries, or you may be another person concerned about the future of this Earth. Whatever you are, you must face reality and make the right choice now or it will be too late and there will be no future.
Addendum: We are at a time when there is no chance of stopping growth and slowly reducing demands on resources. We are at the razor sharp cutting edge of a disaster that will cut through the civilizations and lay waste to the human population. Mass starvation will occur if the climate changes cause desertification and loss of arable land due to rise in sea level. There is no room for experimenting on what or where to send millions of climate refugees. There has already been this problem in Syria. It’s going to spread further. >>
There are three times as many renewables jobs as there are fossil fuel jobs. That ratio will only grow greater.
<< Karl Thidemann
Said, “This transition [in animal agriculture] will take years if not decades to achieve.”
The world doesn’t have decades to get to this transformation in animal agriculture.
In the next decade you will see a changeover in transportation to fossil fuel-free vehicles. The electricity will no longer be generated by fossil fuels. That will leave livestock and agriculture as the last major source of CO2.
The desert in north Africa was savanna. There are sand dunes in Kansas, which will grow as rainfall drops. If the climate change isn’t stopped and reversed there will not be grasslands for herds to graze on. That will force everyone to give up meat involuntarily. It’s make changes now, or the changes will be forced upon us by Mother Nature. >>
<< Karl Thidemann
Said, “This transition [in animal agriculture] will take years if not decades to achieve.”
The world doesn’t have decades to get to this transformation in animal agriculture.
In the next decade you will see a changeover in transportation to fossil fuel-free vehicles. The electricity will no longer be generated by fossil fuels. That will leave livestock and agriculture as the last major source of CO2.
The desert in north Africa was savanna. There are sand dunes in Kansas, which will grow as rainfall drops. If the climate change isn’t stopped and reversed there will not be grasslands for herds to graze on. That will force everyone to give up meat involuntarily. It’s make changes now, or the changes will be forced upon us by Mother Nature. >>
<< Karl Thidemann
Said, “Cutting emissions is not good enough; excess CO2 must be removed from the air.”
Absolutely. The “heal this land” you said also requires reforestation: billions of trees must be planted, but where? The land which is capable of supporting forest. That includes farm land that was originally forest. This obviously reduces the amount of available farm land. We’ve got to do more sooner or we will be ‘climate refugees’ and have food insecurity AKA starvation. >>
<< Karl Thidemann
Said, “…animals are bad for nature…”
I don’t believe that’s true. Humans are destroying the environment in the name of food, and one of the most inefficient foods is livestock and dairy. It’s a matter of conflicts between a human population that is too much for the available resources and squeezing out the natural world to make room for human made food sources. Something must be done to correct this problem. The other issue that I said earlier is that there is the extremely urgent need to sequester carbon and the most forthright way is reforestation. If it is necessary to regenerate the soil before planting trees, then it will have to be done extremely fast, by artificial means if necessary. This could mean adding huge amounts of renewables to make this possible without the further use of fossil fuels. If the predictions that climate change will cause deforestation come true then it may be necessary to replenish the deforested lands.
The concepts Karl Thidemann brings up deal with existing issues and I believe that we have to look at issues in the long term. The world has to go past the reacting to problems and be proactive to mitigate future climate change. >>