Azath Vitr (D, on 16 August 2022 - 10:02 PM, said:
Mezla PigDog, on 16 August 2022 - 09:31 PM, said:
I've been kidding myself for ages that my version of meat eating isn't as bad for the climate as everyone else's. I've been trying to eat organic, non-intensively farmed meat. Today I read an article by George Monbiot (who I usually try to avoid because his matter of fact dissection of topics around our impending climate apocalypse are so accurate and well researched, I usually wind up wanting to lock myself and child in a car with the exhaust pipe funneled in through a window) where he pointed out my version was the most damaging of all!! Essentially organic pasture fed beef and lamb is the farming method that produces the least protein per hectare of land that could otherwise be used as carbon sinks for temperate rain forest. He calculated the carbon toll of intensively farmed meat and the carbon cost of producing feed for intensively farmed animals too. It was pretty indisputable.
The climate logic of a plant based diet is very hard to ignore. What's everyone else's excuse? I don't have one - I was vegetarian for many years but now I'm not. I'm trying to cut down on animal products but family logistics make it a challenge. And cows and sheep taste so darned good and are so easy to get.
Eating oysters and certain types of seafood (that happen to be among my favorites) is apparently better for the environment than a plant-based diet.
'The simple food that fights climate change
[...] they actively sequester carbon. They can even protect fragile ecosystems by cleaning the water they live in. Welcome to the remarkable and unglamorous world of the bivalve.
[...] Their lowly status, however, perhaps means their potential has been largely overlooked. But as the world attempts to find ways of feeding a growing population with less environmental impact, many experts believe we may need to make these shellfish a larger part of our diet.
[...] "Bivalves have the remarkable potential to provide people with food that is not only environmentally sustainable but also nutrient dense," says David Willer, a zoologist at the University of Cambridge[...]
[...] "[...] the environmental footprint of bivalve aquaculture is even lower than many arable crops in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, land and freshwater use."
'
The simple food that fights climate change
Perhaps I should make it clear that I'm quoting the BBC there. It may seem like a fringe idea, but among experts it's (apparently) really not.
Since oysters were an immensely popular staple in the UK, US, and many other places (before wild oysters were overfished), it's plausible that they can become a staple again.
Bivalve farming can also be scaled up to feed mass numbers again. From the Guardian:
'Why oysters, mussels and clams could hold the key to more ethical fish farming
[...] Bivalves are the best option for farming if one chooses to farm and/or eat animals at all. They appear to have minimal ecological impact [...]
...]
[...] scientists predict we will need 70-100% more food to feed an estimated 9 billion people by 2050. [...]
[...] If we continue to mass produce animals[...] They should not require fish feed, should not require conversion of habitat, and should minimize pollution. [...]
[...] bivalves appear to be the most promising in terms of meeting these goals. [...] For the future of aquaculture, we should look toward the half-shell.'
Why oysters, mussels and clams could hold the key to more ethical fish farming | Guardian sustainable business | The Guardian
This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 20 August 2022 - 12:48 PM
Help
