Edit History

On 4/27/2021 at 11:13 AM, Katie Meadow said:

Cows also put out an enormous amount of methane, causing almost 10 percent of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and contributing to climate change."

 

This is really not true.  Even the folks who published the original lone study have retreated from this.  It's more like 2%. 

The total number of ruminants belching methane while roaming the earth has not changed all that much in the last 200 years, although the demographic shift from wild ones subject to political removal (namely, bison) to cows is significant.  

What has changed, of course, is the human-community's use of fossil fuels.  When you compare it to the environmental impact of shipping fruits and vegetables to rich markets, the climate case against cows tends to fade.  

ETA:  not to mention, it avoids the whole late-20th-century problem of so many human eaters thinking that eating "beef" means eating "steaks".  Is whole-animal eating an environmental problem in a world where so many people insist on air-conditioning?  

Sorry if I'm coming across like a jerk.  I think the marketing/messaging around environmentally impactful decisions is often un-scientific. People eating less beef and more year-round vine-ripened tomatoes . . . sigh.  I find it very frustrating.

On 4/27/2021 at 11:13 AM, Katie Meadow said:

Cows also put out an enormous amount of methane, causing almost 10 percent of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and contributing to climate change."

 

This is really not true.  Even the folks who published the original lone study have retreated from this.  It's more like 2%. 

The total number of ruminants belching methane who roaming the earth has not changed all that much in the last 200 years, although the demographic shift from wild ones subject to political removal (namely, bison) to cows is significant.  

What has changed, of course, is the human-community's use of fossil fuels.  When you compare it to the environmental impact of shipping fruits and vegetables to rich markets, the climate case against cows tends to fade.  

ETA:  not to mention, it avoids the whole late-20th-century problem of so many human eaters thinking that eating "beef" means eating "steaks".  Is whole-animal eating an environmental problem in a world where so many people insist on air-conditioning?  

Sorry if I'm coming across like a jerk.  I think the marketing/messaging around environmentally impactful decisions is often un-scientific. People eating less beef and more year-round vine-ripened tomatoes . . . sigh.  I find it very frustrating.

On 4/27/2021 at 11:13 AM, Katie Meadow said:

Cows also put out an enormous amount of methane, causing almost 10 percent of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and contributing to climate change."

 

This is really not true.  Even the folks who published the original lone study have retreated from this.  It's more like 2%.  The number of ruminants belching methane who roaming the earth has not changed all that much in the last 200 years, although the demographic shift from wild ones subject to political removal (namely, bison) to cows is significant.  

When you compare it to the environmental impact of shipping fruits and vegetables to rich markets, the climate case against cows tends to fade.  

ETA:  not to mention, it avoids the whole late-20th-century problem of so many human eaters thinking that eating "beef" means eating "steaks".  Is whole-animal eating an environmental problem in a world where so many people insist on air-conditioning?  

Sorry if I'm coming across like a jerk.  I think the marketing/messaging around environmentally impactful decisions is often un-scientific. People eating less beef and more year-round vine-ripened tomatoes . . . sigh.  I find it very frustrating.