Animals don't fly, don't drive, don't use public transport, don't need a factory to make toilet paper, don't use electricity for heating, they do fertilize the land, increase biodiversity, etc, humans v animals who wins?
-
-
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
It takes about 100 calories of grain to produce just 12 calories of chicken or 3 calories worth of beef. Just 55 percent of the world's crop calories are actually eaten directly by people whereas 36 percent is used for animal feed.
-
Genuinely interested by this, you got a source for it?
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Bjorn, you're missing some big things here. Yes, the Green Revolution has increased food security but it's led to algal blooms and GHG emissions from the nitrogen use. Industrial agriculture also leads to massive pools of animal waste, bacterial contamination, overuse of...
-
...antibiotics, soil depletion because of monocropping and potential depletion of groundwater. Here's a nice quick video on some problems with industrial farming: https://youtu.be/UkMZJrbCRdQ And here's a video on soil erosion: https://youtu.be/AOefA-bSduM
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
I haven't noticed so much shaming nor a lot of vegetarianism promotions by politicians, could you post some data to underline your statement?
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
My understanding was that it would be more effective to focus on agricultural research, than to try to persuade people into vegetarianism. Which would be unlikely to work and would produce little CO2 reduction. A cost benefit view rather than a dismissal of vegetarianism.
Keskustelun loppu
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.