In the past, crops like soy were bred for high yields to the detriment of taste and texture for the sake of cheap animal feed. Now, when we need alt proteins, we have low quality ingredients. Some scientists are trying to change that.
Me for ⬇️.
Follow
Jack McGovan
@jack_mcgovan
Freelance writer / 
for answers on building a better world / Climate, food, future society / Hate mail: jackmcgovan(at)protonmail(dot)com / (he/him) 
for answers on building a better world / Climate, food, future society / Hate mail: jackmcgovan(at)protonmail(dot)com / (he/him) Berlin, DeutschlandJoined May 2012
Jack McGovan’s Tweets
Killing wild animals for no reason during a global mass extinction doesn't really seem like the smartest idea to me, but then, based on the article, it seems this decision is driven more by the bloodlust of hunters than reason or logic.
1
1
3
Show this thread
Research from earlier this year in Denmark found that wolves only kill livestock if there is no natural prey around i.e they eat sheep out of necessity not preference.
1
1
3
Show this thread
People are now allowed to shoot wolves in Brandenburg (area outside of Berlin) because some of them killed livestock. This is despite there being no evidence that it will actually help solve the problem.
2
1
2
Show this thread
"The spread of the virus to new species poses potential risks to wildlife and provides the virus with new chances to mutate and adapt to mammalian hosts."
Maybe it's worth worrying more about the impact of this rather than a 96 year old woman dying 🤷.
1
1
Show this thread
We probably need to be worrying less about stamps at the minute and more about changing every day things like using fossil fuels and eating meat.
Quote Tweet
It is hard to overstate to non-Brits (and some Commonwealthers) how much every day stuff changes with the Queen's death: our stamps, our coins, our banknotes, the Queen's Speech, Queen's Counsel: even our national anthem will change and people while find it hard to switch.
Show this thread
1
1
5
Show this thread
Topics to follow
Sign up to get Tweets about the Topics you follow in your Home timeline.
Carousel
So the idea that a false social reality exists? I'm on board.
But that 66-80% of Americans are secretly hoping for an eco-revolution on the scale needed to stop the climate crisis? I'm very, very sceptical.
1
2
Show this thread
Other studies show that people who support climate policies don't really get which ones are important, or what the consequences of said policies are.
For example, stopping deforestation is popular, eating less meat – which drives deforestation – isn't.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @keithalexander and @NoelFCass
My concern with this framing is that people don't understand which actions are more important, so the policies they might accept aren't as strong as they maybe need to be.
That is, imo, the key finding from the data presented, even though it's great people want policy changes.
1
3
4
Show this thread
The study asks people about very vague policies that don't really discuss the consequences.
Who isn't going to support "100% renewable energy by 2035" as a statement in itself? Add the caveat that it means reducing their energy consumption, and I'm sure support would drop a lot.
1
Show this thread
It's cool that this study highlights that more people probably care about climate than it seems as it encourages people to speak about it, which can only be a positive thing.
But I'm sceptical of some of the other points made.
1
Show this thread
Finally, individual action can pave the way for impactful #climate policies.
Berlin’s university canteens adopted a mostly #PlantBased menu in 2021, a change made possible by 13.5% of the city’s student population identifying as vegan. 4/4
2
3
There's so much evidence that behaviour change is a useful tactic for bringing about wider system changes – especially when done by wealthy people i.e readers of the FT – and social scientists in the field are pretty clear about that.
1
5
Show this thread
The irony of a climate scientist (Mann), who tries so hard to convince the world to listen to the science of his field, ignoring the science of another field (the social sciences) would be funny if it wasn't helping to destroy the planet.
1
2
10
Show this thread
I was reading through a paper this morning and came across an interesting point: as renewable energy gets cheaper, it becomes less profitable for energy companies.
There's literally no incentive for energy companies to go green – nationalisation is looking like the only option.
1
1
6
Show this thread
Remember after Seaspiracy when fisheries scientists were furious, saying their industry was all about protecting and helping marine life?
Still waiting on the evidence of that.
Quote Tweet
They actually did it. Freya the walrus has been killed by the Directorate of Fisheries in Norway.
Utterly disgraceful. direkte.vg.no/nyhetsdognet/n
Show this thread
1
12
45
Focusing conversations about behaviours on biophysical impacts (emissions etc) misses the importance of the social impact of decisions – one person or multiple peoples' decision to go vegan, or stop flying, a long time ago has now grown into a movement.
2
Show this thread
Good story r.e behaviour change. My decision to go vegan happened 1) when I moved for uni and 2) people showed me how to cook vegan food.
Now, I've inspired several people to go vegan too. Spreadsheets and scary reports aren't necessarily the key to getting people to change.
Quote Tweet
Read how @GlobalEcoGuy gives the middle finger to ExxonMobil, & how a friend inspired me to change my behaviour in a way my spreadsheets never did.
wired.com/story/the-psyc by @grace_huckins @WIRED
2
5
Show this thread
Hopefully this elicits the same kind of outrage that cyclists receive from drivers, given that this is infinitely more dangerous than more people using bikes.
1
Biggest interest rate rise for 25 years, energy bills through the roof, and the Bank of England say we're heading for a deep recession within months.
Meanwhile the PM has disappeared on holiday while his successors talk about 'woke' diversity training and gender neutral toilets.
264
3,863
12.7K
Yeah, I studied chemistry in the Netherlands and Shell were mentioned *a lot* because they funded research in the department.
There's a lot of social licence going round for fossil fuel companies in universities, which I'm sure influenced some students to go work for one.
Quote Tweet
Fossil fuel companies often sponsor science education. Maybe to influence content, but also to recruit support for their activities.
Giving influence and praise for their involvement extends their social license. We can study science without them.
Here are ones I know:
Show this thread
1
7
I wrote about monkeypox, the social vulnerability of gay men, and what we get wrong about AIDS history, for
13
452
959
Show this thread
“We should say: It’s not about who you are. It’s about what you’re doing. And we’re not going to stigmatize it. But just know that you’re at greater risk if you fit this profile.”
Show this thread
Prioritising MSM for the monkeypox vaccine is exactly the same as prioritising elderly people for the COVID-19 vaccine i.e the community most at risk is getting the help they need first.
That's good public health policy, not discrimination.
1
4
Show this thread
Working so much is a climate issue as excessive production drives consumption and encourages people to adopt convenient, yet damaging, behaviours.
There's no sustainable future without addressing how we work.
Quote Tweet
Am I the only one that sees a problem with working 8-9 hours a day and then going home to having about 4 hours to yourself which includes getting ready for the next day??? This is not life…
Show this thread
3
14
Even if we banned all private jets or the ultra rich, we wouldn't even get close to our climate goals. Please practice what you preach because you're not so different to Kylie Jenner when compared to most people on this planet.
1
1
1
Show this thread
"We should forbid the low-cost flights where you sometimes have two people go from Paris to Madrid or from Edinburgh to Vienna. It’s a high-cost flight for people in my country. They pay the price of that." – Madagascar's climate minister.
1
2
Show this thread
Seeing this shared around a lot and I absolute agree: screw everyone with a private jet, let's eat them.
Problem is that if you're part of the wealthiest 10% (i.e average EU/American citizen), other people in the world look at you the same way.
1
1
3
Show this thread
To answer the question myself, I would only fly in emergencies.
I'm privileged in that I can work from my laptop and am able to spend massive amounts of time traveling to far off places. We need more worker flexibility like this so people can still see the world without flying!
1
Show this thread
This isn't me just digging at individuals, rather the systems that encourage international travel as a way to progress in one's career.
It also allows people with certain jobs (like academics) to excuse their flying, where others (like plumbers) won't have that option.
1
Show this thread
A lot of people in this thread are talking about flying only for work, and it's great to see people making commitments to fly less.
But it also reveals that certain work cultures need to change because nobody's job is so important that they *have* to fly.
Quote Tweet
I'm interest in whether and how people constrain how often they fly. If you limit your flying, what rules do you apply? And how do people respond when you say "I can't come because I'm not flying"?
Genuinely interested. This seems like a good day to ask this question.
1
1
5
Show this thread
The ruling class were killing their own family members for inheritance for centuries, so I can't say I'm surprised they are willing to let all of us burn to protect their economic interests.
2
And for clarity, I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the language or whatever, it's just cool that someone is arguing against the apparent God given right to fly abroad when we live in a society where people think recycling aeroplanes is more sustainable than not flying.
1
5
Show this thread
Two things I want to shoot into the 🌞 today (apart from the usual):
1. Ppl defending their indefensible carbon-intensive lifestyles as "convenient" or "inevitable" or "comfortable." It's like listening to alcoholics or heroin addicts, in many ways. Listen up. Perhaps ...
1/
21
214
577
Show this thread
It's actually really refreshing to see someone make these kinds of points on a mainstream platform.
Quote Tweet
"The climate crisis is worse than both World Wars and the Great Recession - if we don't stop flying the world's poorest will die"
@DonnachadhMc says holidaymakers are "criminals", he says he has no sympathy for "so-called" victims of airport chaos.
@ClaudiaLizaTV | #JeremyVine
4:58
82.2K views
1
3
19
Show this thread
Many people are taking more action these days, and it's really great to see. But please can we let this myth of top-down system change die, so we can actually get on with what needs to be done to stop this existential crisis.
1
4
Show this thread
The only way to get them to change is to threaten what they care about i.e wealth and power. As a movement, this means we need to show that there are consequences for them not caring – economic damage via mass boycotts (changing consumption) and more radical disruptive action.
1
1
3
Show this thread
The idea of a top down solution to the climate crisis seems less likely every day. Climate policies have never been so popular, but these people just don't care because what are the immediate consequences if they don't?
1
1
6
Show this thread
Media hostility towards trans people in the UK comes from the same irrational place as this, and I would encourage people to read The Transgender Issue by Shon Faye for a deeper understanding on why standing against it is important for widespread emancipation.
1
4
Show this thread