Meat rationing

[Saniflush]

to save the polar bears......


Sure.  Right.  Like that is gonna happen.  I can't believe these people can find a way to take themselves seriously! 


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/30/food.ethicalliving

People will have to be rationed to four modest portions of meat and one litre of milk a week if the world is to avoid run-away climate change, a major new report warns.

The report, by the Food Climate Research Network, based at the University of Surrey, also says total food consumption should be reduced, especially "low nutritional value" treats such as alcohol, sweets and chocolates.

It urges people to return to habits their mothers or grandmothers would have been familiar with: buying locally in-season products, cooking in bulk and in pots with lids or pressure cookers, avoiding waste and walking to the shops - alongside more modern tips such as using the microwave and internet shopping.

The report goes much further than any previous advice after mounting concern about the impact of the livestock industry on greenhouse gases and rising food prices. It follows a four-year study of the impact of food on climate change and is thought to be the most thorough study of its kind.

Tara Garnett, the report's author, warned that campaigns encouraging people to change their habits voluntarily were doomed to fail and urged the government to use caps on greenhouse gas emissions and carbon pricing to ensure changes were made. "Food is important to us in a great many cultural and symbolic ways, and our food choices are affected by cost, time, habit and other influences," the report says. "Study upon study has shown that awareness-raising campaigns alone are unlikely to work, particularly when it comes to more difficult changes."

The report's findings are in line with an investigation by the October edition of the Ecologist magazine, which found that arguments for people to go vegetarian or vegan to stop climate change and reduce pressure on rising food prices were exaggerated and would damage the developing world in particular, where many people depend on animals for essential food, other products such as leather and wool, and for manure and help in tilling fields to grow other crops.

Instead, it recommended cutting meat consumption by at least half and making sure animals were fed as much as possible on grass and food waste which could not be eaten by humans.

"The notion that cows and sheep are four-legged weapons of mass destruction has become something of a distraction from the real issues in both climate change and food production," said Pat Thomas, the Ecologist's editor.

The head of the United Nations intergovernmental panel on climate change, Rajendra Pachauri, also sparked global debate this month when he urged people to have at least one meat-free day a week.

The Food Climate Research Network found that measured by production, the UK food sector produces greenhouse gases equivalent to 33m tonnes of carbon. Measured by consumption - including imports - the total rises to 43.3m tonnes. Both figures work out at under one fifth of UK emissions, but they exclude the indirect impacts of actions such as clearing rainforest for cattle and crops, which other studies estimate would add up to 5% to 20% of global emissions.

The report found the meat and dairy sectors together accounted for just over half of those emissions; potatoes, fruit and vegetables for 15%; drinks and other products with sugar for another 15%; and bread, pastry and flour for 13%.

It also revealed which parts of the food chain were the most polluting. Although packaging has had a lot of media and political attention, it only ranked fifth in importance behind agriculture - especially the methane produced by livestock burping - manufacturing, transport, and cooking and refrigeration at home.

The report calls for meat and dairy consumption to be cut in developed countries so that global production remains stable as the population grows to an estimated 9bn by 2050.

At the same time emissions from farms, transport, manufacturing and retail could be cut, with improvements including more efficient use of fertilisers, feed and energy, changed diets for livestock, and more renewable fuels - leading to a total reduction in emissions from the sector of 50% to 67%, it says.

The UN and other bodies recommend that developed countries should reduce total emissions by 80% by 2050.

However, the National Farmers' Union warned that its own study, with other industry players, published last year, found net emissions from agriculture could only be cut by up to 50% if the carbon savings from building renewable energy sources on farms were taken into account.

The NFU also called for government incentives to help farmers make the changes. "Farmers aren't going to do this out of the goodness of their hearts, because farmers don't have that luxury; many of our members are very hard pressed at the moment," said Jonathan Scurlock, the NFU's chief adviser on renewable energy and climate change.

[kirkAU]

does this mean i need to stop eating baby seals for breakfast?

[DnATL]

does this mean i need to stop eating baby seals for breakfast?

Or you could just eat Seal's baby's momma............

[Saniflush]

does this mean i need to stop eating baby seals for breakfast?

BK told me that you will blow a seal.

[Tarheel]

People will have to be rationed to four modest portions of meat and one litre of milk a week if the world is to avoid run-away climate change, a major new report warns.
...

What kind of absolute bullshit is this?!  This enviro-babblist bullshit linking of food consumption to global climate change is a crock!  This is just another excuse to control the population and create a new tax!

The report, by the Food Climate Research Network, based at the University of Surrey,

Speaking of bullshit...is this a real organization or a couple of enviro-babblist nerds working in some basement somewhere?

also says total food consumption should be reduced, especially "low nutritional value" treats such as alcohol, sweets and chocolates.

WHAT!?  WHAT!?  WHAT!?  Reduce Alcohol consumption!?  Who the hell do these people think they are!?

It also revealed which parts of the food chain were the most polluting. Although packaging has had a lot of media and political attention, it only ranked fifth in importance behind agriculture - especially the methane produced by livestock burping - manufacturing, transport, and cooking and refrigeration at home.

I guess that if we stop refrigerating our food-stuffs (and alcohol) it'll help prevent pollution. 

And what about cooking?  Are we supposed to cook in bulk as they imply earlier in this article or not cook at all?

he NFU also called for government incentives to help farmers make the changes. "Farmers aren't going to do this out of the goodness of their hearts, because farmers don't have that luxury; many of our members are very hard pressed at the moment," said Jonathan Scurlock, the NFU's chief adviser on renewable energy and climate change.

As usual, the government needs to take over!  Or, at least, help with government incentives (which means taxpayer subsidies).


As I said, in the end this anthropogenic global climate change rubbish is just another excuse for taxes.

[Saniflush]

I purposely did not bold a lot of the article to see who would. 
I miterknown you would pick up the slack!

They can take my food but they can't have my beer/bourbon.

Give me bourbon or give me me death!

[Townhallsavoy]

Damnit.  Just when I thought I was doing the world a favor by eating as much beef as possible.

I thought cow farts were responsible for global warming? 

Oh well. 

[AUTiger1]

What kind of absolute bullshit is this?!  This enviro-babblist bullshit linking of food consumption to global climate change is a crock!  This is just another excuse to control the population and create a new tax!
Speaking of bullshit...is this a real organization or a couple of enviro-babblist nerds working in some basement somewhere?

WHAT!?  WHAT!?  WHAT!?  Reduce Alcohol consumption!?  Who the hell do these people think they are!?

Now Now Tarheel, remember these words, "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72"  I guess he will expect the freaking gov't to regulate all that for us.   

Will someone please sneak me some Makers Mark and good ole bacon cheese burger while I am in re-education camp?

http://www.livescience.com/environment/080...lean-green.html  ---since it doesn't work anymore I still have the article I will quote it here.  Another good one from the crazy enviro nuts.  I think this explains where they are getting some of this idea.  Still a crack and a bad idea.

Fat People Have Bigger Carbon Footprints
By Benjamin Radford, LiveScience's Bad Science Columnist
posted: 30 April 2008 09:05 am ET

You can toss your empty soda cans in the recycle bin instead of the garbage, saving energy and reducing landfill. Or you can wear hemp clothes and drive a hybrid car plastered with bumper stickers requesting the salvation of everything from owls to dust mites.

There are lots of little ways to go green, but if you really want to help save the Earth, you can start by dropping a few pounds.

It's no secret that obesity has plenty of personal health consequences; the list of diseases that have been associated with being overweight include higher risk of high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, stroke and less sex, to name only a few. But being fat also has consequences for our planet—often in ways we might not expect.

The fact is that lean is green, and larger people leave larger carbon footprints on the world. A few examples:

Food consumption

There's an old joke about a mother telling her son to finish the food on his plate because there are starving children in Africa. The smart-aleck's response is, "Got a stamp?"

What's not a joke is that there is a finite amount of food in the world, and it is growing scarce. Recent food riots Haiti, Sudan, Yemen, Mexico, Egypt, and other countries are a stark reminder that many people do not have enough to eat. The cost of staple foods such as corn, rice, and wheat are at record highs across the globe, and some can't afford to feed their families.

Meanwhile in the United States, obesity is at an all-time high; two-thirds of adults in the Land of Plenty are overweight or obese. Obesity is perhaps the ultimate symbol of resource consumption; it's visible proof that overweight people already has more than they need—and take more anyway.

The causes of food shortages are varied and complex, but if Americans simply ate less food, there would be more for the rest of world. By some estimates, the average American consumes about 4,000 calories per day; that's twice what they need. Those 2,000 fewer calories would be available for those who truly need the food, and help to conserve Earth's natural resources.

Air pollution

Overweight people create more air pollution than thin people do. It's simple physics: Extra pounds translate into extra fuel in automobiles and airplanes. Extra fuel means increased energy usage, oil drilling, and air pollution.

A 2004 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that for every ten pounds gained by the average American, airlines burned 350 million more gallons of fuel to carry the additional weight. That fuel spewed an estimated 3.8 million extra tons of carbon dioxide into the air.

And as for that smaller hybrid car? It's a good start, but there's not much point in buying fuel-efficient vehicles if you're going to fill that large seat with your extra-large butt; you might as well throw a few sandbags in the trunk. Fuel efficiency drops dramatically with more weight the engine has to pull; the lighter you are, the less gas you burn, the more money you save, and the less pollution you emit.

Of course, going green by going lean is easier said than done, and only part of the problem. But by getting ourselves healthier we also help save the planet. Not a bad deal.

Benjamin Radford is managing editor of the Skeptical Inquirer science magazine. His books and films can be found on his website.

They can bite me.  I think I will order extra fries, wings and ranch dressing tomorrow.   :thumbsup:

[Tarheel]

Damnit.  Just when I thought I was doing the world a favor by eating as much beef as possible.

I thought cow farts were responsible for global warming?  

Oh well. 

I think that the PC term for that is "livestock burping".

...
It also revealed which parts of the food chain were the most polluting. Although packaging has had a lot of media and political attention, it only ranked fifth in importance behind agriculture - especially the methane produced by livestock burping - manufacturing, transport, and cooking and refrigeration at home.
...

[Tarheel]

I purposely did not bold a lot of the article to see who would. 
I miterknown you would pick up the slack!
...

Well...somebody had to do it after the "seal blower" thread hi-jacking.

They can take my food but they can't have my beer/bourbon.
...

"It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugR-Iyp-e1k&eurl=http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Braveheart&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=iurl=http://i2.ytimg.com/vi/ugR-Iyp-e1k/default.jpg

[Tarheel]

Now Now Tarheel, remember these words, "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72"  I guess he will expect the freaking gov't to regulate all that for us.   
...

How could I forget the great words of The Obama!  Thank You!  Thank You, AUTiger1!  We're all citizens of the world.   

...
Will someone please sneak me some Makers Mark and good ole bacon cheese burger while I am in re-education camp?
...

Don't count on it from me...hell, I'll be in there too.

Great article by the way; thanks for posting it.

[Townhallsavoy]

I listened to that Braveheart speech every Friday evening in the fall when I was in high school.

Nothing got me more pumped up to play a football game. 

[AUTiger1]

Well, we didn't get to go to our normal wing place today.  We went to Logan's instead.  I made sure that I got the 16oz Ribeye, extra ranch on my salad and loaded baked potato.  Had a few rolls with that.  Take that enviro nutcases.  I hope the extra pounds made my truck less efficient.   :thumbsup:

[Tarheel]

Well, we didn't get to go to our normal wing place today.  We went to Logan's instead.  I made sure that I got the 16oz Ribeye, extra ranch on my salad and loaded baked potato.  Had a few rolls with that.  Take that enviro nutcases.  I hope the extra pounds made my truck less efficient.   :thumbsup:

You'll be on the list to get charged that Carbon Tax from The Obama's government orcs.