Sunday, July 08, 2007

In which I agree with PETA

PETA has pointed out that if "Save the Earth from Global Warming" concerts are going to be taken seriously, there should be no meat served at any venue. Wembley Urged To Take Meat Off Live Earth Menu:
Organisers of the Live Earth concerts should not sell burgers or hot dogs at the high profile gigs, an animal rights group claimed today.

Peta said that selling meat at a concert for the environment would be like selling cigarettes at an anti-cancer fundraiser because of the amount of greenhouse gas emitted by the meat farming industry.

... Peta campaigner Yvonne Taylor said that it would be "hypocritical" if the damage caused by the industry was overlooked at the concert, and said that the group had written to the managing director of Wembley Stadium, Alex Horne, urging him not to sell meat at the event.

She said: "There's no such thing as a meat eating environmentalist.

...It would be hypocritical to be serving meat at an event for the environment, and if you really cared about the environment, you wouldn't be eating meat in the first place."
Ms Taylor is right. If you think "Climate Change" is the biggest threat ever to face humankind - and requires immediate, drastic action - then you should never eat farm produced meat. And no milk or eggs, either, for reasons we shall examine..

The UN has told us:
Cattle-rearing generates more global warming greenhouse gases, as measured in CO2 equivalent, than transportation...
So, ordering a Big Mac is a more serious environmental infraction than buying it at the drive-through window. Cows, you see, are methane emitters. Methane is over 20 times more potent a "climate change" agent than is carbon dioxide. The Wall Street Journal notes here, Cows, Climate Change and Carbon Credits, that:
Methane accounts for 16% of global greenhouse-gas emissions, according to the International Energy Agency. That is far less than the most prevalent greenhouse gas, CO2, which accounts for 75% of the global total. But methane is an attractive early target because it generates a big environmental bang for the buck. The methane produced by the manure of a typical 1,330-pound cow translates into about five tons of CO2 per year. That is about the same amount generated annually by a typical U.S. car, one getting 20 miles per gallon and traveling 12,000 miles per year.
Another consequence of your carnivorous disregard for the environment is farm-animal defecation. The more meat, eggs and milk you consume the more sh*t happens, and its decomposition produces nitrous oxide. Nitrous oxide is 296 times more "climate change" potent than carbon dioxide.

The UN again:

When emissions from land use and land use change are included, the livestock sector accounts for 9 per cent of CO2 deriving from human-related activities, but produces a much larger share of even more harmful greenhouse gases. It generates 65 per cent of human-related nitrous oxide, which has 296 times the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CO2. Most of this comes from manure.
The byproduct of carnivore necessity - manure production - is a grave "climate change" threat. How you define "manure" and how you view the climate change prophets will determine your response.

To be clear, as an "anthropogenic climate change" believer, your mission, should you decide to accept it, must be to immediately stop eating meat, eggs and milk. And probably rice, too, since rice paddies are a major methane producer.

It's either strict vegetarianism, or picketing McDonald's until they offer methane and nitrous oxide "offset credits" for each burger they sell. This might be accomplished by insisting that for every cow McDonald's serves up, an acre of rice paddy is taken out of production. It's WAGWD.

No comments: