Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
Thanks for sending all the stuff. Unfortunately although most of those links demonstrate long-term reduction, livestock production still has far more intensive results than a non-meat diet. The carbon footprints of livestock consumption continues to be one of the most CO2 intensive methods of farming and agriculture. And in fact, personal choice at the grocery store is one of the best ways to make a statement. The almighty dollar speaks volumes to lower emissions in this industry. If you have sources on how livestock production can realistically compete with plant-based diets on a per capita emissions output basis, I'd be happy to listen.
Unfortunately you're still dead wrong on telling people to do something without policy. Good example? COVID-19 vaccinations. The majority of our country got them voluntarily without any mandated policy to do so. Why? Because people trust the science. Another one? Smoking. The majority of Canadian's don't smoke, and it's not because smoking is illegal. It's because they trust the science that smoking is bad. So really, your whole point about people need policy to change is just not true. For some things, sure - but people who see the negative effects of things like infections and diseases and understand the consequences of these make rational decisions. People can - and do - apply the same logic to things that have environmental consequences, and take personal responsibility for their actions that perpetuate that.
I must say though, that your response is quite thorough, and with the personal insults you included, you are really a dedicated meat lover and internet warrior!
|
I think here's the crux of why I feel simply asking individuals to make the difference is bad policy:
Quote:
|
Three-quarters (77%) of Canadians agree that human activities contribute to climate change. On the other hand, as many as one in ten (11%) do not believe that human activities have any meaningful impact on our climate.
|
Quote:
Canadians love their meat, as fewer than three in ten (28% vs. 41% globally) say they would eat less meat in order to limit their own contribution to climate change, a figure which edges out only Australia (27%), the United States (27%), and Japan (23%). The same holds true for dairy, as just two in ten (22% vs. 35% globally) would eat and drink fewer dairy products in order to limit their contribution to climate change.
Just one in four (24%) Canadians are willing to avoid flying for the betterment of the environment, a figure which not only tracks well below the global average (41%) but is lowest, among all countries surveyed. Alas, Canadians want to see their government act on climate change, yet many do not want to have to take any actions of their own, to help the cause.
|
And this is pretty consistent everywhere. People by their nature are comsumption-aholics.
https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-and...As-Coronavirus
As for your smoking analogy, the real reason for the declines is policy not personal agency. That's been borne out in the data.
I don't think people choosing greener options is a bad idea, I just don't think waiting for that to happen will make industrial emissions drop at all