Dogs twice as bad for environment as SUV's

[EddyBeers]

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/environment/Polluting%20pets%20devastating%20impact%20best%20f riend/2367119/story.html

Combine the land required to generate its food and a "medium" sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) -- around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car.

But as always, the solution to the problem is not in my backyard

Sylvie Comont, proud owner of seven cats and two dogs -- the environmental equivalent of a small fleet of cars -- says defiantly, "Our animals give us so much that I don't feel like a polluter at all.


"I think the love we have for our animals and what they contribute to our lives outweighs the environmental considerations.


"I don't want a life without animals," she told AFP.

[starseed]

Finally people will start to realize the importance of banning ownership of dogs. What will happen in 20 years when our children find out we could have stopped owning dogs to save the world, yet did not?

Dave Bronconnier, get on it.

[stang]

Maybe dess was onto something....

[Weiser Wonder]

I think the environmental movement would have much more success if we decided to ban people.

[Bertuzzied]

Thank god i have a hybrid dog!

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

I don't understand how this makes sense.
What are they comparing?
Okay, they can come up with how much land it takes to produce the food that a dog eats, but what are they comparing that to? Last time I checked, we don't grow car fuel.

[Cowperson]

Combine the land required to generate its food and a "medium" sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) -- around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car.

Not if they're livin' off da fat o' da lan' . . . . . .



Cowperson

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

I don't understand how this makes sense.
What are they comparing?
Okay, they can come up with how much land it takes to produce the food that a dog eats, but what are they comparing that to? Last time I checked, we don't grow car fuel.

[HPLovecraft]

Are they really comparing living organisms to cars? Really?

Good God.

And cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo -- owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease.

Better kill off the human race because we're sh*tting in the toilet like mad. What a terrible attempt at rationalization.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

I don't understand how this makes sense.
What are they comparing?
Okay, they can come up with how much land it takes to produce the food that a dog eats, but what are they comparing that to? Last time I checked, we don't grow car fuel.

They're comparing how much energy each consumes, not whether we grow this energy or not. We might grow the food for dogs, but it still costs us non-renewable energy to process it into dog food.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

I don't understand how this makes sense.
What are they comparing?
Okay, they can come up with how much land it takes to produce the food that a dog eats, but what are they comparing that to? Last time I checked, we don't grow car fuel.

Yes............yes we do.

[jammies]

Other potential positive steps include avoiding walking your dog in wildlife-rich areas and keeping your cat indoors at night when it has a particular thirst for other, smaller animals' blood.

I was wondering why he keeps asking me to buy him a little cape.

[Weiser Wonder]

All these stories should tell us is not everyone can live in the suburbs with a big house, 3 kids, 2 dogs, and 4 cars. Suburbs are not viable at this point. I don't think conclusions need to be made beyond that. No need to judge those who really like their 4x4 or those that love animals. Everything leaves an environmental footprint, each person has to learn to manage theirs responsibly.

[iggypop]

carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle

Combine the land required to generate its food and a "medium" sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) -- around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car.

Wow, what skewed statistics. Considering the average distance driven is closer to 15000 miles (~24000 km), it is no where near double.

What a weird comparison overall.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by iggypop

Wow, what skewed statistics. Considering the average distance driven is closer to 15000 miles (~24000 km), it is no where near double.

What a weird comparison overall.

Controversial position = better book sales

[Puppet Guy]

so do I lessen the damage if I ride a St. Bernard to work instead of driving?

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Puppet Guy

so do I lessen the damage if I ride a St. Bernard to work instead of driving?

Apparently that would be even worse.

[burn_this_city]

Hilarious. If my dog eats out of the garbage regularily does that offset his environmental footprint?

[Torture]

And cat poo can be even more toxic than doggy doo -- owners who flush their litter down the toilet ultimately infect sea otters and other animals with toxoplasma gondii, which causes a killer brain disease.

Who cleans their cats litter out into the toilet?

[octothorp]

Really, really weird stats. I'll assume they're right that a dog's food consumption equals 0.84 hectares of agricultural land. Apply that by about 121 kilos of CO2 per hectare for barley production*, and dogs come in right around 100 kgs of CO2 per year.

Compare that with a 2006 Nissan Pathfinder that goes 10,000 km a year (as Iggypop noted, a very skewed number), which generated 3.75 tonnes of CO2. I'd love to hear where the authors get the missing 3.65 tonnes from.

*Couldn't find a great source of barley CO2 footprint, but ended up using a table in this PDF about beer production. http://www.climateconservancy.org/cca_fattire.pdf

Edit: Ah, from reading elsewhere about this article, apparently their SUV calculations don't factor in tailpipe emissions.