Bang on the money, Plum - I don't eat nearly as much meat as I used to but, when I do it's almost always a cut from the hard working parts of the animal that needs 'low and slow' cooking; e.g. pork and lamb shoulder, oxtail, beef shin and my all time favourite, pig or beef cheek.
We actually eat more meat and dairy products than we have historically, the 'post war diet' we now know tended to be healthier and relied a lot less on the higher % of meat / dairy (& land needed for) than present consumption and diet, add to this significant increase in population in recent history and the problem becomes (one of the reasons= where we are now
It's not a pleasant subject but what's your own plans for your own disposal? A. Burial which is basically landfill. B. Cremation which will cause CO2 pollution. C. Stripped down for spares. Then one of A or B.
A good well thought out article here, in the SUN of all places. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10809227/vegan-fad-wreck-british-industry/
I used to know a chap who we reckoned that,when he died, he would be dried out, sold by the ounce and smoked.
that reminds me of the old marriage is just like a deck of cards - starts with hearts and diamonds and finishes with a club and a spade
A suitably sized gravitationally directed asteroid would eliminate all the high methane generating herbivores on Earth. Same source as caused dinosaur extinction. The few humans who can anticipate and survive such a disaster would not need to worry about the methane impact on global warming, should they plan it correctly. Start digging deep bunkers folks, or set up habitable stations on the moon or Mars. # askAliceRoberts
It's good to see that the powers in charge are looking in on our forum (the font of all knowledge) and taking action. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...5m-homes-Government-clamps-air-pollution.html
I'd forgotten this also...an excellent read. Prompted by Balkan's resurrection of the topic (previous post) please log in to view this image
As much as I support action against climate change I did find this video a bit sick-making, especially when Monbiot starts... https://www.theguardian.com/environ...film-on-solutions-to-the-climate-crisis-video
When tree planting actually damages ecosystems. Increasing the tree cover in savanna and grassland can mean plant and animal species which prefer open, well-lit environments are pushed out. Studies from South Africa, Australia and Brazil indicate that unique biodiversity is lost as tree cover increases. This is because adding trees can alter how these grassy ecosystems function. More trees means fires are less likely, but regular fire removes vegetation that shades ground layer plants. Not only do herbivores like zebra and antelope that feed on grass have less to eat, but more trees may also increase their risk of being eaten as predators have more cover. More trees can also reduce the amount of water in streams and rivers. As a result of humans suppressing wildfires in the Brazilian savannas, tree cover increased and the amount of rain reaching the ground shrank. One study found that in grasslands, shrublands and cropland worldwide where forests were created, streams shrank by 52% and 13% of all streams dried up completely for at least a year. Grassy ecosystems in the tropics provide surface water for people to drink and grazing land for their livestock, not to mention fuel, food, building materials and medicinal plants. Tree planting here could harm the livelihoods of millions. https://qz.com/africa/1676424/tree-planting-can-actually-damages-ecosystems/
The bots are faking / denying the truth of climate change... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-51595285