Off Topic Climate Strike

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Plum said:
Can't beat a lamb shoulder cooked for about 6 hours, my mouth's watering just thinking about it. Sorry about this Den...

You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...

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.
 
highpeak tiger said:
Cut meat and dairy intake 'by a fifth', report urges

So if a fifth of the population goes vegan, the rest of us can carry on as normal
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
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

You must log in or register to see media
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edelman
tigerscanada said:
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

You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...
The moon is already taken...

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-49265125
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigerscanada
balkan tiger said:
A problem of unimaginable complexity, not helped by big business and money interests.

Think it was Charon that mentioned coal usage, I remember humping sacks of coal around in the late 70's and the introduction of smoke free zones. What a relief when a house wanted a sack of coke rather than nutty slack. So all those years ago we got rid of all that pollution and smoke which was bad for every ones health
And yet today wood burning stoves are the eco warriors choice for heating, because it is sustainable. As a layman that seems as stupid as **** to me. And surprise surprise all the kids living in cities are getting breathing problems again, but that's because of cars. But hang on we were all pushed to get rid of our lead polluting petrol driven cars and buy diesel because that was better for the environment. Now diesel is the fuel of Satan and electric cars are the way forward, another trip to the car dealership looms. Best not mention materials needed to make batteries and what to do with them when they reach the end of their useful life.
And back to coal It has been the fastest growing energy source worldwide in the 21st century, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA) ?????????????
Click to expand...

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
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigerscanada
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/
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron Burguvdy
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back