this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
289 points (92.6% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5243 readers
496 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You have evidence that farming 10 billion+ kangaroos (it would probably have to be closer to 15 billion, based on the weight differences, ~200 lb/roo vs ~2000 lb/cow) can be done without any compounding burdens, e.g., land use changes, increasing the CO2/kg?

Are there a lot of studies in industrial-scale kangaroo farming? I'm very much interested in evidence on how we could sustainably manage and farm tens of billions of animals to feed a global population at today's levels of meat consumption.

If you're comparing the footprint of wild caught kangaroos with industrially farmed beef you're comparing apples to oranges. One cannot be a substitute for the other because they exist on tremendously different scales. Unless of course you have evidence on how we manage wild kangaroos to feed 7 billion people. If you do, please oh please share. I am definitely interested in the evidence!

In not disagreeing with what was presented, that wild caught kangaroo is lower carbon intensity than industrially farmed beef, I'm only disagreeing with the clear implication of that statement and its context; that we could somehow swap one for the other and not have to change our levels of consumption. So please, show me the data on global-population-feeding scale kangaroo farming, I'll retract my previous statement and issue a formal apology in the Australian Times.

[–] Cypher@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don’t recall saying that kangaroo could or should replace beef globally. You’ve taken my observation of a single data point and practically built an army of straw men.

Congratulations it is entirely clear that you are so blinded by whatever ideology you possess that you cannot critically assess new information or meaningfully participate in any discussion.

[–] crazyCat@sh.itjust.works -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You’ve got this all so backwards it’s mind numbing. Everything the other person says was correct.

[–] Cypher@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

Kangaroos dont fart methane you fucking moron.

Unlike cows.

Even if you replaced all land used by cows with kangaroos they would be lower emissions but I never fucking said that to start with.

I observed that kangaroos are lower GHG emissions than tofu per kg you illiterate fuck.