this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
10 points (81.2% liked)
Climate
129 readers
1 users here now
Discussion of global heating, Climate and related issues of mitigation. Other active communities: [email protected] ([email protected]) [email protected] ([email protected]) ClimateAnxietySupport - * Manage your grief.
- * Work to Empower your local community
- * Find viable technical solutions that could work within a context of systemic change General News US News Science
founded 2 years ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean, that's cool and I can get behind eating less meat, but in my lifetime I'm not convinced that people eating meat will be the major contributor to greenhouse gas reduction. This notion always sounds like putting the burden on common folks that are trying to live, rather than companies, countries and organizations that deliberately contribute.
These countries and organizations are destroying the world on our behalf. We like what they do, we buy their products, and we accept it all because it's more convenient, tasty, or otherwise makes our lives better.
We need to do both personal and societal responsibility. We need to stop the pollution at the source AND we need to accept what that means. Stopping agricultural waste for example will mean things like expensive meat, less meat, more ugly looking vegetables, eating more plants. Otherwise it won't happen. There's no dream scenario where we stop the environmental destruction from an environmentally destructive thing and yet we still keep the thing.
This is exact right. Thank you for writing what I wanted to say.