196

255 grams per week. That's the short answer to how much meat you can eat without harming the planet. And that only applies to poultry and pork.

Beef cannot be eaten in meaningful quantities without exceeding planetary boundaries, according to an article published by a group of DTU researchers in the journal Nature Food. So says Caroline H. Gebara, postdoc at DTU Sustain and lead author of the study."

Our calculations show that even moderate amounts of red meat in one's diet are incompatible with what the planet can regenerate of resources based on the environmental factors we looked at in the study. However, there are many other diets—including ones with meat—that are both healthy and sustainable," she says.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 82 points 1 week ago

I don't like these kinds of articles because they always have an undertone of making it a matter of personal consumer choice as opposed to systemic change.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

Systemic change doesn’t happen without political will. Political will depends on personal opinions. Try to bring in systemic change with an election win but not overwhelming support then you get reactionary backlash like we’re seeing right now.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

Which is why I think it's better to start with some kind of populist attack on the excesses of the super rich. How many beef burgers was Katy Perry's publicity stunt in low orbit?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 week ago

WRI published an interesting article on this subject a week or so ago:

https://www.wri.org/insights/climate-impact-behavior-shifts

Systemic pressure [e.g. voting / collective action] creates enabling conditions, but individuals need to complete the loop with our daily choices. It's a two-way street — bike lanes need cyclists, plant-based options need people to consume them. When we adopt these behaviors, we send critical market signals that businesses and governments respond to with more investment.

WRI's research quantifies the individual actions that matter most. While people worldwide tend to vastly overestimate the impact of some highly visible activities, such as recycling, our analysis reveals four significant changes that deliver meaningful emissions reductions.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I like the bikelane analogy, actually.

It shows clearly that (a) yes you do need activism (like Critical Mass) and a few crazy ones that will bike regardless of the adverse conditions, (b) political will to shift towards bikelanes, (c ) wider adoption but also sustained activism to build better bikelanes (not painted gutters on the side of stroads, but protected lanes, connected with transit).

We definitely do not lack (a), but (c ) FOLLOWS (b). If you want to go from "just the crazies" to "everyone and their 5 year old", systemic change needs to be backed by very concrete top-down action.

Without very meaningful (b), telling people to change their eating habits while stuff is otherwise the same is like telling people to take their kids to school on bikes next to crazy SUV traffic: it's not happening.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago

If we simply stopped subsidizing meat consumption entirely the rising cost would shift more people to plant based diets.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago

Oh boy, the red meaters are going to downvote the shit out of this.

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 41 points 1 week ago

Meh. I wouldn’t eat chicken these days either. You should see how it’s made. Corporate farming is abhorrent.

[-] tissek@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago

I'm kinda in this camp as well. Barely eat any meat and the meat I do buy is from small local producers where I can meet (hihi) and greet the animals.

[-] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago

How does that work? Do you never eat meat when you go out?

There aren't a ton of places in the world with a good supply of vegetarian/vegan food AND enough of an ag industry you can go around petting your meat.

[-] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 week ago

A majority of restaurants where I live offer at least one vegetarian option on their menu, and commonly also a vegan option (they might be the same)

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

This has been my rule of thumb for a while. It should be clear as day that 9 billion people cannot all chow on hefty ruminant mammals. We would run out of land even before it cooked the climate.

The problem with chicken farming is the cruelty.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] HappySkullsplitter@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

Well, beef is already so damn expensive that I can't remember the last time we bought it.

Meat-wise It's just been a steady cycle of chicken, turkey, and pork at our house

I had no idea we were so environmentally avant-garde

[-] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago

Good on you!

When my wife and I started being conscious about our food intake, it wasn't too bad to give up red meat, and shrink meat portions / add veggies.

It took us months of learning / trying new recipes to actually get to the point where we were consistently eating fewer than 14 meat-centric meals a week (lunch/dinner). Once we got comfortable cooking plant based dishes though, we had built up so much momentum that we went from 1 or 2 plant based meals a week to 100% in just a few weeks.

It takes a long time to build up that comfort level, but at some point a switch just flips and the new "normal" is just as easy as what you were used to.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] wordcraeft@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 week ago

The article barely touches on fish. It suggests fish, eggs, and dairy are mostly fine, but doesn't explicitly say that.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 10 points 1 week ago

Dairy has the same problems as beef. Remember, you also have to grow food to feed the food, so it's inherently a net loss of calories.

[-] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 days ago

And on the animal ethics side dairy is often considered worse - forced endless cycle of birth and separation of mothers from their calves, most calves slaughtered. It's not all sunshine and rainbows just because you aren't eating the corpses.

Has any society in human history been able to afford eating meat regularly? My great great great great grandfather’s journals talk about a lot of stew and veggies and he was wealthy enough that he founded a small city. We never ate that much meat.

Yes, Inuit for example have a diet largely based on fish and meat. Steppe herders like mongols are another example of a culture with regular meat consumption.

Medieval Barcelona had a higher meat consumption than today. The article also gives other examples of high meat consumption from medieval England and Vikings.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
196 points (90.8% liked)

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

6473 readers
307 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS