Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts (www.nature.com)

submitted 4 weeks ago by ButtBidet@hexbear.net to c/vegan@hexbear.net

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

All environmental indicators showed a positive association with amounts of animal-based food consumed. Dietary impacts of vegans were 25.1% (95% uncertainty interval, 15.1–37.0%) of high meat-eaters (≥100 g total meat consumed per day) for greenhouse gas emissions, 25.1% (7.1–44.5%) for land use, 46.4% (21.0–81.0%) for water use, 27.0% (19.4–40.4%) for eutrophication and 34.3% (12.0–65.3%) for biodiversity. At least 30% differences were found between low and high meat-eaters for most indicators. Despite substantial variation due to where and how food is produced, the relationship between environmental impact and animal-based food consumption is clear and should prompt the reduction of the latter.

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] AernaLingus@hexbear.net 27 points 4 weeks ago

The overall result isn't surprising, but the methane stats are particularly impressive: vegans are in an entirely different postal code compared to everyone else.

[-] LocalMaxima@hexbear.net 19 points 4 weeks ago

vegetarians eat less dairy overall but more cheese than meat eaters

not beating the allegations

Also, the high meat category is 100+ grams (around uk average) and the average USian meat consumption is close to 350g/d, so US vegans might be single digits percentages of their meat eating counterparts if a similar methodology was applied

[-] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 17 points 4 weeks ago

shocked-pikachu

[-] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 5 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

I'm kind of surprised how small the difference is w.r.t. carbon emissions, but I saw that they're counting land use differently and I guess not accounting for the increased carbon emissions from requiring much more forest land to be burned down and turned into pasture to support meat diets?

[-] Glitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 weeks ago

I would suggest that eating meat !== burning down forest land. That's a policy and regulation issue that could be corrected or severely reduced. It's the policy makers, paid out by industry lobbies, who allow for such absurdity

[-] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 4 points 4 weeks ago

Where do you think pasture land comes from

[-] Glitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 weeks ago

From the cheapest lots available. Prices are dictated or influenced by legislation. If we can pay farmers to NOT grow corn, we can pay farmers to use specific kinds of lands, revitalize dying landscapes, and support natural ecosystems.

[-] ButtBidet@hexbear.net 3 points 4 weeks ago

I guess you're going to do your part to stop supporting those industries?

this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2024

58 points (98.3% liked)

vegan

6659 readers

8 users here now

:vegan-liberation:

Welcome to /c/vegan and congratulations on your first steps toward overcoming liberalism and ascending to true leftist moral superiority.

Rules

No plant-based diet bullshit or promotion of plant-based capitalism. Veganism isn't about you, it's about historical materialist anti-speciesism, anti-racist animalization, and animal liberation. Ethical vegans only.
No omni apologists or carnists. Babystepping is for libs, and we're not here to pat you on the back. Good faith questions and debate about how to fight for animal liberation are allowed.
No advocating violence to any species for any reason. If you think this is negotiable GTFO. This includes but is not limited to animal testing, slaughter, and mass euthanasia. Anything that promotes speciesism or the commodification of animals will be removed.
Use Content Warnings and NSFW tags for triggering content. Especially if a comrade requests it.
Questions about diet belong in c/food. It's also a great place to share recipes.
In all sections of the site, you must follow the Hexbear.net Code of Conduct.