Invest your own money, let compound effect be your leverage, and avoid debt like the plague.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 4
It's been disappointing to say the least about how slow it's been for real science to assert itself over the flood of nonsense the climate change lobby has been producing but finally, we're getting pushback.
Today's subject is about the left's war on meat:
https://co2coalition.org/publications/livestock-me...Methane emissions by livestock have a negligible effect on Earth’s temperature. For example, killing all of the approximately 1.6 billion cattle on Earth in the year 2025, when this paper was written, would only reduce atmospheric methane concentrations enough to change the temperature by ΔT = −0.04 C. Killing all 1.3 billion sheep would lead to a temperature change of ΔT = −0.004 C. New Zealand’s pledge to reduce methane emissions of their livestock by 14% to 24% from those in the year 2017 would change the temperature by ΔT = −0.000005 to − 0.000008 C, far too small to measure. These are maximum temperature savings where methane emissions from domestic livestock are not replaced by other sources (such as wild ruminants and termites) during the inevitable rewilding of managed grasslands and rangelands.So yeah. Fire up your grill and enjoy a steak. You're not killing the planet.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Methane emissions by livestock became a cause celebre for the right more than it was ever a rallying cry on the left.
Methane being unlocked by warming arctic tundra? Now there’s a real issue.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Methane emissions by livestock became a cause celebre for the right more than it was ever a rallying cry on the left.
If by "became a cause celebre" you mean "the right said to tell the left to shove their zero meat nonsense up their behinds", then I agree with you. But generations of kids have been taught/indoctrinated - erroneously - that "cows cause global warming". That was never true, not even close.
No. of Recommendations: 7
"Left's war on meat"??
I guess I'm on the left (at least relative to many people I interact with), and I'm a heavy carnivore. I hate vegetables, and regard them as medicine/pills I need to take even if I don't like it. Vegetarians and vegans are not a significant political force (left or right).
As for the methane associated with meat, it is relatively trivial. "Agricultural" accounts for about 40% of methane, but that includes cultivation (especially rice). You identified a much more dangerous source (melting tundra). Also, I read an article a year or so ago regarding significant methane leaks in production facilities. As I recall, they did some imaging on a facility in L.A. that was leaking like a sieve. And then there are "burps" from the ocean resulting from methane clathrates (among other things).
Meat production can result in a lot of pollution, especially with lax enforcement. Humans produce more methane than ungulates. Not per capita, but the entire population. And our other activities (including decomposition of various wastes from humans and civilization).
Ironically, I produce more methane if I eat vegetables than if I eat meat. :-)
No. of Recommendations: 11
But generations of kids have been taught/indoctrinated - erroneously - that "cows cause global warming". That was never true, not even close.
I agree with you and always have on this point. Cow farts are only a small contributor to global warming- as are the digestive systems of every living creature on earth. God…. Just think of the scope of the problem during the age of dinosaurs!
But here’s my main point. Except for a few rules and regulations (mostly in Europe) limiting nitrogen (excrement) production, cow farts have been a non-issue… as have cow burps, for that matter.
The main beneficiaries of “cow farts produce global warming” have been right wingers who have used the issue in their “liberals are coming for your cow herds!” nonsense, or “Liberals will force you to become vegetarians!”
It’s always been a red meat (sic) issue for the right- based on lying about the scope of the threat to livestock production.
At the end of the day, both liberals and conservatives will be grilling steaks on Memorial Day.
The bigger threat to US farmers and ranchers is Donald Trump.
No. of Recommendations: 3
production, cow farts have been a non-issue… as have cow burps, for that matter.Yeah, left wingers never do the things they say. Except they always do, and then we have to wade through the pretending that the left isn't doing something and That The Right Made It All Up. The list of that stuff is now pretty impressive with my favorites being the Defund the Police gaslighting. Anyway.
https://shs.cairn.info/revue-de-l-ofce-2023-4-page...One of many examples.
Launched in December 2019, the European Green Deal (EGD) is a European Union (EU) initiative that aims at making Europe the first carbon-neutral continent by 2050, in order to keep global warming below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. As an interim target, the EU as a whole must reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 55% below 1990 levels by 2030. This will require efforts from all EU countries and sectors. In this context, the EU agriculture sector faces specific challenges. It has to set out on the path towards sustainable food systems, while at the same time securing food for its 450 million inhabitants. And to the point:
Cattle livestock make a large contribution to CH4 and N2O emissions. Methane is predominantly emitted through enteric fermentation, and due to the particularities of their digestive tract (rumen) cattle emit a lot of methane compared to monogastric (non-ruminant) animals such as pigs or poultry. In 2021, cattle accounted for 85% of enteric fermentation (Figure 1A), which in turn accounted for 48% of total agricultural GHG emissions (Table 2). Manure management (urine and faeces) is another source of GHG emissions (accounting for 17% of total agricultural GHG emissions) and is responsible for additional methane emissions as well as for nitrous oxide emissions. Again, cattle make a major contribution to manure management, accounting for 45% (Figure 1B). Altogether, 49% of GHG emissions in EU agriculture came directly from cattle in 2021. [2] More generally, cattle are recognised as a major contributor to global GHG emissions in both developed and developing countries (FAO, 2023).Lulz at that. Never mind that overall livestock is pretty carbon neutral given that they eat grass, poop fertilizer that feeds grass, which grows, and the methane they emit gradually breaks down into CO2 in the atmosphere...which then feeds the grass. A nice cycle.
So what are the euros doing?
In this context, voices have echoed around the world to reduce cattle livestock numbers (Garnett, 2009; Thorpe, 2009). For example, Garnett (2009) argues that, due to our incapacity to substantially reduce livestock emissions through technological measures alone, a reduction in livestock and consumption is additionally required. Within the EU, the government of Ireland citing the need to meet climate change targets, has proposed cutting dairy herds by 10% over three years, equivalent to the culling of 200,000 animals by 2026. In the Netherlands, which is caught up in the nitrogen crisis, the government will spend €1.47 billion to buy out cattle and reduce the country’s numbers, with the ultimate goal of achieving a 30% reduction in livestock by 2030. In France, the Court of Auditors has called on the government to downsize numbers by 2 million by 2035 (and 3.5 million by 2050), arguing that “the balance sheet of cattle is unfavourable” (…) “carbon sequestration by the meadows where the animals graze is far from offsetting the emissions from livestock farming” (Cour des Comptes, 2023). Among civil society, NGOs and scientists, another argument in favour of reducing livestock is linked to a healthier diet (i.e. a diet with less protein of animal origin and more protein of plant origin). People in rich countries, particularly, are considered to eat too much meat, especially beef, which leads to chronic diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease and certain cancers. [3]So there you go. The left has indeed been on the kick of MEAT KILLS THE PLANET despite the denials now being kicked about.
Eat the bugs.
No. of Recommendations: 9
“liberals are coming for your cow herds!”Yet beef herds are the smallest in the last 75 yrs under the right.
https://www.drovers.com/news/industry/u-s-beef-her...U.S. Cattle Inventory Hits 75-Year Low at 86.2 Million Head (Jan 30, 2026)
The right must HATE COWS based on how far they have allowed the supply to fall. Called this one YEARS ago.
No. of Recommendations: 7
The bigger threat to US farmers and ranchers is Donald Trump.
Who, if the rumors are true, contributes way more than his fair share of methane to the atmosphere!
No. of Recommendations: 5
Who, if the rumors are true, contributes way more than his fair share of methane to the atmosphere!
We had a guy in our college dorm over half a century ago……
Every time he got drunk, he managed to hurt himself.
We always knew….. if Joe got drunk, he was going to get hurt.
One time by breaking his leg in a culvert.
Another time by drinking too much and we had to take the poor SOB to the emergency room.
And then there was the night he decided to light his own farts……
No. of Recommendations: 14
"3 Things I Know As A MAGA Voter:
1) Climate Change is a Chinese Hoax
2) Wind Mills are Cancer Factories
3) Trump has Destroyed America's reputation & Economy, but his blatant racism just speaks to me!"
~Dope1, ballmaxxer and man who failed science class
