English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

as the biofuel industry enters comeptition with meat industry for land and crops, it becomes an increasingly irrational act to continue with the traditional western diet. How long will the general press and our polititians side step the issue of enviroment and heavy meat consumption.

When will the benefits to the enviroment of a meat free diet be brought into the arena for the general public to see?

2007-10-18 12:34:06 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Food & Drink Vegetarian & Vegan

emily!!! you seem to have misunderstood the argument, i made no claim that could be put down by your "answer"... Let me rephrase for you.

The meat industry uses obcene amounts of land and crops just to FEED animals that feed us. 16lbs of grain to 1lb of beef (i'm sure your all aware). In an effort to grow enough crops to feed to our food we our clearing rainforest at an alarming rate, souly for the purpose of feeding our food.

This is adding to global warming, causing the worlds fresh water sources to be deminished, but yet again, the meat industry wastes more fresh water feeding our food than we would if we fed our selves of the crops.

However, this in light, the general public, press and polititians seem to ignore it as a real source of enviromental damage. Yet with the production and development of variouse biofuels taking off, and competeing for the crops and land (maybe not enviromentalt feasible, but a step in the right direction) how long will it be before the general public

2007-10-18 22:21:07 · update #1

the general press, and our politicians start openly discussing the enviromental benefits of a meat free diet!!!??

At no point am i claiming biofuels are great, are the future, are going to save us all... i mearly attempt to highlight the point, that it's an avenue that needs to be explored, and perhaps their compitition with the meat industry may help to highlight the fact with people, that production and development of variouse biofuels is a better use of land than food for our food.

Of course food for me and you is a better use of land than either of them, but people have had trouble seeing that for years. I wonder will this relitively newer issue help bring this to light!?

2007-10-18 22:25:50 · update #2

4 answers

Wine Window Guy

It takes energy to make hydrogen from water, and it takes platinum to make a fuel cell. Platinum reserves are even lower than fossil fuel reserves. Fuel cells are viable only if renewable energy (wind, solar) was used to extract the hydrogen. Using fossil fuels to generate hydrogen (as is still commonly done) is basically 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'. In this case, hydrogen fuel cells have the purpose of shifting pollution from the cities to the industries where the H2 is produced, but the environmental cost is the same (actually more, due to loss of efficiency).

Hydrogen fuel cells produced by solar energy is a great idea but just not enough on its own. A whole slew of alternative fuels is needed to make up for fossil fuels, biofuels being one of them.

2007-10-18 12:52:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

ACTUALLY, biofuels aren't a environmentally feasible yet. Processing them actually does more damage to the environment than burning the gasoline. The meat industry certainly doesn't need the land, and it would be better used to grow food to feed the world's hungry. However, your argument for environmentalism is lacking the oomph it would have if you brought in, oh, say, some accurate facts.

2007-10-18 14:48:29 · answer #2 · answered by emily_brown18 6 · 2 1

plants dont have a central nervous system, thus no pain nor emotions. the morality issue only comes in to play when the slaughtered being can actually feel it. some vegetarians arent even vegetarians because of the morality issue so youre only trying (and might i say failing at it) to appeal to part of the population. you can get also all nutrients from plant matter while you cant from meat. also Eggs- From chickens. You just killed a baby chick. MURDER is incorrect. eggs that are consumed on the regular are not fertilized, so its sort of like eating the equivalent of chickens period, not embryo.

2016-05-23 12:22:42 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

We are running out of water in America. Corn for fuel will never be a viable option. The hydrogen cell is the only answer.
That and bacon on all your cheesebugers!

2007-10-18 12:41:56 · answer #4 · answered by Wine and Window Guy 4 · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers