The only thing is that I believe there are situations when the "don't eat meat argument" is more nuanced. I do rarely eat meat now but on occasion I do when I've weighed lots of things up.
So of course eating beef from ex-Brazil rainforest is an absolute disaster but e.g. British farmers with organic cattle grazing on pastures with high welfare standards where the land can only be pasture (and has never had trees on it), disturbing the soil trying to grow other things would release emissions, if they go out of business then what will happen to the land, could it be developed for worse things?? And I do feel sorry for those farmers with excellent practices tarnished by the same brush.
Also, when I worked on international sustainable farming at Defra I did a project that concluded the most sustainable food production system in terms of land mass and emissions would be potatoes grown under with nut trees and free range chickens roaming underneath (permaculture, vertical farming type of thing). So I do think it's important to differentiate between types of meat.
I also worry that soya farming, pacakaging and industrial processes needed for some vegan protein substitutes are emissions-heavy and not so sustainable.
I am always interested that veggie, vegan and organic items are often very well packaged and they are quite cagey on how to get dispose of the packaging...
This article has a useful graphic showing differences in carbon footprint of same food depending on its production: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46459714
Always so complicated!
This is a great article from BBC thanks for sharing Jess
© One Thing Is, powered by microcosm.
Report a problem
"One Thing You Can Do is" - the intersection of sustainability conversation