• Spzi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    most of the carbon is part of the earth’s existing carbon cycle

    I’m afraid that’s a bit too simplistic. I’ll name a few reasons to give a hint why.

    For example, both carbon dioxide and methane are “part of the earth’s carbon cycle”, but both have different climate impacts. Ruminants transform one into the other; from bad to worse.

    Another person pointed out how meat production also involves burning fossil fuels, for example for transport. Or synthetic fertilizers.

    Yet another reason is land use change. Meat production, being inherently less efficient due to more intermediate steps (see trophic levels), uses more land for the same amount of nutritions compared to plant based agriculture. This translates to more deforestation, more dried up wetlands, more desertification, and more stress on other species.

    Finally, scale and speed make a difference. It’s true that both carbon dioxide and methane are part of Earth’s existing carbon cycle. Yet, the scale and speed at which we emit those is unprecedented.

    • psud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      But natural ruminants like deer would take up places cows were removed from. They will have the same emissions as cows per unit biomass

      • Spzi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Says who, got any source on that? Do we have any evidence for both assumptions, specifically the second?

        As far as I know, natural herds of ruminants can actually help keep carbon in the ground. The natural population density is also much lower compared to modern factory farms.