“Scientists have a moral obligation to clearly warn humanity of any catastrophic threat and to “tell it like it is.” On the basis of this obligation and the graphical indicators presented below, we declare, with more than 11,000 scientist signatories from around the world, clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency.
We need to promptly reduce the emissions of short-lived climate pollutants, including methane (figure2b), black carbon (soot), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Doing this could slow climate feedback loops and potentially reduce the short-term warming trend by more than 50% over the next few decades while saving millions of lives and increasing crop yields due to reduced air pollution (Shindell et al.2017).
Eating mostly plant-based foods while reducing the global consumption of animal products (figure1c–d), especially ruminant livestock (Ripple et al.2014), can improve human health and significantly lower GHG emissions (including methane in the “Short-lived pollutants” step). Moreover, this will free up croplands for growing much-needed human plant food instead of livestock feed, while releasing some grazing land to support natural climate solutions (see “Nature” section). Cropping practices such as minimum tillage that increase soil carbon are vitally important. We need to drastically reduce the enormous amount of food waste around the world.”
🗨️
Professor Susanne Stoll Kleemann currently works as Chair of Sustainability Science and Applied Geography, University of Greifswald and does research on conditions for a real transformation to sustainability and
individual and collective behaviour change.
”…meat production is responsible for generating approx. 14.5 % of total global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) identified changing diets as a significant though undeveloped area for action.. A vegetarian diet could reduce emissions from food production by 55 % per capita compared to the projected diet patterns in 2050…Reducing ruminant meat and dairy products has the highest impact on GHG emissions compared to other foods…how to achieve this change in dietary behaviour in the direction of reduced meat consumption as well as animal product consumption in general has yet to receive the attention it deserves “
🔗 Source: World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency
🔗 Source: Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: a review of influence factors
Change in global human activities from 1979 to the present.
The Precautionary Principle or What to do when we can’t be sure
People, policy makers and politicians are often sceptical of ‘experts’, and these people may correctly point to a gaps in data or some piece of information that is unclear - which is sure to happen when we’re talking about the future. Thankfully the Precautionary Principle can help in just these situations:
🗨️
“The purpose of the precautionary principle is to create an impetus to take a decision notwithstanding scientific uncertainty about the nature and extent of the risk.”
and in case there is any further doubt
🗨️
“The precautionary principle should be invoked when:
1. there is good reason to believe that harmful effects may occur to human, animal or plant health or to the environment; and
2. the level of scientific uncertainty about the consequences or likelihood of the risk is such that the best available scientific advice cannot assess the risk with sufficient confidence to inform decision-making.
Action in response to the precautionary principle should accord with the principles of good regulation, i.e. be proportionate, consistent, targeted,”
🔗 Source: Select Committee on Science and TechnologyWritten Evidence 2004
Perhaps because of the precautionary principle the latest edition of the government’s National Risk Register recognises zoonotic diseases, anti microbial resistance and the effects of climate change on the weather in the UK as relevant risks, but fails to mention or discuss the impact of widespread factory farming on these risks.
So when perfect information is missing this is no reason for inaction BUT it can’t help us when crucial information is neglected
🗨️
“On a global basis, household consumption accounts for almost three quarters of greenhouse gas emissions The need for changes in household consumption is even more pressing in wealthy countries such as the UK and there is an urgent need to identify and implement solutions for promoting greater engagement and action from citizens and consumers” “Like aviation, diet has been neglected by climate policy”
🔗 Source: Behaviour change, public engagement and Net Zero (Imperial College London)
Climate Change Committee - ignored by the same government that funds them
In response to a letter, the UK Government advisory board (Climate Change Committee) confirmed to us that they had made the following recommendations to the UK Government:
🗨️
“Eat a healthy diet, for example with less beef, lamb and dairy.
UK government wants to reduce greenhouse gases using unspecified ‘green’ technology.
Despite The UK Committee on Climate Change recommending a reduction in meat consumption, along with the IPCC, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and WWF, Farmers Weekly reported that Stricter government targets on climate change will not include forcing people to eat less meat or dairy
🗨️
“…The new government target is to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 78 by 2035 compared with 1990 levels This will become enshrined in law by the end of June 2021 Mr Johnson said : “We want to continue to raise the bar on tackling climate change, and that’s why we’re setting the most ambitious target to cut emissions in the world In December, the government’s Committee on Climate Change recommended a 20 cut in meat and dairy by 2030 rising to 35 by 2050 for meat only However, the government said it will look to meet the 78 reduction target through green technologies, while maintaining people’s freedom of choice including their diet”
In addition to ignoring the CCC, the Government also seem to be ignoring a report they commissioned called Absolute Zero Delivering the UK’s climate change commitment with incremental changes to today’s technologies authored by researchers from the Universities of Cambridge, Bath, Nottingham Strathclyde and Oxford Imperial College who state starkly in the Executive summary
🗨️
“We can’t wait for breakthrough technologies to deliver net zero emissions by 2050 Instead, we can plan to respond to climate change using today’s technologies with incremental change This will reveal many opportunities for growth but requires a public discussion about future lifestyles”
The Absolute Zero Report states that
🗨️
“The authors of this report are funded by the UK government to support businesses and governments (national and regional) to develop a future Industrial Strategy that’s compatible with Zero Emissions.”. And “ Growing grain and other feed for cows, pigs and sheep is exceptionally inefficient, as up to 80 times more grain is required to create the same calories for a meal of meat as for a meal made from the original grain. As a result, our commitment to zero emissions in 2050 requires that we refrain from eating beef and lamb” and All schools could immediately switch to providing meat free meals reducing emissions and promoting healthy eating
We fear that the Absolute Zero report was a prediction of how much notice the government gave it.
Green technology promises
The BBC summarised the story as
🗨️
“Breakthrough technologies such as carbon capture and hydrogen cannot be relied on to help the UK meet its climate change targets, a report says The government had hoped that both technologies would contribute to emissions reductions required by 2050 But the report’s authors say ministers should assume that neither carbon capture and storage ( nor hydrogen will be running "at scale" by 2050 They say the government must start a debate on other, controversial steps.”
The purpose of ILGRA is to help secure coherence and consistency within and between policy and practice in risk assessment as undertaken by Government, and help disseminate and advance good practice. ILGRA reports
to Ministers. In 2002 they reported that:
🗨️
“The precautionary principle should be invoked when:
1. there is good reason to believe that harmful effects may occur to human, animal or plant health or to the environment; and
2. the level of scientific uncertainty about the consequences or likelihood of the risk is such that the best available scientific advice cannot assess the risk with sufficient confidence to inform decision-making.
Action in response to the precautionary principle should accord with the principles of good regulation, i.e. be proportionate, consistent, targeted, transparent and accountable”.
🔗 Source:United Kingdom Interdepartmental Liaison Group on Risk Assessment (UK-ILGRA)
The precautionary principle is to avoid ‘analysis paralysis’
The point of the precautionary principle is to create an impetus to take to decision notwithstanding scientific uncertainty about the nature and extent of the risk i.e to avoid ‘paralysis by analysis’ by removing excuses for inaction on the the grounds of scientific uncertainty.
So it is NOT controversial to reduce carbon emissions by cutting back on ‘animal protein’ - it is practical AND precautionary.
And the government advisors agree
🗨️
“One of the most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and free up land for nature is to cut back on animal proteins 85 of the land used to feed us is used for livestock farming, even though meat and dairy only account for one third of our calories Plant based proteins produce, on average, 70 times less greenhouse gas emissions than an equivalent amount of beef, and use more than 150 times less land”
🔗 Source: The National Food Strategy Chapter 16
And other environmentalists broadly agree
“Industrial meat is the world’s leading cause of deforestation We need to end the system that’s churning out meat at an unsustainable rate and in turn eat a lot less meat
🔗Source: How much meat should we be eating - Greenpeace
“Friends of the Earth, along with the Eating Better alliance is calling for a 50 reduction in the amount of meat produced and eaten in the UK by 2030 and for the remainder to be ‘ This means produced to high environmental and animal welfare standards Diets lower in animal products are also better for our health”
🔗Source: Sustainable eating: our position - Friends of the Earth
“More food can be delivered by changing our dietary preferences, especially those in high income countries characterized by a high share of animal proteins Food availability (in terms of calories, protein and critical nutrients) can be increased by shifting crop production away from livestock feed, bioenergy crops, foods with low nutritional value and other non food applications Encouraging consumers to eat healthy diets with moderate animal protein could enhance food availability and reduce the environmental impacts of agriculture
“If you care about how your food is produced and want to help protect birds and the countryside, here's what you can do
• Organic food is often great for birds and the environment, so try to buy organic foods where you can
• Think about reducing the amount of meat and dairy in your diet Not only is there evidence that those who eat more than 100 g of red meat a day are at higher risk of health problems, much of the meat produced in the world today (including cattle, but particularly pig and poultry meat) is dependant on feed, often soy based, which has been produced on deforested land and has resulted in wildlife losses and negative climate change impacts Cattle are also directly responsible for significant amounts of greenhouse gas emission”
Powered by