
For a lower climate footprint, vegetarian diet beats local - colobas
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181023110627.htm
======
acd
Did a new years resolution to try and do what I can to lessen climate change.
Calculated carbon foot print with a calculator. Concluded main changes needed
was to changes required eat less red meat and drive and ride cars less. Try
and consume less new things, prefer buying used things. Buying quality items
that lasts long instead of cheap buy and throw.

Changing to vegetarian diet and driving less had the biggest impact.

~~~
goalieca
For me it was air travel. That was more than diet even though I didn’t travel
much. Home heating was also a lot in my cold city.

Also, reduce then reuse then recycle in that order.

------
drinchev
Btw it's not really necessary to consume >only< vegetarian / vegan food. Since
couple of months I try and eat vegan meals for one day per week and reduce
eating meat to at most 2 times per week. I can gladly say that this is
manageable, not a big deal for all of us and doesn't require so much
strictness ( IMO ). Nevertheless the benefit for the environment is not as big
than being a vegan / vegetarian, but still bigger than eating meat 7 days per
week.

Side topic, but meat these days is quite expensive if you really take it from
a quality manufacturer ( Bio meat in Germany costs 3 times more than the
"regular" one ). You can imagine what kind of meat you get if you don't have
to dig deep into your pocket for a meal.

------
yummybear
As a cooking enthusiast I struggle with finding vegetarian recipes that are
appealing to me, my wife and kids, even if we’d like to eat more vegetables.

As a “carnivore” or at least omnivore, most dishes feel like they’re either
missing some part (i.e. “dinner is just a salad”) or trying to imitate a meat
product.

~~~
AgentOrange1234
Cold turkey could be hard. Try transitioning slowly. As a start, just cook
more veggies and load up your plate with them. Roasted broccoli, cauliflower,
brussel sprouts, etc., can be amazing. You can also substitute less-bad meats
(turkey burgers instead of cow, etc.) or try out some of the veg. substitutes.

~~~
danShumway
Going slowly would be my recommendation as well. I transitioned to lacto-ovo
vegetarian over the course of somewhere between 2-3 years. First was red meat,
then poultry, and then fish. Even there, I had tiny goals -- I started with,
"I won't buy this at a supermarket, but I'll eat it if I'm offered, or at a
restaurant."

I'm also a really picky eater, and it took about that amount of time for my
palette to start to change, to the point where I now really enjoy salads,
mushrooms, tofu, and well-cooked veggies.

Changing a pallet is hard, it's OK to do it gradually, and it's OK to
experiment and find setups that work for just you. I'm still working on softer
veggies like baked beans; everyone says they're really healthy, but I saute
about 90% of the veggies I eat. There's something about steamed or boiled
veggies that just grosses me out.

But there were other foods I thought I'd never like before, and it's been
really interesting especially over the last 4-5 months to go back and try
foods that I dismissed before and discover that I suddenly like them a lot
more.

------
SECProto
The biggest takeaway I get from the article is that the average annual food-
sourced CO2 emissions is equivalent to driving 6000km. Average car owners in
North America do quite a bit more than that annually (and likely in a vehicle
that produces much more CO2 per km than the europe-based study would use)

~~~
neltnerb
Oh wow, I just did the calculation myself (3.22 trillion miles and 330 million
people) to see the 9800 miles _per capita_ driven in the USA.

What a waste. I hope that at least most of it is long haul trucking or
something with personal value like a vacation, rather than just commuting.

~~~
fpgaminer
The average American commute takes 26.9 minutes:
[https://www.npr.org/2018/09/20/650061560/stuck-in-traffic-
yo...](https://www.npr.org/2018/09/20/650061560/stuck-in-traffic-youre-not-
alone-new-data-show-american-commute-times-are-longer)

9800 per capita should be completely unsurprising to any American. If all you
did was drive to work, it'd be a mere 40 miles per workday (5 days a week, 50
weeks).

Non-Americans might be surprised about it. But let me be clear: driving is the
backbone of American society. Always has been. The classic video game Oregon
Trail is about Americans making one long commute across the entire country, so
they could find better jobs. Which honestly explains a lot about Californians:
our ancestors traveled the whole of the United States to get here, what's a
short 2 hour commute to work on the 405 every day?

Our country is HUGE, almost all of it is habitable, and we have a sprawling
road system. We have the option to work where it's most profitable, and live
where it's most comfortable. And boy do we take advantage of that.

Good or bad, that's the U.S., so I hope people aren't too surprised when they
learn that we've been burning a lot of gasoline in our cars. And also perhaps
why we have such a pro-oil/coal culture.

------
scythe
This isn’t really why people like to eat “local”, though. Local food is
popular primarily because it tastes better since it’s fresher.

------
wtdata
Greenhouse emissions from meat/dairy production (the all chain) in highly
efficient meat industries of 1st world countries, are negligible when compared
to to other sources. [1]

Even when looking at the global numbers and taking into account countries with
less efficient systems, the global total is still less than 15% of all
greenhouse emissions. [2]

[1] [https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-
emis...](https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions)

[2]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production)

------
hacknat
Makes sense, cows are bad for the environment, no matter how far away they
live from you.

~~~
vinni2
But a chicken or fish near you is far more environmentally friendly than
vegetarian food from father places. So the title is a bit misleading.

~~~
mtalantikite
Are they? The study left out fish, so I didn’t see that conclusion in there.
Also, the title is pretty much the conclusion of the study: eating vegetarian
has a greater environmental impact than eating local.

~~~
vinni2
So why are they generalizing their claims when they have left out whole
category of foods? And they consider dairy as not vegetarian that’s not
accurate either.

