• silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    6 months ago

    Unfortunately, it’s going to take both. Methane from cattle is a big enough deal that it matters.

    • vividspecter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      And also that it’s absurdly inefficient in terms of CO2 emissions to grow crops just to feed these animals, rather than eat the crops directly.

      • jeffw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        nOt AlL oF tHaT lAnD iS sUiTaBlE fOr HuMaN fOoD

        Because god forbid we eat soy or something ig?

      • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        We should be tackling all of it. At once. Not picking and choosing. Because we need to get to zero. Fast.

      • vividspecter@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Methane is worse in the short to medium term, so if anything we should be hitting it first. But as the other commenter suggested, it needs to be a full court press of tackling agriculture, electricity, manufacturing, transport, and efficiency all at once if he want to prevent even more severe damage to climate.