U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-03-2009, 07:46 AM
 
Location: Greensboro
627 posts, read 1,863,513 times
Reputation: 432

Advertisements

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-03-2009, 08:32 AM
 
Location: The Woods
16,946 posts, read 22,260,462 times
Reputation: 9051
So, are cows behind smog?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Greensboro
627 posts, read 1,863,513 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
So, are cows behind smog?
Yes, cows are a big part of Smog.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 10:49 AM
 
Location: The Woods
16,946 posts, read 22,260,462 times
Reputation: 9051
Quote:
Originally Posted by d_Random View Post
That link doesn't take me to anything pertaining to this topic.

I can assure you, the brown smog over Asia, particularly China, was not caused by cows. The smogs that famously plagued LA and other dense urban areas, were not caused by livestock. It was caused by automobiles. In Asia, coal burning (in dirty, inefficient plants) is a major problem. It may shock you but the air quality in rural, agricultural areas is quite cleaner (and clearer), in general, than cities full of automobiles. Vermont isn't full of cow smog.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Greensboro
627 posts, read 1,863,513 times
Reputation: 432
Well no, cows don't cause all smog, but do contribute to smog in some areas (as referenced in the link). That being said, livestock is a greater producer of GHG than all global transportation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 12:56 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,946 posts, read 22,260,462 times
Reputation: 9051
Quote:
Originally Posted by d_Random View Post
Well no, cows don't cause all smog, but do contribute to smog in some areas (as referenced in the link). That being said, livestock is a greater producer of GHG than all global transportation.
Automobile pollution is far more dangerous, and is an immediate threat..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 01:16 PM
 
260 posts, read 502,073 times
Reputation: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Automobile pollution is far more dangerous, and is an immediate threat..
this is a widespread misconception. livestock is by far the biggest contributor to green house gases and global warming:

http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/...e%20Change.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 04:03 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,946 posts, read 22,260,462 times
Reputation: 9051
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg420 View Post
this is a widespread misconception. livestock is by far the biggest contributor to green house gases and global warming:

http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/...e%20Change.pdf
We're going in circles here...you insist on focusing on greenhouse gases, I'm looking at bigger, more immediate threats: carcinogens and other toxins in the air, oil and other chemicals getting into the water, landfills full of hazardous materials...as yet we don't fully understand climate change and how much we impact it or not, and some science suggests we're headed for a cold period anyways (just consider in fact the past changes...it always warmed up then suddenly dropped into a cold period). If we stop emitting any greenhouse gases entirely, it still won't stop climate change. In the immediate future, all the pollution I mentioned above will cause untold suffering and disease among people, animals, etc., and we have the ability to reverse that (if countries like China step up to the plate anyways...).

You also skip over how much damage switching to vegetarianism will do. Currently, much of our livestock (beef particularly) is raise on poor land for crops. We will need to either: A) clear more of our good wildlife habitat to raise crops here or B) import more, which just shifts where the habitat destruction happens, and adds transportation issues to the mix. This also ignores the rest of the world, where many countries would have to import nearly all their food because their land is only good for livestock.

And if I bring up hunting, you will say hunting is cruel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 05:20 PM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,293 posts, read 23,162,770 times
Reputation: 3889
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg420 View Post
this is a widespread misconception. livestock is by far the biggest contributor to green house gases and global warming:

http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/...e%20Change.pdf

Then I say our only option is to kill all the animals!

I can only hope we have enough ammo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 10:25 PM
 
39,454 posts, read 40,762,330 times
Reputation: 16258
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
We're going in circles here...you insist on focusing on greenhouse gases, I'm looking at bigger, more immediate threats: carcinogens and other toxins in the air,.....
Agree, part of the global warming propaganda machine is to lump greenhouse gases into the same category as truly toxic agents. I'd imagine a lot of the propaganda being distributed about meat originates from sources like PETA. It should be noted the 6 most common air pollutants in the US have drooped by more than 50% since 1980.





Not included in that is lead which has dropped by something like 98% which I would imagine primarily was due to it being removed from gasoline.

The fundamental issue with any of these regulations is that unless it's addressed globally you're really not accomplishing much. If you take mercury emissions for example the EPA estimates sources within the US account for about 3% of the global total and about 1% of that is from coal fired plants. The EPA estimates about 1/3 of those emissions get deposited within the US and the rest enter the global pool. Asia on the other hand accounts for about 50% of the global emissions primarily from China and India.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top