• Spzi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      No single human activity has a bigger impact on the planet than the production of food

      A provocative claim which is not supported by the link. It goes on to talk about other thing, which cannot show the claim is true, if it is. For example, while the following sentence might be true, it does not show wether the initial claim was true:

      The production of animal-based foods—particularly beef—is responsible for about half of the food system’s greenhouse gas emissions. 
      

      Because both talk about different things. I couldn’t find that July 5, 2022, Boston Globe article to check.

      The production of food (even in the most sustainable ways) probably still is a good bet, simply because it requires so much land, and more.

      Though not sure how it fares against “trade”, or the extraction and burning of fossil fuels.

    • beta_tester@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We could also half the population and have the same result.

      Property would become more affordable as well.

      Win win

      • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, don’t be so harsh. If we only decimate developed countries’ populations, Russia and China, we can have the same or more impact with relatively few people. Most African people wouldn’t make any difference, why go after half of them?