Veggies destroying the planet

Forums New posts
Interesting that the study uses the bizzare "per calorie" messurement and selectivey highlights low calorie veg such as lettuce and celery in its summary.

Also interesting that the study was carried out by civil engineers and not a climate scientist or a biologist.

Nice try by the Telegraph, but I smell some bad science.
 
Two Headed Boy said:
Interesting that the study uses the bizzare "per calorie" messurement and selectivey highlights low calorie veg such as lettuce and celery in its summary.

Also interesting that the study was carried out by civil engineers and not a climate scientist or a biologist.

Nice try by the Telegraph, but I smell some bad science.
Click to expand...
not clear to me that the telegraph runs Carnegie Mellon university research or that a biologist or climate scientist are more qualified than a civil engineer to calculate co2 given off throughout a supply chain heavily featuring engineered processes and machinery.
 
Two Headed Boy said:
Interesting that the study uses the bizzare "per calorie" messurement and selectivey highlights low calorie veg such as lettuce and celery in its summary.

Also interesting that the study was carried out by civil engineers and not a climate scientist or a biologist.

Nice try by the Telegraph, but I smell some bad science.
Click to expand...

I think that might be the brussel sprouts 2HBoy.
 
egb_hibs said:
not clear to me that the telegraph runs Carnegie Mellon university research or that a biologist or climate scientist are more qualified than a civil engineer to calculate co2 given off throughout a supply chain heavily featuring engineered processes and machinery.
Click to expand...
The Telegraph are responsible for the ridiculous headline though. The study concludes that a diet with less red meat, with fish, veg, dairy etc... making up the diffrrence, could be worse for the environment. That is not the angle of the article, which asserts that because a lettuce has less calories than two rashers of bacon its worse for the environment... You can see the illogic there, right? Nobody eats two lettuces at a time and nobody only buys two rashers of bacon.There is a mountain of data pointing the other way.
 
Two Headed Boy said:
The Telegraph are responsible for the ridiculous headline though. The study concludes that a diet with less red meat, with fish, veg, dairy etc... making up the diffrrence, could be worse for the environment. That is not the angle of the article, which asserts that because a lettuce has less calories than two rashers of bacon its worse for the environment... You can see the illogic there, right? Nobody eats two lettuces at a time and nobody only buys two rashers of bacon.There is a mountain of data pointing the other way.
Click to expand...
the article explains all that - I see the headline as a retort to all those blaming poor old cows for farting their way to doomsday. Wonder what the veggie position is on cowicide to save the planet :hmmm

Don't see the illogic you refer to. Quite normal to have two rashers on a piece and this tells me that when considering the carbon footprint of a BLT - dumping the lettuce for a plain bacon piece is the ethical decision rather that offering support to the evils of lettuce.

Iirc growing lettuce is also one of the most nutritionally inefficient uses of land there is. Let's be honest, it's bordering on a biohazard.
 
Whats the obsession with lettuce? There are thousands of veggies, grains and pulses that can be grown with minimal environmental impact in comparrison to meat. I suspect lettuce one of the few plants that supports the argument.

Also, comparing lettuce to bacon is comparing the least impactful meat to most impactful veg. Rather unfair, no?A beef to broccoli comparrison wouldnt support the pro-meat argument all.

I get the impression you are enjoying a wee giggle at playing devils advocate here EGB, but the fact is, meat and dairy farming is proven to be damaging to the environment and consuming less of both would help. If lettuce is as bad (or worse), then maybe we should get behind eating more spinach instead. Id support that.

As for "cowicide". In my opinion, if less animals are bred, then their cramped conditions should improve and less land needs to be ruined to look after them. A win win in my mind.
 
Disappointing.

I thought this was going to be about the damage to the environment caused by lentil infused farting by all the bloody vegetarians, pumping their way home after a few pints of real ale and a slice or two of nut loaf or bean cake.
 
Sir Shrink said:
Disappointing.I thought this was going to be about the damage to the environment caused by lentil infused farting by all the bloody vegetarians, pumping their way home after a few pints of real ale and a slice or two of nut loaf or bean cake.
Click to expand...
If that were the case, my arse would have a conga line of greenpeace demonstrators behind it most weekends.
 
Two Headed Boy said:
Whats the obsession with lettuce? There are thousands of veggies, grains and pulses that can be grown with minimal environmental impact in comparrison to meat. I suspect lettuce one of the few plants that supports the argument.

Also, comparing lettuce to bacon is comparing the least impactful meat to most impactful veg. Rather unfair, no?A beef to broccoli comparrison wouldnt support the pro-meat argument all.

I get the impression you are enjoying a wee giggle at playing devils advocate here EGB, but the fact is, meat and dairy farming is proven to be damaging to the environment and consuming less of both would help. If lettuce is as bad (or worse), then maybe we should get behind eating more spinach instead. Id support that.

As for "cowicide". In my opinion, if less animals are bred, then their cramped conditions should improve and less land needs to be ruined to look after them. A win win in my mind.
Click to expand...

There's more than one thing at work though...I think using intensive cattle farming as a critique of eating meat is no more or less valid than the lettuce argument. Locally-sourced, low-intensity farming is the key, ecologically, regardless of what goes on your plate; there's fuck all negative impact coming from someone with a chicken coop selling the eggs to folk they work with. It's as true for bolivian quinoa as it is for kiwi lamb, and as true for DDT as it is for colistin.
 
FTJT said:
There's more than one thing at work though...I think using intensive cattle farming as a critique of eating meat is no more or less valid than the lettuce argument. Locally-sourced, low-intensity farming is the key, ecologically, regardless of what goes on your plate; there's fuck all negative impact coming from someone with a chicken coop selling the eggs to folk they work with. It's as true for bolivian quinoa as it is for kiwi lamb, and as true for DDT as it is for colistin.
Click to expand...
It would be great if everyone could eat locally sourced food, but its impractical and too costly for many.Mass produced meat and dairy is far more harmful than mass produced veg (the dreaded lettuce aside) though.
 
Two Headed Boy said:
It would be great if everyone could eat locally sourced food, but its impractical and too costly for many.Mass produced meat and dairy is far more harmful than mass produced veg (the dreaded lettuce aside) though.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the lettuce that makes up part of my favourite baguette the well balanced BLT ;-) I love it in the context of fresh tomatoes etc..

I do think though that water melon has at least one question to answer. I heard and I'm not looking it up that it takes more calories to eat than it provides!

If food is to be produced for benefits without detriment surely the water melon should be first against the wall!


;-)

Brazil nuts rool OK!
 
Jack said:
I don't know about the lettuce that makes up part of my favourite baguette the well balanced BLT ;-) I love it in the context of fresh tomatoes etc..

I do think though that water melon has at least one question to answer. I heard and I'm not looking it up that it takes more calories to eat than it provides!

If food is to be produced for benefits without detriment surely the water melon should be first against the wall!


;-)

Brazil nuts rool OK!
Click to expand...

I heard the same about cucumber. They are both full of water so it could be true [I'm not googling it either].
 
Yes, never mind all the factories and cars filling the air with deadly gases, stop eating lettuce to save the planet hahahaha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom