this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
20 points (100.0% liked)

Environment

3985 readers
25 users here now

Environmental and ecological discussion, particularly of things like weather and other natural phenomena (especially if they're not breaking news).

See also our Nature and Gardening community for discussion centered around things like hiking, animals in their natural habitat, and gardening (urban or rural).


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It's not just a matter of the number of people. The per capita consumption of meat is higher than it was decades ago

[–] deft@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I'm just saying no matter what green initiatives we take won't really help because there's too many people. On no scale is feeding this increasing number of people going to be environmentally viable.

[–] frog@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Unfortunately, convincing people to have fewer children is likely to be significantly more challenging than convincing them to eat less beef.

[–] deft@ttrpg.network 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unfortunately you're very right. Alternatively nature is very potent at equalizing. Let's watch how that unfolds

[–] frog@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago

It's a shame, because it would do wonders for the environment if people just cut down on both: beef once a week instead of several times a day, and 1-2 kids instead of 3 or more. Both would be more special for being enjoyed in smaller quantities, too.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)