Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

celebratedrecluse wrote

This is misleading, not all greenhouse gases have the same efficiency at creating the greenhouse effect.

It is likely that simply ceasing to raise livestock & produce monocultural crops to feed those livestock, along with ceasing to extract natural gas, would alone reverse a majority of the ongoing additive greenhouse activity in the atmosphere on top of what has already been effected. This is because methane is between 12-60 times (depending on varying environmental conditions) as potent of a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide.

Framing this question as one of "how much emissions" is a borderline disingenous way to describe the issue, and coming from a state funded university is damned irresponsible/manipulative. Agriculture alone is far and away the biggest problem, not just in the direct ways I already described either. If you're worried about the Amazon inferno, that's basically the result of the Brazillian beef lobby's hard work over the years.

However none of this is particularly significant because we've already crossed the threshold of feasible action for feedback systems we can no longer interfere with. What matters now is reducing the harm that is now inevitable, and doing that requires an immediate cessation of meat production, monocultural crop harvesting, and at the very least an end to fracking.

The other sources are important environmental problems (smog from dirty industry & transit kills literally millions of people per year), but in the specific problem of global climate change are less significant. Ocean acidification is a much more worrying problem as a result of carbon dioxide emissions, than climate change per se.

It's important to have fluency in these topics so that we can talk to people about them in an informed & intelligent way.