Enter your username and password below

Not registered yet?   Forgotten your password?

Food & Hunger

What did you learn about dietary choices from using the footprint calculator? Now imagine that you could translate what you learned into an effective societal policy on food- what would it be? And how would this policy effect the need to alleviate world hunger?

925 million people on earth do not have enough to eat according to the FAO [Food and Agricultural Organization]. That's almost 1 in 7 inhabitants of our planet!




Food & Hunger >

Does being Vegetarian actually help the environment?

Reem Alwaheb

I believe being vegetarian is not beneficial to our environment. Fo example having a quarter of  our human population rely only on plants will have a great impact on our earth and the organisms too. This is because there are many organisms who are herbivores and can only rely on plants to get their sources of energy and live. If we ate all these plants they would not have their source of food and their population would decrease. Another reason why being vegetarian is not helpful to environment is because there would be an overpopulation of livestock including cows, sheeps, chickens, and pigs.  Something that is harmful that is caused by cows are methane. The methane that they release is a harmful greenhouse gas which is one of the sources to warming up our earth.

ce445

I'd like to politely disagree on some things mentioned in your post. I acknowledge that going vegetarian might not be the most beneficial however, it is not completely useless. Reducing meat consumption would indefinitely serve as a limiting factor for methane being produced. While up front, just eating plants and using it as the only source of food doesn't make sense due to "overpopulation of livestock including cows, sheeps, chickens, and pigs" however diving deeper into the business side of things, it does make sense. Companies and farms run off of a supply and demand. If the world converted to only eating vegetables that would mean that the demand for vegetables are higher meanwhile the demand for meat is less. This results in companies raising less livestock which is good in terms of methane. Because the demand for meat is less, the supply of meat is less, eventually there would be no livestock at all.

osh.ktaj

I´d like to politely disagree with this statement as well. The statement that ¨going vegetarian is not beneficial to our environment¨ is not very accurate. It has been proven many times that even the smallest cutting back of red meat would help our environment greatly, so of course completely going vegetarian would do wonders in decreasing methane production. I acknowledge the idea that we would be taking their food supply but we don´t pick wild fruits and vegetables as a species, most crops are grown in man-made farms specially made to go from farm to table. However I agree that going vegetarian should not be an expectation for all as it is important to many indigenous and foreign cultures who manage to consume meat sustainably.

Stix

While I don’t totally disagree with you, you’re main point seems to be slightly flawed. Yes, livestock, specifically cows, do produce 37% of methane emissions, but people not eating them wouldn’t cause them to become overpopulated. The only reason there is so much cattle around the world currently is because of how high the demand for meat is. If we just stopped farming meat, that would not only reduce a large portion of our methane emissions, but it would clear up more land to turn into farmland or cities.

4 posts
You must be logged in in order to post.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

This site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Privacy
Terms