Tuesday, June 16, 2009

McCartney Blames Cows

Paul McCartney Calls for Meat-Free Day to Cut Cow Gas
By Alex Morales

June 15 (Bloomberg) -- Paul McCartney, the former Beatle and vegetarian pop star, asked fans to go meatless on Mondays to help slow global warming by reducing the amount of gaseous emissions from farm animals.

Cows, pigs and sheep bred for human consumption discharge millions of tons of methane, a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Livestock accounts for about 18 percent of greenhouse gases, more than all the world’s cars, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has said.

“If you want to fight climate change, it’s not only about electricity and coal-fired power plants: Agriculture is a huge contributor too and meat consumption is a big problem,” Jan van Aken, a biologist and agriculture campaigner for the Greenpeace environmental group, said today in a telephone interview from Hamburg. It’s “mainly burps” and animal flatulence, he said.

Supported in his cause by celebrity chefs and Hollywood actors, McCartney said in a statement today that skipping meat a day a week is a “meaningful” change everyone can make to their lifestyles to help the environment. Less consumption may lead to fewer animals reared, and so emissions would fall. Read More

Paul McCartney and others like him continue to suggest things like this based on the faulty information included in the UN report that suggest livestock contribute more to global warming than transportation does. If this were true, the earth would have been continually warming since the beginning of time. After all, there have been livestock on this planet since the beginning. Transportation that relies on fossil fuels has only been around for just over a century. The United State EPA has concluded that animal agriculture contributes less than 3% of all GHG emissions in this country.


Bea Elliott said...

Could there possibly be reasons the EPA has to protect certain businesses here in the U.S.? Oh probably not... all government institutions are above corruption...

But still... I makes one question -especially after reading this 3 year study from Greenpeace http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/press-center/reports4/slaughtering-the-amazon

One acre of rainforest lost every 8seconds for cattle grazing... Now that's something that hasn't been going on since "the beginning of time".

Perhaps just a "smidge" of what these scientists and experts have to say might be true?... just a smidge?

Troy Hadrick said...

With all of the regulations that the EPA has put on agriculture you honestly think they are protecting our businesses? And by default are you suggesting that this wouldn't happen at GreenPeace or the United Nations?

I'm glad you brought up the rainforest issue. First of all, Greenpeace isn't a scientific-based organization. Even some of their founders have quit them because of their practices.

How many rainforests have we cut down in the United States to graze? There's not much I can do from here to stop Brazil from cutting down it's forests. But that doesn't mean people have to stop eating meat. They simply need to buy beef that was raised in the United States.

I look forward to seeing you promote that idea as a solution to the rainforest problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that Paul McCartney is a scientist or expert on this issue?

And why is McCartney and vegans like yourself advocating for the killing off our food animals and driving family farmers off their land?

Elaine Vigneault said...

If you knew what the word "livestock" meant, you would understand that the sentence you wrote, "there have been livestock on this planet since the beginning," doesn't make any sense.

So, I'll educate you. Livestock = a domesticated animal intentionally reared in an agricultural setting to produce products or labor for human use.

The essence of the concept of livestock is the concept of property.

So, NO, livestock have NOT existed on this planet since the begining of time. Animals have existed for quite a while, but NOT domesticated animals and certainly not animals like dairy cows and broiler chickens.

Bea Elliott said...

"Regulations the EPA has put on agriculture"? Seriously? From what I know it allows tons of manure that is contaminated with pharmacuticals and harmful bacteria to be (over) sprayed on crops and land - to the point that our vegetables actually wind up with ecoli on them. Ecoli originates only in the intestines of animals. No vegetable gets it on it's own. There is little to no regulation. All oversight to "over spraying" is left to the honor system, and issues "special permits" only when requested by the company doing the spraying.

The EPA has also turned it's concern away from citizens in these towns that can't exit their homes without the stench of manure in the air - or dealing with fly infestations...

I know, I have a friend that lives in Colorado - she says on certain days the odor permiates everything - insider her car... inside the library, post office - schools and churches. She says it's awful. She's an honest woman and not prone to exaggeration. These are things the EPA is ignoring for the sake of animal agriculture interests.

This study was conducted by scientists and climatologists - in the name of Greenpeace... Just the way animal agriculture and the AMI hire thier "experts" to conduct research on their behalf.

Fortunately the US did not have rain forests to destroy - we however do a fine job at soil degradation from mono-cropping to feed animals. And grazing requires the destruction of other plant species which compromises ecological diversity... And there are ground water issues and dead zones in our rivers which in effect, score just as low on responsible stewardship to the land. And I think U.S. cows flatulate just as much as Brazilian cows do. And so do they require just as much scarce water. So if anyone really wants a solution to this crisis no beef from anywhere is the answer.

I never suggested that Paul McCartney was an "expert" on global issues. Although I do think he's an intelligent man who has examined the issues and wishes to do his part in protecting the earth. He's just a figure head... not unlike that Hollywood moviestar - Matt (what's his name?) that the beef people exhaulted as a spokesperson.

And I'm not advocating the killing of animals - or driving people off their land. On the contrary... I would like to see animal killing haulted and wish land owners would provide a more wholesome, sustainable and green product - so that all may thrive.