This is the only way to get everyone paying attention.
1 Like
Give me some…
1 Like
I wonder how much energy this takes to produce relative to non-lab meat?
1 Like
No figures in that article, and nothing from independent scientific sources, though it says
The small scale of current cultured meat production requires a relatively high use of energy and therefore carbon emissions. But once scaled up its manufacturers say it will produce much lower emissions and use far less water and land than conventional meat.
3 Likes
Does anyone have familiarity with this organization or an opinion regarding them? My initial reaction is that I like their goals and organizing philosophies.
1 Like
My GF signed up for a virtual conference last weekend, and this one. So, I’ve been “attending” as well. The organizations and people that are a part of this are incredible. If anyone is looking for inspiration, education, and connecting with others on a broad range of topics related to justice: climate, racial, gender, ecological, etc etc etc, this is quite a resource.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-disney-peru-deforestation/
Interesting article about the politics and consequences of carbon offsets.
Jesus bloomberg fuck off with the are you a robot stuff. Try this link:
Why can’t the owls live in Trump brand condos? Then everybody wins.
This article was shared by Obama and it seems like the most ridiculous thisisfine.jpg I have ever read.
Curious what you guys think of it, it pissed me off:
Interesting, I didn’t read it that way at all. It seemed more like a shot at those who would go ¯_(ツ)_/¯, either because Biden is president and we can all relax or because we’re all doomed and what’s the point.
I can see getting angry after just reading the tweet, though.
It put a looot of stock into bidens claim that we will be net zero emissions by 2050. In my opinion this is never ever happening.
It sure as hell won’t with that attitude! 
I think it can be done, but a LOT of things have to go just right to get to net zero by then, not least of which is keeping people with respect for science and evidence in office. But it has to at least be tried.
1 Like
Yea, that’s a fair point. I just think it’s dangerous to underscore the severity of the situation. I feel like it could encourage support for half measure policies that don’t do enough because people think we’re not actually doing that bad.
2050 is still a long way off. If every vehicle will be electric and every place is solar-powered, will that be enough for net zero?
Watched that on german news site. Sometimes you just have to start…
4 Likes
There won’t be zero emissions by 2050, but there could easily be reforestation that offsets a much lower level of emissions.
I think I’m actually much more bullish on the environment than most and when people argue that the doom and gloom is ridiculous, I can say, sure, most people will survive and it might not affect us personally that much, but 100 million people dying or in refugee camps in poor countries around the equator is not ok and it’s worth taking extraordinary measures to avert that to whatever degree we can.