- Sep 16, 2012
- 57,738
- 51,267
- 3,605
No, seriously. . . 
This is one of the ideas that was rolled out among the elites and the climate conference in Scotland.
Just like counting calories is all the rage for a large portion of society, the ruling cultural elites, political elites, and ruling class propagandists might soon try to shoe horn into the culture, the idea of "green cuisine," for those stressed about "doing their part."
"Meat and fish on the menu at #COP26
?! This is the equivalent of serving cigarettes at a lung cancer conference. Only when governments grasp animal agriculture's central role in the #climate crisis will we stand a chance of solving it."
"A beef burger or a chocolate bar – which will do more harm to the environment? You probably think you know the answer. One comes from a bloated, methane-belching cow, a leading cause of climate change; the other is a fairly harmless – and delicious – snack. Alas, it’s not quite that simple.
Experts say chocolate is a leading cause of deforestation, due to the need to cut down tropical forests to plant cocoa. The “highest-impact” chocolate might actually be worse for the environment than lower-impact beef, says Anya Doherty, CEO of Foodsteps, an environmental consultancy, and former food researcher at the University of Cambridge. “No one’s going to like me for saying that,” she admits.. . ."
<snip>
". ..The markers are causing no end of confusion among delegates. Cop26 was forced to backtrack after wrongly labelling a plant-based croissant as more carbon-heavy than a bacon sandwich (the calculation was based on a normal croissant, they said). Amid the hoo-ha, France’s eco minister Barbara Pompili even suggested it was time for her country to eat fewer croissants. “A croissant is so good but it is fat and it’s not the best carbon footprint,” she explained to the BBC at the summit.
Despite the confusion, “carbon menus” are continuing to attract a great deal of interest, with calls to make them compulsory in restaurants across the UK. But sustainability experts have in fact been looking for years at how we can measure the carbon output of our food, which is responsible for about a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions. Some of their results proved surprising.. . . "
www.rt.com
www.nature.com
This is one of the ideas that was rolled out among the elites and the climate conference in Scotland.
Just like counting calories is all the rage for a large portion of society, the ruling cultural elites, political elites, and ruling class propagandists might soon try to shoe horn into the culture, the idea of "green cuisine," for those stressed about "doing their part."
"Meat and fish on the menu at #COP26
?! This is the equivalent of serving cigarettes at a lung cancer conference. Only when governments grasp animal agriculture's central role in the #climate crisis will we stand a chance of solving it." Green cuisine: why it's time you watched your 'foodprint'
Menus that list CO2 emissions are a common sight at Cop26 – but things aren’t as straightforward as they appear...
"A beef burger or a chocolate bar – which will do more harm to the environment? You probably think you know the answer. One comes from a bloated, methane-belching cow, a leading cause of climate change; the other is a fairly harmless – and delicious – snack. Alas, it’s not quite that simple.
Experts say chocolate is a leading cause of deforestation, due to the need to cut down tropical forests to plant cocoa. The “highest-impact” chocolate might actually be worse for the environment than lower-impact beef, says Anya Doherty, CEO of Foodsteps, an environmental consultancy, and former food researcher at the University of Cambridge. “No one’s going to like me for saying that,” she admits.. . ."
<snip>
". ..The markers are causing no end of confusion among delegates. Cop26 was forced to backtrack after wrongly labelling a plant-based croissant as more carbon-heavy than a bacon sandwich (the calculation was based on a normal croissant, they said). Amid the hoo-ha, France’s eco minister Barbara Pompili even suggested it was time for her country to eat fewer croissants. “A croissant is so good but it is fat and it’s not the best carbon footprint,” she explained to the BBC at the summit.
Despite the confusion, “carbon menus” are continuing to attract a great deal of interest, with calls to make them compulsory in restaurants across the UK. But sustainability experts have in fact been looking for years at how we can measure the carbon output of our food, which is responsible for about a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions. Some of their results proved surprising.. . . "
Carbon foodprints? The ruling class' plan to change what you eat
Carbon foodprints? The ruling class' plan to change what you eat
Spawned by the unsustainable menus fed to climate-conscious billionaires at COP26, the latest trend in foodborne guilt – examining one’s ‘carbon foodprint’ – will add to the emotional minefield that comes with ordering dinner.
Personal carbon allowances revisited
Personal carbon allowances revisited - Nature Sustainability
Personal carbon allowances (PCAs) could support climate mitigation efforts but would need to be carefully designed to avoid impacts on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This Perspective discusses why the time is ripe for reconsidering PCAs and provides a set of SDG-based design principles...
www.nature.com
