Don’t know but with the amount of bulls**t from their teenage years probably a lotJut out of curiosity, has anyone worked out how much carbon is generated by raising a child from birth to 18?
Not a problem
View attachment 984586
A problem
View attachment 984587
But by far and away the biggest problem
View attachment 984588
Try this paper: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541Jut out of curiosity, has anyone worked out how much carbon is generated by raising a child from birth to 18?
well learn something everyday, I didnt know calves from extensive and sustainable grazing suckler herds in England get shipped to be fattened in massive feedlots in the US.....The calf in the top photo, is also in the middle photo.
I know, of course where you're coming from, and for individual producers promoting their own particular system it's a valid argument. But for an industry, it has to be that both photos are 'not a problem', because otherwise you need to line up all beef producers in the UK and divide them into two camps. Can't be done.
It's a reference to the fact that almost all US feedlot cattle spend most of their lives as what we'd call suckler calves on extensive rangeland. They are only 'finished' in a feedlot because there isn't sufficient nutrition in the rangeland pastures to reach finish quickly.well learn something everyday, I didnt know calves from extensive and sustainable grazing suckler herds in England get shipped to be fattened in massive feedlots in the US.....
Also see "How bad are bananas" by Tim Berners Lee https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/How_Bad_Are_Bananas/Pym9DwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0Try this paper: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541
"We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of (tCO2e) emission reductions per 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year)."
It's a reference to the fact that almost all US feedlot cattle spend most of their lives as what we'd call suckler calves on extensive rangeland. They are only 'finished' in a feedlot because there isn't sufficient nutrition in the rangeland pastures to reach finish quickly.
It's not actually that bad from a purely climate impact.
The real climate impact from cattle is those areas (mainly Asia and South America) where numbers are increasing significantly.
How much of the impact
Try this paper: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541
"We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of (tCO2e) emission reductions per 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year)."
There is no impact.
Well there's more CO2 emitted as a result, that's an impact.
Whether that CO2 affects the climate or not is a different matter altogether.
Welcome aboard .
Jut out of curiosity, has anyone worked out how much carbon is generated by raising a child from birth to 18?
Well I am feeling pretty proud of myself right now for having one fewer child