Emissions from 13 dairy firms match those of entire UK, says report
Exclusive: Milk giants’ climate impact rising and production caps needed, say researchers
www.theguardian.com
The 13 biggest dairy companies in the world have the same combined greenhouse gas emissions as the UK, the sixth biggest economy in the world, Report
- Thread starter GeorgeC1
- Start date
www.theguardian.com
primmiemoo
Member
- Location
- Devon
They can't finger the ruminants, so they are going for the processors and distributors, perhaps?
Propaganda on avocado toast, probably.
Propaganda on avocado toast, probably.
what do you mean so what? 13 dairy companies have more greenhouse emissions then the 4th biggest economy.
Storeman
Member
- Location
- South East Englandshire
Oh look. An article from the Gruanaid. Well that will be accurate and full of actual scientific facts then 
Soon to be 40th biggest and falling.
Think the world has bigger problems than cows farting
good for them, but I didn't realise it was a competition
this sort of stuff really gets on your tits after a while
what about the 13 smallest dairy companies are they keeping up with Lundy or do they have work to do
you do know that when we have lots of co2 in the air we can grow bigger plants keep bigger cows and have even bigger emissions from dairy
well that won't be so bad then
averageguy54
Member
- Location
- New Brunswick, Canada
Maybe we just need less processing of a food product that doesn't need a lot of processing.
So what? No really, so what?
What does that actually mean? Without the context of what those dairy firms actually *do*, it really is a meaningless comparison.
It's worth remembering that the humans on this planet have to eat something. It's kinda fundamental to the propagation of the species. Our civilization is currently fundamentally reliant on the use of fossil fuels, so it's entirely consistent for our food production and processing to rely on fossil fuels (which is where the vast majority of GHGs come from ultimately).
Maybe if you're worried bout the overall emissions of GHGs, why not start with the 63% of emissions that aren't related to something quite so important as food production?
(BTW, for the record, I think there's a lot wrong with our food economy, but I'm not sure bashing dairy to death is all that high on the list of things to do to make it better.)
- Location
- DD9.
........says report in paper paid to write anti-dairy and meat production stories.
I wasn't bashing an industry just posted an article I like reading.
If it was truly about maximising food production something like 45% of crops are grown to feed Animal Agriculture, I'm not a vegan or vegetarian I'd be willing to pay more for meat/animal proteins if it means less GHG being emitted overall as part of a larger holistic approach to climate change.
The whataboutism about fossil fuels is not really the point, FF's are being dealt with gradually via new energy sources.
- Location
- North West England
The woke and terminally outraged have just cottoned on to the fact that the guardian was started with money made from slavery. So it might not be around much longer......
If FF are being dealt with, we have only the other extractive processes to worry about.
Silica mining (for solar panels, amongst other things).
Rare earth metal mining (for wind turbine generators, amongst other things).
Deep aquifer depletion (for almond, avocado, asparagus production, and dairy farming in some parts of the world, amongst other things). The list goes on.
The article you posted a link to is still vacuous click-bait.
ETA: Shame really as the guardian is the only mainstream alternative to the overwhelmingly right-wing press we have in this country.
You need to say that louder
GeorgeK
Member
- Location
- Leicestershire
Funny the methane cycle isn't mentioned in the article? Cows eat grass and produce methane, over 9 years in the atmosphere it's broken down into C02. Grass reabsorbs the C02, the cows eat the grass and so on. So long as the number of cows doesn't increase (in this country numbers are falling) the net impact on greenhouse gas levels is zero.
The article is misleading, like saying the Amazon rain forest is a huge producer of C02 from rotting trees and therefore must be got rid of, but ignoring that the new trees growing reabsorb the C02 from the dead ones
The article is misleading, like saying the Amazon rain forest is a huge producer of C02 from rotting trees and therefore must be got rid of, but ignoring that the new trees growing reabsorb the C02 from the dead ones
Roger Perry
Member
Oh, do tell please.
lol.
The article (apart from being full of lies regarding cows) is a comment on the concentration of market share, that is all. Reverse that concentration and the headline becomes redundant.
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Guardian hates all farmers in the UK, and all farmers who dont grow organic avocado, soya and quinoa. Sadly, all teachers read it. Home school is full of stuff straight from Guardian. Sigh.
The London Palladium event “BPR Seminar”
This is our next step following the London rally 
BPR is not just a farming issue, it affects ALL business, it removes incentive to invest for growth
Join us @LondonPalladium on the 16th for beginning of UK business fight back
lwtheatres.co.uk
BPR is not just a farming issue, it affects ALL business, it removes incentive to invest for growth
Join us @LondonPalladium on the 16th for beginning of UK business fight back
BPR Summit | LW Theatres
lwtheatres.co.uk