Last week we had a people in New Zealand saying we need edible pets. This week we have England’s “premier climatologist” saying we need to give up meat. You first, me Lord. However, this sort of tactic risks marginalization of his cause. Poll numbers are already falling. What’s really needed here is “steak watch”. Since as we’ve seen with many prominent people who give worldly advice, they often don’t follow it, we need some British paparazzi at restaurants and public banquets to see if Lord Stern follows his own advice. When in Japan, maybe someone can offer him the new Windows 7 Whopper to try. Why no “OSX Snow Leopard” Burger? – Anthony
From the London Times: Climate chief Lord Stern: give up meat to save the planet
by Robin Pagnamenta, Energy Editor
People will need to turn vegetarian if the world is to conquer climate change, according to a leading authority on global warming.
In an
interview with The Times, Lord Stern of Brentford said: “Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world’s resources. A vegetarian diet is better.”
Direct emissions of methane from cows and pigs is a significant source of greenhouse gases. Methane is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide as a global warming gas.
Lord Stern, the author of the influential 2006 Stern Review on the cost of tackling global warming, said that a successful deal at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December would lead to soaring costs for meat and other foods that generate large quantities of greenhouse gases.
He predicted that people’s attitudes would evolve until meat eating became unacceptable. “I think it’s important that people think about what they are doing and that includes what they are eating,” he said. “I am 61 now and attitudes towards drinking and driving have changed radically since I was a student. People change their notion of what is responsible. They will increasingly ask about the carbon content of their food.”
Lord Stern, a former chief economist of the World Bank and now I. G. Patel Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, warned that British taxpayers would need to contribute about £3 billion a year by 2015 to help poor countries to cope with the inevitable impact of climate change.
He also issued a clear message to President Obama that he must attend the meeting in Copenhagen in person in order for an effective deal to be reached. US leadership, he said, was “desperately needed” to secure a deal.
Read the rest of the article at the London Times: Climate chief Lord Stern: give up meat to save the planet
Like this:
Like Loading...
“They [young people] will increasingly ask about the carbon content of their food.”
Well, last time I checked, your Lordship, all food can be reduced to amino acids, fatty acids and carbohydrates, all of which contain molecules of carbon in some form. In that case, if you think you can eat without consuming carbon, lots of luck.
On the outrageous scale this hits a perfect 10 out of 10.
Give the man a prize…
Step right up, tell what you really intend to do — if you get the power.
It would cut the cost of health care quite a bit though 🙂
Posted at Science Museum “Prove It” site.
The planet is cooling, not warming. CO2 is not a pollutant. Carbon trading is a tax. In two years, AGW will be acknowledged as a delusion and its supporters will be vilified, if they are lucky. The climate always changes. It’s historical!
http://www.nothingtodowithco2.com/pdf/AGW_presentation_ILMCD.pdf
http://www.climateaudit.org/
As for that loony Lord Stern of Brentford, he’s well past his sell by date.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/27/climate-craziness-of-the-week-2-steak-watch/
Read on.
http://www.climatedepot.com/
http://climaterealists.com/index.php
http://iceagenow.com/
BTW, On Friday The Englishman noted that voting was about four to one against. Derek Reynolds in correspondence noted that by Sunday morning it was approaching six to one against, which corresponds to your bending author’s recollection. Quite suddenly the votes have become almost even. Far be it for us to suggest that there is anything of an ichthyoid malodour about this, or that it is in any way comparable to any recent election in an Islamic republic, but Sunday night is a very unusual time for such intense activity on the internet. If such movement occurred in a publicly quoted share price the regulatory authorities would be sniffing around in no uncertain manner.
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/2009%20October.htm#odd
As I asserted, you warmists are on a hiding to nothing.
To restore your faith in the sanity of the human race, go to the Times web page and look at the comments – 631 comments last time I looked. Some of them are quite amusing. Click on ‘most recommended’ to get the best ones.
His learned lordship was on the radio this morning, falsely claiming that the number of ‘deniers’ was decreasing, even though the interviewer had earlier referred to the latest poll showing increasing disbelief.
But aren’t we supposed to be eating our pets?
Doesn’t this guy realize that our pets are made of meat?
Lord Stern a climatologist? I think not — and probably not all that hot as an economist either.
As for his prescription regarding meat consumption, I wouldn’t be surprised if, in his mind, it is more like, “Meat is bad for ye and thee, but not for me.”
Little meat is eaten in India (a former colony of yours Lord Stern) and many cattle roam the country side. Will India be exempt from your scheme?
FWIW, World Bank policies (bad loans to dictators, raising taxes to repay the loans and thus preventing the poor from raising any capital to start businesses and improve their lives) derived in part no doubt from Lord Stern’s economic advice have demonstrably hurt third world countries. What gives him any credibility to promote more disaster?
FWIW-2, there actually may be problems from deforestation to create pastureland and feedlot pollution that should be addressed.
Apparently, his Lordship is not a strict vegetarian.
Reporter: I understand your Lordship is a vegetarian.
His Lordship: Indeed I am.
Reporter: Could you give us some food tips, I mean how does being on a vegetarian diet work?
His Lordship: Certainly, suppose you were to have a nice sirloin steak.
Reporter: Yes?
His Lordship: You select a sample from the vegetable kingdon. I’m a parsely man myself.
Reporter: Yes:
His Lordship: And you lay the sprig of parsley on the steak.
Reporter: I see. What else can you do?
His Lordship: Say I’m having a nice roast grouse.
Reporter: Grouse is nice.
His Lordship: Well, prepare your grouse, and add a sprig of parsely.
Reporter: Go on.
His Lordship: Venison. . .
Reporter: You add a sprig of parsely?
His Lordship: That’s it exactly.
Reporter: I can’t wait to try it.
At the Society for Marine Mammalogy Conference earlier this month in Quebec, a paper was presented posing the question: Are [large] whales a net sink or source of carbon dioxide? The paper was complete with photos of farting whales and what happens to the carcasses. The conclusion was that whales are indeed a net sink for carbon. We would assume, then, that Lord Stern of Brentford should at once work to stop the Japanese whale hunt and other whale and dolphin kills in Norway, Iceland, and elsewhere. After stopping the hunts of wild “ocean bison,” he could then shift to the domesticated terrestrial bovines.
Brilliant! Hypocrisy is surely an Achilles heel of tyrants.
Let’s see, eating meat wastes water food resources. But in the NY Times, its found so does solar energy generation:
http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/water-use-by-solar-projects-intensifies/
And don’t get me started on food to fuel bio-fuels but even the second generation biofuels from cellulosic stock doesn’t look so good:
http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2009/10/biofuel_woes_1.html
So going green is only supposed to cost a postage stamp a day but in the name of green I should:
1. Have fewer kids
2. Eat no meat
3. Use less toilet paper (preferably in a waterless toilet)
4. Live in a different house
5. Stop driving a take public transportation
6. Limit my flying (unless I’m on an eco-pilgrimage)
7. Send any energy intensive jobs to developing countries so they can use their quota of greenhouse gases to prosper.
Sounds like the good old days, well the olden days at least.
“He also issued a clear message to President Obama that he must attend the meeting in Copenhagen in person in order for an effective deal to be reached. US leadership, he said, was “desperately needed” to secure a deal.”
Why? Once again, the only reason Obama needs to attend, or more specifically, for the US to agree to an outrageous treaty, is so that money can be transferred through a special-interest filtration system (SIFS: aka. Government).
If this actually had anything to do with reduction of ‘pollutants’, every committed sovereign nation can do whatever is needed today. That is, why cannot Britain ‘take the lead’ and show us how successful Co2 reduction policies and technological instruments can make everyone’s life better.
Is there anywhere in the world that has achieved, or is on the way to achieving CO2 reduction goals? If not, why not? If so, then please show us how it’s done, the investment curve, the desired result and the actual result.
By the way, this is funny:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6425738/Science-Museums-climate-change-poll-backfires.html
I liked the comment on the Times…
Don’t think of it as meat,
think of it as recycled grass.
DaveE.
It almost sounds like something The Onion would publish.
Perry (09:55:31) :
“As I asserted, you warmists are on a hiding to nothing.”
‘ “On a hiding to nothing”
Meaning
To be faced with a situation which is pointless, as a successful outcome is impossible. This is usually expressed in terms of a sporting contest in which one of two outcomes is foreseen, either a hiding or nothing. ‘ from http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/on-a-hiding-to-nothing.html
I avoided meat for 20 years and ate mostly bread, pasta, potatoes, rice, veggies, and cake. With a growing waistline and low energy levels, I opted to try a low carb diet of mostly meat, fish, and veggies; I’ve never felt better.
Lord Stern is not only not a climatologist, he is also not a nutritionist. Funny how those two fields seem to have a lot in common!
There’s a real issue here about whether meat is man’s natural diet, and as such, how should we balance the health of our species against that of other species on the planet?
One point to note.
As you indicate a little way into the article, Lord Stern is not “England’s premier climatologist”, nor indeed any kind of climatologist. He’s an economist.
Rather reminds me of the old joke.
A surgeon, and architect and an economist were travelling together, and fell to discussing which of them had the oldest profession.
The surgeon says “I think I can claim priority there. If you refer to the book of Genesis, it tells how God took one of Adam’s ribs to create Eve. So God was in fact the first surgeon.”
Then the architect says “Ah, but before he did that he created the heaven and the earth from chaos. That was the work of an architect.”
And the economist says “And who created chaos ?”
Really GORIC !!
Entry Word: gore
Function: verb
Meaning: to penetrate or hold (something) with a pointed object running with the bulls in Pamplona, Spain, may sound like fun, but the bulls have been known to gore runners who get too close
http://www.aolsvc.merriam-webster.aol.com/thesaurus/gore
Cattle are a machine to convert inedible plants into edible meat. Cattle would have to be replaced with more farmland, more oil-burning tractors, and more chemical fertilizer. I don’t think that is what he wanted.
Steak for me but not for you, peasants.
People DO need to give up meat, but not because of any climate nonsense, but because of the land and resources required to provide for animals. If everyone went veggie then there would be MUCH more land available and much less use of resources like water and energy. In the future everyone WILL be almost vegetarian. Meat will be an expensive luxury. Admittedly that time is quite a way off, but it WILL come.
This have been obviously written by vegetarians, but….consider this:
-Leaves are green
-Green is chlorophyl
-Chlorophyl is made from CO2 + water + Sun
-No CO2 = No Chlorophyl = No Green = No Leaves = No Vegetarian Lord.
-May your Lordship rest in green-peace.
Interesting. The Science Museum’s “Prove It” poll now has a ratio of 3 to 10.
To be more precise: