Meta-study finds: “Men are the worst.” pic.twitter.com/Pb6RU1x0Ic— Argo Nerd (@argonerd) July 22, 2021
It is really better for the planet to be a single, childless, petless woman on a climatarian diet living alone in a dirty apartment full of cheap disposable wine cartons in a dense big city.
“But is man’s best friend, the planet’s greatest enemy?
As lovable as they may be, cats and dogs come with a steep carbon pawprint. This is mainly because of their diet, which includes a lot of meat and animal products.
The meat consumption of cats and dogs in the US produces around 64 million tonnes of CO2 per year, the equivalent of a year’s worth of driving from 13 million cars, according to a 2017 study published in the journal PLOS One. …
The study found that cats and dogs are responsible for 25 to 30 per cent of the environmental impact of meat consumption in the US.
“Pets have many benefits, but also a huge environmental impact,” said Gregory Okin, author the study and a geography professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. “Those of us in favor of eating or serving meat need to be able to have an informed conversation about our choices, and that includes the choices we make for our pets.” …
Dry food production for cats and dogs uses around 49 million hectares of agricultural land, roughly twice the size of the UK, annually, the study found. …”
Getting your dogs on a bugman insect diet might not be good enough. It turns out that men have a higher carbon footprint than women because they drive more and eat more red meat.
“When it comes to climate change, male consumers may get a bit more of the blame than their female counterparts. Men spend their money on greenhouse gas-emitting goods and services, such as meat and fuel, at a much higher rate than women, a new Swedish study found.
Published this week in the Journal of Industrial Ecology, the study looked at consumer-level spending patterns rather than the climate impact of producers and manufacturers to see if households could reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by buying different products and services.
“The way they spend is very stereotypical – women spend more money on home decoration, health and clothes and men spend more money on fuel for cars, eating out, alcohol and tobacco,” study author Annika Carlsson Kanyama, at the research company Ecoloop in Sweden, told The Guardian.
The authors analyzed Swedish government data through 2012 on the spending habits of households, single men and single women, as well as other more updated consumer pricing data. They said a “large proportion” of people in affluent countries, such as those in the European Union, live in single-person households.
Single Swedish men didn’t spend much more money than single Swedish women in total — only about 2% more — but what they bought tended to have a worse impact on the environment, according to the study.
In fact, men spent their money on things that emitted 16% more greenhouse gases than what women bought. For example, men spent 70% more money on “greenhouse gas intensive items” such as fuel for their vehicles.
There were also differences between men and women within categories, such as spending on food and drinks. Men bought meat at a higher rate than women, though women purchased dairy products at a greater clip than men. Both meat and dairy production result in high greenhouse gas emissions. …”
We’re reducing everything now to their carbon emissions.
“Men emit 16 percent more greenhouse gases than women because they tend to spend more money on fuel and eat more meat, among other things, a new study has found. …”
This has been proven by “science.”
It would be an act of pure environmental vandalism to bring a male child into this world.