Nearly 50 per cent of Canadians say they can’t afford meat
(ipolitics.ca)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (67)
sorted by:
It should be "Nearly 50 per cent of Canadians say they can’t afford meat the way the used to"
From the article: "nearly 50 per cent said they’d bought fewer meat products in the previous six months"
Noticed it getting warmer lately? Droughts? Fires? Deaths from heat waves? Relevant: "Meat accounts for nearly 60% of all greenhouse gases from food production" https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/13/meat-greenhouses-gases-food-production-study
So Canada, which organically, has a declining population, should encourage it's citizens to eat less meat so some guy in the third world can have their 11th child? Get fucked.
Not seeing that connection. I was thinking more like so the woods don't burn up and crops don't fail, Greenland and Antarctica's ice doesn't all melt, and so on. Noticed any changes in the weather lately?
If you have the time have a look at Table 1 "Top Six Areas of Climate Change Risk Facing Canada" in this report: https://cca-reports.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Report-Canada-top-climate-change-risks.pdf
Hahahaha. This is a serious report? All the northern Native communities gonna be running each other down with their canoes?
Don't know much about the North, eh?
Let’s do what if.
Internet search engines are your friends.
Or perhaps you have something you want to say?
So if greenlands and Antarctic ice does melt…So what? Greenland is called Greenland becuase it used to be green. Greenland used to vary between 50F to about 1F.
The woods “burn up”? How do the woods “burn up” by simply having the average temperature increase by say. 3c? No. The cause of most forest and wild fires is lightning, not ambient temperature. Lightning will start a forest fire no matter if it’s 5c or 50c.
Higher co2 means better and thicker leaf growth and faster tree repopulation. Fire is a vital part of mother nature’s forest cleaning and renewal ecosystem and fires raged in the forest long before mankind came on the scene and interfered. Canada’s jack pine needs the heat of fire nearby to germinate. Can we reduce forest fires by clearing away undergrowth and having fire breaks? Yes. If we don’t, like California, Mother Nature will do it for us. The recent media hysteria of forest fires in BC were surreal. The fires should have been left alone to burn out, whilst protecting populated areas.
Rising sea levels. The consequences do not lend themselves to short OmegaCanada posts. National Geographic summarizes things fairly well: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/sea-level-rise-1
Lightning starts them. Climate change produces more lightning. How well they burn is firmly linked to climate change.
https://blogs.egu.eu/divisions/np/2021/09/01/forest-fires/
This is the logical equivalent of saying "Raising the speed limit in cities to 100 miles per hour will allow people to get where they're going faster." True, but not a good idea given everything else it means.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ask-the-experts-does-rising-co2-benefit-plants1/