Slashdot Mirror
Cats and Dogs Contribute Significantly To Climate Change, Says UCLA Study (patch.com)
New submitter Zorro shares a report from Patch.com: When it comes to global warming, Fido and Fluffy are part of the problem, a new study by UCLA indicates. Pet ownership in the United States creates about 64 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, UCLA researchers found. That's the equivalent of driving 13.6 million cars for a year. The problem lies with the meat-filled diets of kitties and pooches, according to the study by UCLA geography professor Gregory Okin. Dogs and cats are responsible for 25 to 30 percent of the impacts of meat production in the United States, said Orkin. Compared to a plant-based diet, meat production "requires more energy, land and water and has greater environmental consequences in terms of erosion, pesticides and waste," the study found. And what goes in, must come out. In terms of waste, Okin noted, feeding pets also leads to about 5.1 million tons of feces every year, roughly equivalent to the total trash production of Massachusetts. The study has been published in the journal PLOS One.
Too much.
That's why we need a one child policy for countries with the highest birthrates like most non-western countries with the exception of Japan and Corea. We have to maintain a sustainable population since we are so good at eliminating our predators (viruses and other tiny things), otherwise we will only end up eliminating life for good.
Mars isn't a model future look for our planet, but it sure seems there is a great effort in place to make it become like that.
A brief check suggests the total CO2 generation of the US is around 5.3 Billion metric tons, which would mean cats and dogs account for 1.2% of the total CO2 generated by the US.
...someone wants to invent to worry about?
To hear other doomsday sayers talk, the cats only eat wild birds. But anyway, nobody can or would want to do anything about this, so its not worth considering. We'll either live or die with our cats and dogs, and these "studies" aren't going to change a thing.
Cats are carnivores, not omnivores like humans and dogs. You should not feed your cat fruit and vegetables.
Cats are obligate carnivores, they have to eat meat because they need the ready nutrients only meat can provide.
Dogs have a higher tolerance for carbohydrates, but really, this is an accident of domestication. In any wild setting, all canine species would eat a diet almost entirely of meat because that's what's available. The occasional browsing of grasses and plants may have some digestive benefit for canines but almost no caloric value. Their caloric intake would be animal flesh.
And my cat loves fruit and vegetables.
At the very least you should ensure that your cat's diet is fortified with Taurine. Much like humans need to eat fruit and veg in order to avoid scurvy, cats need meat and fish in order to get Taurine. (Cats produce their own vitamin C so do not need it in their diet. Ditto for humans and Taurine)
I'm surprised that your cat "loves fruit and vegetables." That might indicate that it's a very successful hunter and is getting plenty of fresh meat from birds and small mammals. Whether that is a bad thing probably depends on the environment that you live in.
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
Dogs have a higher tolerance for carbohydrates, but really, this is an accident of domestication.
Not true. Dogs are not obligate carnivores. Even wolves routinely supplement their diet with fruits and vegetables in the wild.
In any wild setting, all canine species would eat a diet almost entirely of meat because that's what's available.
Also not true. All wolf subspecies (including dogs, coyotes, dingoes) have an evolutionary preference for meat but will voluntarily eat vegetation in substantial amounts and if necessary can live without meat indefinitely. The Maned Wolf has a diet that is approximately 50% vegetation. With certain exceptions most of what you eat is also readily digestible by your dog too. Dogs are omnivores in actuality.
Except that developing countries tend to, you know, develop, and then all that burgeoning population starts to drive cars and all the other carbon-heavy things. Better to control the population growth while the development is happening, if you can.
There is no such thing as a cyanide atom.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
As much as I agree the study is moronic, you can't just wish the notion that pets contribute to producing extra meat out of existence.
Do pets eat leftovers after you're done eating yourself? Certainly. Are pets open for ickier bits of meat than you are? Also yes. But what constitutes the latter depends on culture and development levels (e.g. there are people who eat pig tail and chicken feet), and other times ickier bits just aren't so edible (e.g. bowels) or turn out to be downright unhealthy (remember Bovine spongiform encephalopathy).
Best I'm aware, a lot of industrial pet food is made with less "presentable" but still perfectly digest meat or carcass, as well as stuff that's deemed too fat by consumers, all of which would have ended up in stews or as grease in the past. Moreover, let's not forget that numerous pet owners treat their pets - because they're hipsters or better informed or both - with human consumption grade meat. Either way, pets have an impact on meat production.
I don't fully buy this studies claims.
It appears to be a PETA Propaganda.
Issue 1: Pet food including the expensive high quality stuff that doesn't have meat bi-products has what we would call meat meat bi-products, from the cuts of meat that we normally do not want to eat, or from scraps that are too small to package.
Issue 2: The carbon foot print of raising livestock has a high variance. Cattle if next to a pond, stream or river. May be getting their water without the needs of electricity. Also there is a big difference between beef and poultry.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Been-there done-that. You know there have been wars fought over byrd poop. Mostly because byrd poop (aka guano) was very helpful in making bombs (as well as being fertilizer for food)
Fortunately (unfortunately?), we discovered how to industrialize a process to fix nitrogen straight from the air (haber-bosch), so we don't need to annex and dig up islands for byrd poop anymore. We just need to burn natural gas...