If you want to eat an animal with a low carbon footprint there are several things you need to consider: # The distance the food has travelled from where the animal was raised (and then slaughtered) to where you are. For example, I live in London, there are lots of sheep in the UK, if I ate British Lamb I can be fairly sure that it has a lower carbon footprint than New Zealand lamb.
# The amount of energy expended during it's lifetime to keep it alive. It takes proportionally a great deal more energy to raise a cow than it does a sheep or a chicken. I believe beef is one of the least efficient ways to turn plants into energy. So, to eat an animal with a low carbon footprint you need to find something that is sourced locally and preferably not raised using inefficient farming methods. I would suggest that line-caught fish (if you live near the sea) or free range chicken (locally sourced) would be a good option for you.
Having a medium sized dog as a pet has the same carbon footprint as running two SUVs, or four-wheel drives. This is largely because of the amount of meat they eat.
The type of food you eat can affect your carbon footprint based on factors like production methods, transportation, and packaging. Plant-based foods generally have a lower carbon footprint than animal-based foods due to the resource-intensive nature of meat production. Choosing locally sourced and seasonal foods can also help reduce your carbon footprint by minimizing transportation emissions.
Yes, choosing to eat more vegetables and less meat can help reduce carbon emissions. The meat industry has a larger carbon footprint compared to growing vegetables, so opting for a plant-based diet can have a positive impact on the environment.
It takes tremendously more vegetable food to feed the animals that people then eat, then it would take to feed people vegetables rather than meat. It is also true that the digestive process of ungulates such as cows tends to release a lot of methane into the atmosphere.
Most food has a carbon footprint. This means that the production, transport and even cooking release some carbon emissions. If you eat apples that are grown on the other side of the world, that apple has a small global footprint from all the transport that carried it from its tree to your mouth. If you eat an apple that grew in your garden then its carbon footprint is very small (fertiliser, water), or even neutral.
By eating different foods, we will be changing the food chain, effecting the enviornment.
Grass is a plant, not an animal. It does not eat meat, it only "eats" sunlight, carbon dioxide and nutrients in the soil.
yes
Meat because you don't just eat fruits and berries.
It is better to eat local food than food that has traveled a far distance. The best food is the kind that is available in the locality where you live. This is because of the higher nutritional content of the food, as well as how there is less carbon footprint in not having to send the food a far distance.
I have no idea who originally answered the question of "did Albert Einstein eat meat?" but the only correct answer is that he did indeed eat meat He was a supporter of the vegetarian diet but admitted many times that he could not live up to it. He did finally give up meat the last few years of his life. He is also said to be a forerunner of the heavy carbon footprint theory based on meat eating but this has not been corroborated or confirmed.
Yes, but some do not have much meat on them and others their meat doesn't taste good. It is better to eat broilers or dual purpose birds.