“A woman should wear fragrance wherever she expects to be kissed”-Coco Chanel
Laura Reynolds looks at some of the cheapest beauty products available
The unfortunate truth is, however, that not only does the need for campaigners testify that many people need persuasion to do even the simplest of energy saving tasks, but also that we need to acknowledge that we are going to need to make more serious lifestyle changes than putting your empty bottles in a different bin than we used to.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record to those who know me, I turn to an example. It always surprises me when reading advice like Al Gore gives you at the end of "An Inconvenient Truth" on how to be a bit more environmentally friendly that this one always gets left out in favour of ironically more convenient tips. The winner for the most unpopular way to reduce your carbon footprint is of course to EAT LESS MEAT.
The truth is, the livestock and fishing industries are the second biggest cause of greenhouse gases at 18% compared to the 13.5% of the entire world’s transport system. You can ride your bike as much as you like, but if you’re looking for a really big way to cut down on carbon, why not try going veggie, or even vegan, five or six days a week if full time meatlessness is too daunting a prospect.
Yet this is still a very unpopular piece of advice. People tend to get a bit upset at the suggestion that their meat feast pizza has had an adverse environmental impact, because the truth is that most of us really do not want to change our eating habits, or make too much of a lifestyle change at all. The truth isn't called "Inconvenient" for nothing.
At the risk of sounding a bit apocalyptic, if we really want to make the changes necessary to stop a catastrophic build up of greenhouse gases, people are going to have to make some big changes to the way they consume. Don’t get me wrong, this column is about suggesting some simple, easy ways to live in a more environmentally friendly way, but at some point people are going to have to realise that we have to sometimes to give up things that we don’t really want to. After all, once we really start to feel the impacts of climate change, the planet’s going to force us to give them up anyway.
Presumably cheese and milk have similar effects?
>.>
I'd die if I didn't have meat and cheese...
Yep, Jason doesn't need to bother about the environment, God created the world for him, so he's gonna take care of it too...
Not really. I recycle a lot, walk/run virtually everywhere unless I'm running late or it's insanely far (i.e. London) and try not to get receipts etc. I also generally eat cheese on toast though that's because I'm broke 
I cut down in a lot of areas. Granted that I haven't cut down on meat significantly but I would find it extremely difficult to cut down further. I know it's a lame excuse and I admire vegans because they can do it. Apologies for not being perfect.
I'm sorry, but I just don't buy the 'eco' argument for going Veggie/Vegan. What happens to the animals if everyone stops eating meat. Do all the cattle disappear ?
Unless you want the animals to be systematically killed off in some way, to reduce methane emissions, then fine - but then you have a rather large ethical dilemma.
If this is not an option, then wouldn't the animal population increase if they are no longer being consumed as food ?
I'm sorry, but it just doesn't make sense. This article does not explain how eating less meat reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
Domestic animals such as cows are bred specifically for meat and dairy production. You don't have to kill them all off, you just stop breeding them. Which is a bit of a moot point really as the article is less about cutting meat out completely and more about cutting down.
If it's evidence you're after, the UN published a very comprehensive review of the environmental impact of livestock in 2006 called 'Livestock's Long Shadow', covering not just emissions but also things like deforestation for grazing and livestock's impact on biodiversity. It can be viewed here:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM
The vegan diet is incredibly limited, and if everyone switched to it to 'save the earth' then there would probably be a serious food shortage of staple vegan goods, such as beans and pulses at certain times of the year.
Not to mention the difficulties of maintaining such a diet when on a tight schedule, bringing up children, or not being a particularly inventive cook!! Then of course there's the deficiencies in protein and fat (! ) and of course calcium associated. Not as healthy as everyone thinks, and often a very expensive way to live. Look in the 'free from' section of the supermarket, or a health food shop and you'll see what I mean. No 'feed your family for a fiver' in any of the speciality food shops...
The vegetarian diet isn't impossible to switch to, the only time i really eat meat is when I eat out, or a bacon sarnie (Quorn havnt come up with a decent replacement for bacon yet!).
Of course the flip side to this is that people should be able to eat what they like, and produce and sell what they like too. Scaling down the meat industry would be a crushing blow to rural europe and rural south america, particularly in areas where arable land is of poor fertility, making crop growing impossible.
Shame the last paragraph is so excessive though - we won't really need to make that many changes if businesses adapt to new methods of production. Car emissions are going down, planes are supposedly getting cleaner and can carry more passengers for less fuel, carrier bags are recycled, fuel companies are investing in Capture technology and nuclear / (some)renewables instead of coal (not that clean coal is a bad thing). So quite how drastic the effects on our lives is going to be i'm not so sure. The doom-mongerers havn't stopped us from doing very much so far, and the differences to lifestyle to help the environment have been miniscule.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report