[kublikhan]

Ok, time to stop saying all we have to do is stop driving and the oil problem is solved.

It is actually quite astounding how much energy is wasted by the standard American diet-style. Even driving many gas-guzzling luxury cars can conserve energy over walking -- that is, when the calories you burn walking come from the standard American diet! This is because the energy needed to produce the food you would burn in walking a given distance is greater than the energy needed to fuel your car to travel the same distance, assuming that the car gets 24 miles per gallon or better.

Bicycling Wastes Gas?

[Narz]

I've dunked this BS a number of times already.

Notice the reference to the "Standard American Diet" (which is doomed anyway). Basically it's saying it's better to drive an SUV five miles to buy some beef than walk or bike that distance. This is because meat is so environmentally disastrous and notoriously energy inefficient (beef being the worst) not because SUV's are so great.

Just goes to show with fuzzy enough math you can prove any point you want to.

[kublikhan]

I've dunked this BS a number of times already.
Notice the reference to the "Standard American Diet" (which is doomed anyway). Basically it's saying it's better to drive an SUV five miles to buy some beef than walk or bike that distance. This is because meat is so environmentally disastrous and notoriously energy inefficient (beef being the worst) not because SUV's are so great.
Just goes to show with fuzzy enough math you can prove any point you want to.

That's exactly what the author of the article was trying to point out: meat is notoriously energy inefficient. The author was trying to persuade people to abandon the "Standard American Diet", not trying to persuade people to drive SUVs. It is a bicycling website after all, he wants people to bicycle.

[gandolf]

If god didnt want you to eat meat he wouldnt have made it so yummy

[threadbear]

If god didnt want you to eat meat he wouldnt have made it so yummy

Try going off beef for a few months and see how yummy it tastes, particularly hamburger. Blahhh. It tastes like mud.

[3aidlillahi]

If god didnt want you to eat meat he wouldnt have made it so yummy

Try going off beef for a few months and see how yummy it tastes, particularly hamburger. Blahhh. It tastes like mud.

So true. Same with hot dogs. The only reason I'll eat them is because of sports. Because I've had good memories eating while watching football (I'm a Steelers' fan), I can still enjoy these two while watching.

Even then, I still feel like shit afterwards. Head aches, cramps, bleh.

Chicken is still pretty good. I'd like to try the lamb at the store, but it's from New Zealand!

[frankthetank]

I've had chili without meat and for some reason i need it... Other then soups/spaghetti, i could do without meat. Not big on burger, steaks...

Most Wisconsinites eat meat at least a couple times a day.

[Narz]

That's exactly what the author of the article was trying to point out: meat is notoriously energy inefficient. The author was trying to persuade people to abandon the "Standard American Diet", not trying to persuade people to drive SUVs. It is a bicycling website after all, he wants people to bicycle.

Ok, cool kublikhan, I'm embarassed to say I didn't actually click your link, I'd read about the data before in an article presented in a different way by an apologist for car culture / BAU and I assumed perhaps that this was the same interpretation.

[url=http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=236491]
Here's the thread in case anyone's curious.[/url]

Here's my post on the matter

[BlisteredWhippet]

Kublikhan is on my personal ignore list! Cool!

[kublikhan]

Kublikhan is on my personal ignore list! Cool!

I wish people would actually read the article before busting out the ignore. Congrats for missing the point completely :/

Editor's note: This article is widely misquoted and widely misunderstood. Most of the criticism I see of it in blogs around the Internet shows that the readers missed the point completely. I think people read a faulty blog post somewhere else, then come here, see the headline, get angry, and then decide I must be wrong (and send me woefully misinformed complaints about it) without even having carefully read the article. The point is not that "Taking the car is good for the environment" (which was the title of one blog post). The point is that just like some kinds of transportation use a lot more energy than others, some kinds of food use a lot more energy than others too, and what you eat is as much a part of your energy footprint as how you get around. Please read the article carefully. Thank you.

[BenGoble]

Unlike most of the people around here, I understand what the article as saying. Could you post a link to the article as I can't find it currently and I would like to forward it to a one of my friends doing research on supermarkets and food.

Thanks

can you not delete posts on here!?? sorry found the link now.

[Lanthanide]

Chicken is still pretty good. I'd like to try the lamb at the store, but it's from New Zealand!

Here's a quote from Wikipedia on the Food Miles page:

"A 2006 research report from Lincoln University, New Zealand counters claims about food miles by comparing total energy used in food production in Europe and New Zealand, taking into account energy used to ship the food to Europe for consumers.[5][6] The report states, "New Zealand has greater production efficiency in many food commodities compared to the UK. For example New Zealand agriculture tends to apply fewer fertilizers (which require large amounts of energy to produce and cause significant CO2 emissions) and animals are able to graze year round outside eating grass instead of large quantities of brought-in feed such as concentrates. In the case of dairy and sheep meat production NZ is by far more energy efficient, even including the transport cost, than the UK, twice as efficient in the case of dairy, and four times as efficient in case of sheep meat. In the case of apples NZ is more energy efficient even though the energy embodied in capital items and other inputs data was not available for the UK."

Obviously you aren't in Europe, but further digging can sometimes produce unexpected outcomes.

[Serial_Worrier]

Bottom line is you need protein, which means meat which means factory farmed meat for most people since organic costs way too much for poor people. Stop whining and learn to love American consumerism. You are a consumer!

[Narz]

Bottom line is you need protein, which means meat which means factory farmed meat

*buzz* wrong, thanks for playing.

Educate yourself a bit

There are certain effects from getting aminos from plant sources though.



or



Source

for most people since organic costs way too much for poor people. Stop whining and learn to love American consumerism. You are a consumer!

I hate sht like this. Don't rock the boat. "You have to sacrifice your values a little bit so why have any at all."

[Narz]

Narz the left vertical axis does represent single cancers, per 100,000 women, per year correct?

That's what it looks like to me, yeah.