RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Wright, Angus]

World Hunger: Twelve Myths, revised edition from Food First! takes this up in a 
popular treatment, but with scholarly sources cited. On specific cases, there 
is considerable literature out on the effect of corn exports to Mexico as a 
result of lowering restrictions under NAFTA.

Angus Wright
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Studies
California State University, Sacramento



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Andrew Biro
Sent: Tue 2/13/2007 12:08 PM
To: Kai N. Lee; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact
 
Hi,

Apologies for the delay in picking up this thread... I'm very interested
in Kai's observation: 

 

In Ghana a year ago, I saw billboards advertising rice grown in Texas
and California, whose low prices (counting transportation across the
seas) had decimated the poor farms of the west African interior. 

 

I know that US (also Canadian) agricultural exports have increased
substantially since the 1960s. Does anyone know of any sources that
document the impact of agricultural imports on small producers. I'm
particularly interested in finding sources that could provide more of an
overview of this as a global trend, as opposed to single case studies. I
know Mike Davis talks about this in Planet of Slums, as a factor pushing
rapid urbanization in the global South, but I can't think of any
others... 

 

Cheers,

 

Andrew

 

Andrew Biro

Dept. of Political Science

Acadia University

Wolfville, NS  B4P 2R6

(902)585-1925

[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 

 





 

RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Andrew Biro]

Hi,

Apologies for the delay in picking up this thread... I'm very interested
in Kai's observation: 

 

In Ghana a year ago, I saw billboards advertising rice grown in Texas
and California, whose low prices (counting transportation across the
seas) had decimated the poor farms of the west African interior. 

 

I know that US (also Canadian) agricultural exports have increased
substantially since the 1960s. Does anyone know of any sources that
document the impact of agricultural imports on small producers. I'm
particularly interested in finding sources that could provide more of an
overview of this as a global trend, as opposed to single case studies. I
know Mike Davis talks about this in Planet of Slums, as a factor pushing
rapid urbanization in the global South, but I can't think of any
others... 

 

Cheers,

 

Andrew

 

Andrew Biro

Dept. of Political Science

Acadia University

Wolfville, NS  B4P 2R6

(902)585-1925

[EMAIL PROTECTED]  

 





 

RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Wright, Angus]

Just a quick reply on this one, maybe elaborate later. As Wendy Wolford and I 
found in writing our book on the landless movement, the MST, in Brazil, poor 
farmers who are land reform beneficiaries have found farmers markets to be an 
ideal tool for them. It puts them producing a wide diversity of market-hedging 
products, gaining various kinds of value-added bonuses, avoiding 
intermediaries, and, last but not least, builds political support and 
understanding among urban consumers, many of whom have grotesque, media-built 
images of who the MST folk are. It has also made for building coalitions with 
other small farm and consumer groups.

Angus Wright
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Studies
California State University, Sacramento



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Kai N. Lee
Sent: Wed 1/31/2007 1:06 PM
To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: Vegan and Environmental Impact
 
A fine conversation.

Let me ask a GEP question: how scalable is local, agroecologically  
enlightened food?  There is good news around us in the US, from  
farmers markets to the expansion of Whole Foods.  Yet the latter is  
laden with ambiguities - as one can also see at Trader Joe's and the  
newly greening Wal-Mart.

In a provocative and well-written essay called "Unhappy Meals," which  
appeared in last Sunday's New York Times magazine (still posted on  
nytimes.com), Michael Pollan urges Americans to pay more for their  
food.  His point is that the proportion of income devoted to food has  
dropped by about half in the last two generations, and that there is  
abundant evidence that this has been a mixed blessing for both public  
health and the environment.  Pollan also says, wistfully, that  
Americans would be better off thinking of food in terms of culture  
and community than as (cheap) fuel.

Being a member of the wish-I-lived-in-Berkeley class, I of course  
agree with Pollan.  But the gimlet-eyed social scientist wonders how  
self-absorbed all this talk seems to the rest of the world.  Hence my  
query about whether as either social policy or smart business we have  
yet found the intellectually tractable center of this discussion.   
Maybe agroecologically enlightened food production is scalable:  
anyone have data?

In Ghana a year ago, I saw billboards advertising rice grown in Texas  
and California, whose low prices (counting transportation across the  
seas) had decimated the poor farms of the west African interior.  The  
marketable food fish in even the remote archipelagoes of Indonesia  
are virtually gone: a result of all the American money flowing from  
Wal-Mart into China.These are different issue of local food than  
the farmers market, but not less important ones.

Cheers,
Kai

Kai N. Lee, Rosenburg Professor of environmental studies, Center for  
Environmental Studies, Williams College, Kellogg House, 41 Mission  
Park Drive, Williamstown MA 01267 USA.  Voice & voicemail: 01 
+413-597-2358; fax: 01+413-597-3489.
http://www.williams.edu/ces/ces/people/klee/klee.htm

RE: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Wright, Angus]

Rich and others,

I agree completely with regard to local economies and markets. Fortunately for 
me I live in northern California where all of this is relatively easy and 
presents a fabulous array of year-round choices. And, where the organizations 
and farmers promoting those choices are very active. But, if it can be done in 
Pennsylvania to your satisfaction, than it can be done in most places.

Then there are the Inuit who have traditionally depended on a diet that is 
virtually 100% carnivorous, requiring all the organs to get a good mineral and 
vitamin balance, another version of eating locally and in season..

Angus Wright
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Studies
California State University, Sacramento



-Original Message-
From: Wallace, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 1/31/2007 12:20 PM
To: Wright, Angus
Cc: Mary Pettenger; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu; Dale W Jamieson; Maria 
Ivanova
Subject: RE: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact
 
Nice statement, Angus. 

Also being active in this area, I would add only that given the nature
of today's industrial food systems, considerations of local economy
should be added to the agroecological paradigm. When I moved to
southeastern Pennsylvania five years ago, I was shocked at the advanced
development of the local agroecological market. Virtually every type of
meat and climate-appropriate fruit and vegetable is grown here by local,
small-scale, ecologically sensitive farmers, and sold in local
community-based farmers markets. I know the farmers market phenomenon is
a huge and growing trend in the U.S., but what surprised me here was the
combination of near-complete coverage of unprocessed food types and the
explicit focus not just of individual farmers, but of the entire
"market" or "industry" on the benefits that accrue to the local economy
(and thereby return to the agroecological systems in place). Having
moved here from Florida's central east coast, where there were literally
no farmers markets, much less locally grown organic and/or sustainably
farmed meats or veggies, this was an eye-opener. 

So my sense of the ideal paradigm, for what it's worth, is a combination
of agroecological and local economic (or ecological economic) as a
combined and most fully realized response to the industrial food system.

And I concur with Angus's closing point that this is a very different
view than that driven by animal rights considerations.

Cheers,

Rich

--
 
Richard L. Wallace, Ph.D.
Chair, Environmental Studies
Ursinus College
601 E. Main Street
Collegeville, PA 19426 USA
(610) 409-3730
(610) 409-3660 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wright,
Angus
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:50 PM
To: Dale W Jamieson; Maria Ivanova
Cc: Mary Pettenger; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: RE: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

As I am sure many of you know, the main environmental and justice
arguments (rather than animal liberation arguments for not eating meat
were pretty well-laid out in Frances Moore Lappe's Diet for a Small
Planet and others have been improving on and elaborating those arguments
for some time. I was convinced by those arguments for many years and
became a vegetarian for quite some time largely based on them. I later
became convinced that the best eating model was based on what the best
kind of farm would produce. The best kind of farm and farming system, I
believe, is one that is a rough mimic of natural processes, and that as
such incorporates animals in a variety of ways and makes modest  amounts
of meat consumption a logical consequence of the production system. This
is an agroecological approach rather than a "minimal energy" or "minimal
materials" approach, though in the larger picture, it would tend to
minimize energy and materials production. Of course, large scale or l!
 ong term feed lot production would not be part of this.and meat would
be produced in ways that are far different, ecologically and ethically,
than what we now have. The farm, in fact, would look a lot more like
what the mixed production farms of the American midwest looked like one
hundred years ago--the kind many of us older folks remember from our
childhoods. It is also a kind of farm one still encounters frequently
outside of Europe and the U.S. (Eating very little beef in the U.S., I
am much more relaxed about eating the delicious and more healthful grass
fed beef one finds in Brazil and elsewhere--which of course brings in
rainforest issues, another complicated--much more complicated than
generally believed--issue.)
 
I think many ecologically conscious farmers have come to the same kind
of conclusions. Other than my own work on this, my main guides for this
have been Wes Jackson and Miguel Altieri. I have heard Michael Pollin
speak, but haven't read his book yet, but I gather it i

RE: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Wallace, Richard]

Nice statement, Angus. 

Also being active in this area, I would add only that given the nature
of today's industrial food systems, considerations of local economy
should be added to the agroecological paradigm. When I moved to
southeastern Pennsylvania five years ago, I was shocked at the advanced
development of the local agroecological market. Virtually every type of
meat and climate-appropriate fruit and vegetable is grown here by local,
small-scale, ecologically sensitive farmers, and sold in local
community-based farmers markets. I know the farmers market phenomenon is
a huge and growing trend in the U.S., but what surprised me here was the
combination of near-complete coverage of unprocessed food types and the
explicit focus not just of individual farmers, but of the entire
"market" or "industry" on the benefits that accrue to the local economy
(and thereby return to the agroecological systems in place). Having
moved here from Florida's central east coast, where there were literally
no farmers markets, much less locally grown organic and/or sustainably
farmed meats or veggies, this was an eye-opener. 

So my sense of the ideal paradigm, for what it's worth, is a combination
of agroecological and local economic (or ecological economic) as a
combined and most fully realized response to the industrial food system.

And I concur with Angus's closing point that this is a very different
view than that driven by animal rights considerations.

Cheers,

Rich

--
 
Richard L. Wallace, Ph.D.
Chair, Environmental Studies
Ursinus College
601 E. Main Street
Collegeville, PA 19426 USA
(610) 409-3730
(610) 409-3660 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wright,
Angus
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:50 PM
To: Dale W Jamieson; Maria Ivanova
Cc: Mary Pettenger; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: RE: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

As I am sure many of you know, the main environmental and justice
arguments (rather than animal liberation arguments for not eating meat
were pretty well-laid out in Frances Moore Lappe's Diet for a Small
Planet and others have been improving on and elaborating those arguments
for some time. I was convinced by those arguments for many years and
became a vegetarian for quite some time largely based on them. I later
became convinced that the best eating model was based on what the best
kind of farm would produce. The best kind of farm and farming system, I
believe, is one that is a rough mimic of natural processes, and that as
such incorporates animals in a variety of ways and makes modest  amounts
of meat consumption a logical consequence of the production system. This
is an agroecological approach rather than a "minimal energy" or "minimal
materials" approach, though in the larger picture, it would tend to
minimize energy and materials production. Of course, large scale or l!
 ong term feed lot production would not be part of this.and meat would
be produced in ways that are far different, ecologically and ethically,
than what we now have. The farm, in fact, would look a lot more like
what the mixed production farms of the American midwest looked like one
hundred years ago--the kind many of us older folks remember from our
childhoods. It is also a kind of farm one still encounters frequently
outside of Europe and the U.S. (Eating very little beef in the U.S., I
am much more relaxed about eating the delicious and more healthful grass
fed beef one finds in Brazil and elsewhere--which of course brings in
rainforest issues, another complicated--much more complicated than
generally believed--issue.)
 
I think many ecologically conscious farmers have come to the same kind
of conclusions. Other than my own work on this, my main guides for this
have been Wes Jackson and Miguel Altieri. I have heard Michael Pollin
speak, but haven't read his book yet, but I gather it is the approach he
takes, too. Having served on the board of Food First, the organization
Frances Moore Lappe founded with the proceeds of Diet for a Small
Planet, I can say that it is predominantly the evolution of thought that
most people involved with that organization, I believe including Lappe,
have taken. 
 
Let me emphasize that this would require dramatic change in our
agricultural system--it is not a status quo argument. But it is based
more on genuine ecological reasoning, in my view, than the standard
vegetarian arguments. Of course, if you believe that it is wrong to kill
and eat animals, then that brings in an entirely different set of
considerations, different from those I have outlined here.
 
Angus Wright
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Studies
California State University, Sacramento



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dale W Jamieson
Sent: Wed 1/31/2007 10:23 AM
To: Maria Ivanova
Cc: 'Mary Pettenger'; gep-ed@lis

RE: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Wright, Angus]

As I am sure many of you know, the main environmental and justice arguments 
(rather than animal liberation arguments for not eating meat were pretty 
well-laid out in Frances Moore Lappe's Diet for a Small Planet and others have 
been improving on and elaborating those arguments for some time. I was 
convinced by those arguments for many years and became a vegetarian for quite 
some time largely based on them. I later became convinced that the best eating 
model was based on what the best kind of farm would produce. The best kind of 
farm and farming system, I believe, is one that is a rough mimic of natural 
processes, and that as such incorporates animals in a variety of ways and makes 
modest  amounts of meat consumption a logical consequence of the production 
system. This is an agroecological approach rather than a "minimal energy" or 
"minimal materials" approach, though in the larger picture, it would tend to 
minimize energy and materials production. Of course, large scale or l!
 ong term feed lot production would not be part of this.and meat would be 
produced in ways that are far different, ecologically and ethically, than what 
we now have. The farm, in fact, would look a lot more like what the mixed 
production farms of the American midwest looked like one hundred years ago--the 
kind many of us older folks remember from our childhoods. It is also a kind of 
farm one still encounters frequently outside of Europe and the U.S. (Eating 
very little beef in the U.S., I am much more relaxed about eating the delicious 
and more healthful grass fed beef one finds in Brazil and elsewhere--which of 
course brings in rainforest issues, another complicated--much more complicated 
than generally believed--issue.)
 
I think many ecologically conscious farmers have come to the same kind of 
conclusions. Other than my own work on this, my main guides for this have been 
Wes Jackson and Miguel Altieri. I have heard Michael Pollin speak, but haven't 
read his book yet, but I gather it is the approach he takes, too. Having served 
on the board of Food First, the organization Frances Moore Lappe founded with 
the proceeds of Diet for a Small Planet, I can say that it is predominantly the 
evolution of thought that most people involved with that organization, I 
believe including Lappe, have taken. 
 
Let me emphasize that this would require dramatic change in our agricultural 
system--it is not a status quo argument. But it is based more on genuine 
ecological reasoning, in my view, than the standard vegetarian arguments. Of 
course, if you believe that it is wrong to kill and eat animals, then that 
brings in an entirely different set of considerations, different from those I 
have outlined here.
 
Angus Wright
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Studies
California State University, Sacramento



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dale W Jamieson
Sent: Wed 1/31/2007 10:23 AM
To: Maria Ivanova
Cc: 'Mary Pettenger'; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: Re: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact



'animal liberation' is of course important, but i was thinking of 'the
way we eat'.   an account of the study on vegan diets and co2 emissions
that i was referring to can be found here:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/04/060414012755.htm

cheers, dale

**
Dale Jamieson
Director of Environmental Studies
Professor of Environmental Studies and Philosophy
Affiliated Professor of Law
New York University
http://www.esig.ucar.edu/HP_dale.html

Contact information:
Steinhardt School, HMSS
246 Greene Street, Suite 300
New York NY 10003-6677
212-998-5429 (voice) 212-995-4832 (fax)

"Knowing what we know now, that you could vote against the war and still
be elected president, I would never have pretended to support
it."--Hilary Clinton parody on Saturday Night Live

- Original Message -
From: Maria Ivanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:45 pm
Subject: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

> Mary,
>
>
>
> I want to support Dale's suggestion about Peter Singer's book "Animal
> Liberation." I just showed Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth to my Global
> Environmental Governance class and asked students to post their
> reactions to
> the class website. The note below from one of my students goes
> right to the
> issues you raised.
>
>
>
> "I had been meaning to see An Inconvenient Truth for a while, only
> puttingit off because I felt like I knew most of what Al Gore would
> have to say. I
> had assumed, keeping abreast of environmental issues and taking small
> measures in my personal life towards less consumption, that I was
> well-enough informed. While some of the film's contents did not
> surprise me,
> it reinforced a sense of urgency and a desire to do more.

Re: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Dale W Jamieson]

'animal liberation' is of course important, but i was thinking of 'the
way we eat'.   an account of the study on vegan diets and co2 emissions
that i was referring to can be found here:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/04/060414012755.htm

cheers, dale

**
Dale Jamieson
Director of Environmental Studies
Professor of Environmental Studies and Philosophy 
Affiliated Professor of Law
New York University
http://www.esig.ucar.edu/HP_dale.html

Contact information:
Steinhardt School, HMSS
246 Greene Street, Suite 300
New York NY 10003-6677
212-998-5429 (voice) 212-995-4832 (fax)

"Knowing what we know now, that you could vote against the war and still
be elected president, I would never have pretended to support
it."--Hilary Clinton parody on Saturday Night Live

- Original Message -
From: Maria Ivanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:45 pm
Subject: RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

> Mary, 
> 
> 
> 
> I want to support Dale's suggestion about Peter Singer's book "Animal
> Liberation." I just showed Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth to my Global
> Environmental Governance class and asked students to post their 
> reactions to
> the class website. The note below from one of my students goes 
> right to the
> issues you raised. 
> 
> 
> 
> "I had been meaning to see An Inconvenient Truth for a while, only 
> puttingit off because I felt like I knew most of what Al Gore would 
> have to say. I
> had assumed, keeping abreast of environmental issues and taking small
> measures in my personal life towards less consumption, that I was
> well-enough informed. While some of the film's contents did not 
> surprise me,
> it reinforced a sense of urgency and a desire to do more. 
> 
> I can relate most to the story Gore told about his family giving up 
> tobaccofarming stating that (I have to paraphrase), whatever once 
> served as
> justification could no longer do. Recently I took up a vegetarian 
> diet after
> over 20 blissfully ignorant years of eating meat. I read Peter 
> Singer's"Animal Liberation," a book about animal rights consisting 
> of utilitarian
> arguments for ending the suffering of animals. Immediately I was 
> captured by
> the surprisingly unsentimental and rational arguments for not 
> eating meat or
> accepting other forms of animal suffering. What struck me reading 
> furtherwere the environmental consequences of heavy meat 
> consumption. In one scene
> of the film, there was a fresh water use chart showing the impact of
> agriculture on water consumption. I discovered while reading 
> Singer's book
> that there are gross inefficiencies in meat production (completely 
> asidefrom the issue of animal suffering) which require significant 
> amount of
> grain, water, land and oil use which could be conserved entirely or
> eventually redistributed to poor areas of the world whhere people 
> barelyhave the necessity of fresh water, let alone the luxury of 
> well-fed meat. I
> do not need to go further in summarizing Singer's work, but I do 
> recommendthe book highly.
> 
> What does this aside have to do with Al Gore's tobacco story? Reading
> "Animal Liberation" was an awakening for me. The book asked 
> questions I had
> tacitly refused to acknowledge and encouraged me to face realities 
> I was not
> entirely aware of. Much like Al Gore's father, what I did before 
> was no
> longer acceptable. For me, the ethical dilemma was not so great 
> that I could
> not abstain from eating meat. This story of mine is only half a 
> year old,
> but now I take pleasure in the small sacrifice of a no-meat diet, 
> and I feel
> healthy besides. It will likely be the first of many similar
> conservation-oriented changes I will make in my lifestyle over the 
> next few
> years, because I am surely convinced of Al Gore's point that doing the
> ethically right thing can very well be the most profitable in the long
> term."
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> maria
> 
> 
> 
> Maria Ivanova
> 
> Assistant Professor of Government and Environmental Policy
> 
> The College of William & Mary
> 
> Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795
> 
> Phone +1-757-221-2039
> 
> Mobile +1-203-606-4640
> 
> Fax +1-757-221-1868
> 
> Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> http://mxivan.people.wm.edu 
> 
> 
> 
> Director, Global Environmental Governance Project
> 
> Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy
> 
> 301 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511
> 
> http://www.gegdialogue.org 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  _  
> 
>

RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Maria Ivanova]

Mary, 

 

I want to support Dale's suggestion about Peter Singer's book "Animal
Liberation." I just showed Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth to my Global
Environmental Governance class and asked students to post their reactions to
the class website. The note below from one of my students goes right to the
issues you raised. 

 

"I had been meaning to see An Inconvenient Truth for a while, only putting
it off because I felt like I knew most of what Al Gore would have to say. I
had assumed, keeping abreast of environmental issues and taking small
measures in my personal life towards less consumption, that I was
well-enough informed. While some of the film's contents did not surprise me,
it reinforced a sense of urgency and a desire to do more. 

I can relate most to the story Gore told about his family giving up tobacco
farming stating that (I have to paraphrase), whatever once served as
justification could no longer do. Recently I took up a vegetarian diet after
over 20 blissfully ignorant years of eating meat. I read Peter Singer's
"Animal Liberation," a book about animal rights consisting of utilitarian
arguments for ending the suffering of animals. Immediately I was captured by
the surprisingly unsentimental and rational arguments for not eating meat or
accepting other forms of animal suffering. What struck me reading further
were the environmental consequences of heavy meat consumption. In one scene
of the film, there was a fresh water use chart showing the impact of
agriculture on water consumption. I discovered while reading Singer's book
that there are gross inefficiencies in meat production (completely aside
from the issue of animal suffering) which require significant amount of
grain, water, land and oil use which could be conserved entirely or
eventually redistributed to poor areas of the world whhere people barely
have the necessity of fresh water, let alone the luxury of well-fed meat. I
do not need to go further in summarizing Singer's work, but I do recommend
the book highly.

What does this aside have to do with Al Gore's tobacco story? Reading
"Animal Liberation" was an awakening for me. The book asked questions I had
tacitly refused to acknowledge and encouraged me to face realities I was not
entirely aware of. Much like Al Gore's father, what I did before was no
longer acceptable. For me, the ethical dilemma was not so great that I could
not abstain from eating meat. This story of mine is only half a year old,
but now I take pleasure in the small sacrifice of a no-meat diet, and I feel
healthy besides. It will likely be the first of many similar
conservation-oriented changes I will make in my lifestyle over the next few
years, because I am surely convinced of Al Gore's point that doing the
ethically right thing can very well be the most profitable in the long
term."

 

Regards,

maria

 

Maria Ivanova

Assistant Professor of Government and Environmental Policy

The College of William & Mary

Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795

Phone +1-757-221-2039

Mobile +1-203-606-4640

Fax +1-757-221-1868

Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://mxivan.people.wm.edu 

 

Director, Global Environmental Governance Project

Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy

301 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511

http://www.gegdialogue.org 

 

 

 

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mary Pettenger
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:22 AM
To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: Vegan and Environmental Impact

 

Hello -

I'm seeking sources that discuss the environmental impact of
vegetarianism/vegan in comparison to consumption of meat. A student recently
asked about it and I vaguely remember some articles but cannot find them.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Mary Pettenger



Assistant Professor of Political Science 
Model United Nations Advisor 
Western Oregon University 
345 N Monmouth Ave 
Monmouth OR 97361 
(503)838-8301 (w) 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

RE: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Marc Levy]

This comes courtesy of Ashwani Vasishth's excellent listserv
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
 
- Marc
 
--
 

http://www.csmonito  r.com/2006/1228/p14s01-sten.html

Sci/Tech>Environment
from the December 28, 2006 edition

A grass-roots push for a 'low carbon diet'
 David Gershon's book guides readers through a series of behavioral
changes to reduce their 'carbon footprint.'

By Moises Velasquez-Manoff | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

Last June, David Gershon saw Al Gore's global warming documentary "An
Inconvenient Truth." The time was ripe, he realized, to finish an old
project.

In 2000, Mr. Gershon created a step-by-step program, à la Weight Watchers,
designed to reduce a person's carbon footprint. The idea received positive
reviews after a pilot program was run in Portland, Ore., but it eventually
fell by the wayside for lack of interest. "The world wasn't ready," says
Gershon, who heads the Empowerment Institute in Woodstock, N.Y., a
consulting organization that specializes in changing group behavior.

Illustration Omitted:
   CARBON CUTTER: David Gershon has written a step-by-step program to lower
one's carbon footprint.  COURTESY OF DAVID GERSHON

But since then, Americans witnessed the catastrophic fury of hurricane
Katrina, which, if nothing else, showed them what a major city looks like
underwater. A substantial body of evidence supporting the idea of
human-induced global warming accumulated. And, of course, Mr. Gore made his
movie. 

Attitudes toward global warming had shifted considerably. (Indeed, a recent
poll by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that nearly half of
Americans cited global warming as the No. 1 environmental concern; in 2003,
only one-fifth considered it that critical.)

Gershon put his nose to the grindstone, and a slim workbook titled "Low
Carbon Diet: A 30 Day Program to Lose 5,000 Pounds" was the result. Replete
with checklists and illustrations, the user-friendly guide is a serious
attempt at changing American energy-consumption behavior.

Although representing 4.5 percent of the world's population, the United
States contributes an estimated 25 percent of its greenhouse gases. Faced
with this fact and news reports of spring arriving earlier, winter arriving
later, and the Arctic melting, the subject of climate change has gone from
an abstract issue debated among scientists to something with apparently
measurable effects in daily life.

This is where Gershon's book comes in. The book guides participants through
a month-long process of behavioral change. Each participant calculates his
or her footprint - the average US household emits 55,000 pounds of carbon
dioxide annually, the book says - and then browses a list of
emissions-lowering actions. The goal is to reduce that amount bit by bit.
Replacing an incandescent bulb with a fluorescent, for example, counts for a
100-pound annual reduction. Purchasing an energy-efficient furnace counts
for 2,400 pounds. Just tuning up your existing furnace reduces your carbon
emissions by 300 pounds while insulating your warm air ducts lowers them by
800 pounds.

But the key to the program's success, say those who've participated, is in
forming a support group. People have good intentions, says Gershon, but
alone, they often lack the will to follow through. Like Weight Watchers or
Alcoholics Anonymous, the formation of a group encourages follow-through by
socially reinforcing the new, desired behavior.

"I think it's essential," says Nathaniel Charny, a New York lawyer who
participated in the recently completed testing phase of "Low Carbon Diet."
"Everybody's reinforcing the goals, and you're having frank discussions
about things."

And as Gershon sensed, the timing for a book offering day-to-day solutions
to an overwhelming global problem couldn't be better. Gore's group, The
Climate Project, which recently began training 1,000 volunteers to give
Gore's now-famous slide show, is handing out 600 copies of the book at the
end of the session.

Meanwhile, a handful of environmental and religious groups are recommending
the book to its members. The Regeneration Project, a San Francisco-based
interfaith ministry, has linked to the book on its main page. So have
Climate Solutions, a nonprofit group in Olympia, Wash., and the Vermont
chapter of Interfaith Power and Light (IPL), a nationwide organization
dedicated to "greening" congregations.

Tellingly, before the advent of Gershon's book, several congregations around
the country spontaneously embarked on carbon-reduction programs of their
own. The Michigan IPL worked out a deal with suppliers to sell compact
fluorescents to members at a lower price, and the Georgia IPL came up with a
program called "preparing for a new light" whereby for each candle lit
during holidays such as Hanukkah or Christmas Eve, participants change one
incandescent bulb in their home for a compact fluorescent. And three
congregants at St. Luke'

Re: Vegan and Environmental Impact

[Dale W Jamieson]

hi mary, you'll find references in the recent book by peter singer and 
jim mason on food.  in particular, there is a u. of chicago study about 
the effect of vegan diets on ghg emissions.  cheers, dale

**
Dale Jamieson
Director of Environmental Studies
Professor of Environmental Studies and Philosophy 
Affiliated Professor of Law
New York University
http://www.esig.ucar.edu/HP_dale.html

Contact information:
Steinhardt School, HMSS
246 Greene Street, Suite 300
New York NY 10003-6677
212-998-5429 (voice) 212-995-4832 (fax)

"Knowing what we know now, that you could vote against the war and 
still be elected president, I would never have pretended to support 
it."--Hilary Clinton parody on Saturday Night Live

- Original Message -
From: Mary Pettenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 0:21 am
Subject: Vegan and Environmental Impact

> Hello -
> I'm seeking sources that discuss the environmental impact of 
> vegetarianism/vegan in comparison to consumption of meat. A 
> student recently asked about it and I vaguely remember some 
> articles but cannot find them. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Mary Pettenger
> 
> Assistant Professor of Political Science
> Model United Nations Advisor
> Western Oregon University
> 345 N Monmouth Ave
> Monmouth OR 97361
> (503)838-8301 (w)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>