- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
The U.S. Olympic team is one of a handful that will supply air conditioners for their athletes at the Paris Games in a move that undercuts organizers’ plans to cut carbon emissions.
U.S. Olympic and Paralympic CEO Sarah Hirshland said Friday that while the U.S. team appreciates efforts aimed at sustainability, the federation would be supplying AC units for what is typically the largest contingent of athletes at the Summer Games.
“As you can imagine, this is a period of time in which consistency and predictability is critical for Team USA’s performance,” Hirshland said. “In our conversations with athletes, this was a very high priority and something that the athletes felt was a critical component in their performance capability.”
The Washington Post reported earlier this month that Germany, Australia, Italy, Canada and Britain were among the other countries with plans to bring air conditioners to France.
as it turns out, i provided exactly as much evidence as you did, but you have, once again, included an appeal to ridicule.
My point is proven science, you didn’t ask for a source you just claimed the opposite, so you’re on the same footing as me.
Except for my point is obvious, between the methane and animal waste run off, the water required for animal agriculture, the waste products unused from meat production, and the fact that you have to grow even more plants to feed the animals instead of eating the plants directly, I don’t see why on earth you wouldn’t see how being vegan has a smaller footprint.
Read a scientific study in-between your theory, sometime.
evidence your claims some time
no it’s not.
i reject the narrative of footprints. the issue is resource use and pollution, and those don’t happen in grocery stores or restaurants: it happens during production. being vegan doesn’t stop production, so being vegan doesn’t help the environment.
Being vegan requires less production. And animal waste, runoff, and methane are all major sources of pollution that being vegan eliminates. It takes less water, land, and plants for a vegan diet than it does to feed animals for agriculture.
if the industry doesn’t decrease production, being vegan has done no good.
If the country doesn’t become communist, calling yourself communist has done no good.
i have made no claim like that. by contrast, you have claimed that being vegan is better for the environment. since the industries you claim to be targeting with your veganism continue to grow, being a vegan is not actually better for the environment.
by what metric can you claim that veganism has made the environment better? pollution and resource use has only increased since the 1940s when veganism was invented.
Lmfao that’s your argument?? It’s in “not even wrong” territory, literally what on earth are you talking about lol
Coal pollution is also higher now than when renewable energy was first invented, therefore renewables wouldn’t help us! /s
I don’t know if that’s true, but if it is, then you’ve almost reached the right conclusion. I wouldn’t say “wouldn’t”, I would say “haven’t”.
this is an appeal to ridicule. it is not a rebuttal
very astute.