Not exact matches
For example, a large body of research has found switching to an entirely vegetarian diet would make a huge difference on the carbon footprint of our food system — the Climate Change,
Agriculture and Food Security research program reports that
if the
global population were to reduce or cut its meat intake, it would halve the cost of mitigation actions needed to stabilize carbon dioxide levels to 450 parts per million by midcentury — but for many people that is not in the cards.
«Although we have found that this process is happening slower than first thought,
if global warming exceeds 3 °C, wet regions will likely get more than 10 per cent wetter and dry regions more than 10 per cent drier, which could have disastrous implications for river flows and
agriculture.»
The consequences of climate change are being felt not only in the environment, but in the entire socio - economic system and, as seen in the findings of numerous reports already available, they will impact first and foremost the poorest and weakest who, even
if they are among the least responsible for
global warming, are the most vulnerable because they have limited resources or live in areas at greater risk... Many of the most vulnerable societies, already facing energy problems, rely upon
agriculture, the very sector most likely to suffer from climatic shifts.»
The crazy thing is that
if people followed the whole foods plant - based diet advocated by Dr. G. and others, we would save trillions of dollars, get rid of our worst health problems, and solve the
global warming problem (since 50 % of greenhouse gasses due to animal «
agriculture»).
Both the World Bank and the International Energy Agency (IEA) have warned that
if business - as - usual continues, the world is headed towards a total climate catastrophe, devastating coastal cities,
global agriculture, and leading to mass extinction.
Czech physicist Lubos Motl has calculated that
if it were indeed possible to reduce CO2 levels to their pre-industrial value,
global agriculture would suffer a strong decline and billions of people would starve to death.
But given the role of the MIC, only
if this obstacle is overcome in time can a prevention program avoid climate catastrophe be achieved, with a process of
global demilitarization, transformation of
agriculture to agroecologies and increased cooperation among nations.
But with
global food demand expected to grow another 50 % by 2050, the expanding footprint of
agriculture threatens to decimate much of what remains of the earth's forests and grasslands, even
if output is able to keep up with demand.
Its effects on animals and on
agriculture are indeed frightening and the effects on the human population are even scarier The facts about
global warming are often debated in politics and the media but unfortunately even
if we disagree about the causes
global warming effects are real
global and measurable.
22
Agriculture Agriculture would be most severely impacted by
global warming
if extreme weather events, such as drought, became more frequent.
«
If global warming «only» damages
agriculture, the rest may not matter much.»
It calls for greater emission cuts in sectors including transport,
agriculture, waste and buildings,
if the EU's largest climate policy is to be coherent with the goal to limit
global...
If we do some advance planning now (like not subsidizing building in low lying areas, or encouraging
agriculture in places that are going to dry out), we can make the future significantly more comfortable, regardless of whether
global warming is our fault or not.
If Americans want to consume vast quantities of cheap, factory - farmed cow and chicken and pig flesh, then there simply must be an unending supply of cheap factory - farmed grain to feed the animals, and an unending supply of cheap fossil fuels to power industrial
agriculture, and the anthropogenic
global warming associated with the CO2 and methane emissions from industrial animal
agriculture must simply not be real.
Even
if global emissions from
agriculture are 30 %, the industrialized world emits 72 % of total carbon dioxide emissions, so why should developing countries mitigate?