EnviroLink Forum

Hi everyone,

Seems to me that we should be having 2 big priorities as a species to help solve the environmental issue.

1. Cell Cultured Meat
Mass producing lab grown meat would help fix most of the problems found with meat eating and the impact it has. It would free up farm land and eventually technological developments would make it far more efficient than actual farming. It would prevent the slaughter of billions of animals per year and create new jobs in a new industry. It might sound gross but it can't be much worse than what goes into real meat.
https://nutritionstudies.org/how-is-cell-cultured-meat-changing-the-future-of-food/

2. Transparent Solar Panels
Basically just clear glass that harvests solar energy.
Currently their efficiency levels aren't great but if we really focused on them, they could be better.
The reason they could be a big deal - it's their applications. Imagine a world where all windows were actually solar panels.
https://envirobuy.com/2021/09/15/the-future-of-solar-power/

I personally think that focusing on these 2 technologies will help make a huge dent in the environmental problems we have to face. With food and energy being the 2 biggest culprits, if we drastically rethink the way we feed and build, I think it would fix a lot.

Lab growth meat is not the answer.


https://gizmodo.com/just-one-tiny-indus ... 1835376030

The oil industry makes the fertilizer industry look like small change in methane emissions.

Besides, the Life Extension Foundation reported that the type and amount of iron injected into factory meat, overloads our system, ends up in the brain, and increases our chances of getting Alzheimer's Disease.

The goal should be to eat 100% grass-fed beef. The crops of soybean and corn used to fatten the beef up for more profits emit more methane than the cows.

Plus, the cows can live on pasture land that needs nothing but what mother nature provides. The cows fertilize the grass and the grass nourishes the cows. And by eating grass they fart and burp much less too.

To farm the land that cows can graze on 'for free' would require huge amounts of methane producing fertilizer, huge amounts of cancer causing herbicides, and huge amounts of our most precious and limited resource, water.

The veggie consortiums like ADM would very much like to have that land farmed so they could increase their profits, so they set up tests that are pre-designed to show how bad beef is, make zillion dollar contributions to the AHA along with the bogus tests to sway their opinion, and publish tons of adicles (ad-articles) to convince people that veggies are better than beef.

Humans are obligate omnivores. A vegan needs to take nutritional supplements to get what the veggies don't provide, or his/her health will deteriorate. A true carnivore diet person needs to take supplements to get what the meat doesn't provide, or his/her health will deteriorate. An omnivorous diet can give us all the nutrients we need as long as we eat wisely -- something that cannot be done with a herbivorous or carnivorous diet.

So instead of trashing meat, perhaps we should just be trashing corn and/or feed-lot meat as the real culprit.


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/19/lab-gro ... s-say.html

Remember. zillions of Bison in the historic American West with all their farts and burps did not impact the climate one bit.

Solar Panels and Wind Power on every residence seems like a better way to harvest the eco-energy than letting the power companies erect huge bird-killing windmills and cover thousands of acres of land with the panels. But these huge corporations have a lot of pull with congress, as they use their campaign contributions as tacit bribes to provide legislation to favor the power company.

If everyone had solar panels on their roof and a couple of small windmills on their home, we could use the power company for nothing but supplemental power.

And if we would turn into anti-consumers and buy only what we need and not much more, we'd be much kinder to the environment. I see a neighbor who drives a 1.5 ton pickup truck that only transports his and her two small kids in the back and noting ever in the bed have huge bins of garbage twice a week. That seems to be more a waste than cow farts.

There is not one answer.

My father used to raise tropical fish. The fish would live at peace until there were a few too many fish in the tank. Then the fish would bite each other and their excrement would pollute the tank. Right now there are too many human fish in the aquarium, earth. We are fighting among ourselves and polluting the environment.

The biggest problem with the environment can be boiled down to this: Too many people having too many babies.

Bob

People think of solutions to two things and the environment will be saved. It is complex if you want it to be. Zero people and zero emissions tomorrow will not stop the methane turnover process before runaway in a few years. Perhaps a global aerosol 'event' with an eleven year global winter, with caveats of pollution removal by the survivors.

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

I see a solution as a plague that wipes out 3/4 of the population in one year as something that would help the environment heal itself, but I don't want to see that happen. I wouldn't want to be in that 3/4 nor would I enjoy the dystopia that would happen after 3/4 of us were gone.

I think we are on our way out, and there really isn't anything we can do about it.

My family is trying to keep our emissions down, while others take afternoon joyrides in space that pollute hundreds of times as much as my family will in our entire lives.

We put out about 1 square foot of garbage per week and our neighbor across the street overfills 4 huge bins a week.

I planted dozens of trees and re-wilded my backyard with native vegetation, my neighbor has a lawn which he waters every day, without fail

I had 2 kids in the late 60s, and had a vasectomy. I see people with 3 or more (sometimes many more) children every day.

I live in a small house, painted my roof white, and don't run my AC while I see neighbors with charcoal gray roofs running their AC down to 68 degrees all year (I live in Florida).

Corporations run on a model of perpetual growth, and perpetual growth is what is making the planet inhospitable for us. All the little things that people like ourselves are doing doesn't amount to as much as taking a piss in the ocean.

I'm glad I am as old as I am, because IMO there will be some stressful times ahead before the fall.

Bob

That's a very good point. I was more meaning the total impact of farming though rather than just the methane produced from cows. The grain needed to feed animals, the land dedicated to the whole process etc.



https://stories.pinduoduo-global.com/agritech-hub/cell-agriculture

Just the land alone could be used to rejuvenate huge chunks of the planet that are currently devoted to the meat industry. That land could even be used for environmentally friendly solutions like solar panels.

I wasn't trashing meat. I'm a meat eater myself and I love meat. I was trashing the system and the way its made. If I can enjoy a burger knowing nothing has died so I can eat it, that's a bonus.

You are right that there is not one answer though. I was just saying that I personally feel as though those 2 things will make a huge difference in the problem, although as you say, the oil industry is terrible too.

I've been deeply motivated by transparent solar panels and the idea of lab meat. I can see huge long term potential for both technologies.



Lol totally agreed. In fact, it's making me think twice about even having kids myself!

I had two during the late 1960s, when ZPG (Zero Population Growth) seemed to be the answer. Then I got a vasectomy. ZPG even paid for the doctor, as I wasn't making a lot of money.

When I had my first child, there were fewer than 3.5 million people on the planet. That seemed to be a sustainable number, although in retrospect, there were still too many back then.

Many women were reaching their 40s, following a career and not having children.

Corporations need perpetual growth to achieve perpetually increasing profits. And they require perpetual profits because who would invest in their stock if the stock isn't going to perpetually increase in value?

So as they do, the corporations fought back. Mostly through the great salesperson in your living room, the TV. Comedies, dramas, variety shows all had a woman telling her husband this exact phrase, "My biological clock is ticking" meaning we better have babies before I reach menopause. I do not exaggerate when I say I heard that phrase at least 5 times a day, 7 days a week.

The result was another baby boom, more products sold, baby clothes for the textile industry, paper diapers instead of the cloth diapers that ruled until the 1970s, strollers and baby furniture for the manufacturing industry, plastic toys for the petrochemical giants, bigger cars for the automotive industry and so on. More money for the richest of the rich, and more pollution for the planet. And those babies grew up to have babies of their own.

The earth is a closed system, and we cannot bear perpetual growth of our species. It's not sustainable, we will eventually eat and pollute ourselves out of our collective house and home.

And the government, who makes the laws sponsored by their corporate donors, pass laws cutting taxes and giving benefits for more babies. A family's income tax should increase for every additional child, not reduce. Each child represents an expense on government services and an increase in environmental pollution. So why reward a family for having more?

Since, unfortunately women bear the children and there isn't a logical way to control us men, after the second child, I believe all women should be sterilized. Cut those tubes, just as I had mine cut after two.

But as long as corporations are able to write the laws, either directly or indirectly, we are destined to follow the perpetual growth cycle. And remember, cancer is excessive growth, and I believe we have reached the malignant stage in population growth.

As the population keeps growing, we will continue to pollute and over-farm the world, and as the climate makes it more difficult to grow the crops that feed us, I sincerely feel we are headed towards those dystopian future movies where there isn't enough resources to keep us all alive and the violence that goes with it makes life miserable for all but the richest of the rich.

I look at the tragic tornadoes that just passed through, and I feel sorry for the people. Yet in the wreckage I see the remnants of homes that are too large, 4-door gas guzzling family pickup trucks, and other signs of excess consumption and think yes it's sad, and it's sadder that the people are bringing this on to themselves.

I'm doing all I can, but when I see people taking space joyrides that pollute hundreds of times what my family will pollute in our entire lifetimes, the majority of 'family cars' around here being 4-door, two-ton capacity pickup trucks that never carry more than a weeks groceries in the bed, people with mountains of trash on the curb twice a week, people all buying air-fryers or whatever the TV is selling this month, 3,000 square foot houses for two people, keeping lawns (urban deserts) while they chop down the trees, people painting their roofs a dark color and running air conditioners all day, I think all of my efforts don't amount more than me taking a piss in the ocean.

But I still try, because I care.

Won't you join me?

One best way to our environmental issue is to convert our main source of enrgy to renewable ones such as solar panel, wind mills, water turbines, etc. Planting trees will also definitely help and making the big companies responsible for their carbon emission and the waste that their products produce. We must admit that it takes the government force to imposed sanctions to those big companies who will not comply.

I look at the worst sources of a problem to find the most effective solutions. The vast majority of energy use per capita is cold climates due to heating needs. In those countries, the vast majority of the energy use is connected to either building heating and cooling or transportation and production of food. Cold winters restricts the growing season and mono-crop agriculture destroys all habitat for wildlife. The better agricultural option for most land in cold climates is animal husbandry but specifically animals big enough to not be prey to wildlife and not die in very cold weather... This means cattle for the most part. Cow gas comes from feeding grain and grain is cheap due to the high cost of transportation making sub-par grain to be worthless... It is fed to cattle just to get rid of the stuff. A better use of land is going back to natural pasture and raise bison instead of cows and skip grain production. Insulation and air tight building design can eliminate about 45% of Canada's customer-side energy use. Eliminating grain production and animal feed lots feeding crappy grain can reduce Canada's greenhouse gas production by roughly 35%. Making building heating all-electric can reduce greenhouse gas production by about 20%. Finally, making electricity with renewable energy with storage can drop Canada's greenhouse gas production to the 20-25% left in industry and vehicles. Most of that industry fuel use is making fertilizer to grow grains with steel and wood being the other big contributors. Yes, cultured fake meat is a good idea in hot countries but not that great in cold countries. Finally, clear solar panels have a very great use but not for the expected reason... Bifacial solar panels are designed to accept solar light from both sides by using a clear base and making the layers of solar active materials in the right ways for bifacial use. These panels can now be used hanging vertically and oriented in a North-South direction and act as fences allowing animals to graze between panels or farmers to move farm equipment between panels. The panels also never get snow buildup on them.

What is Sustainability?

Sustainability entails addressing our own demands without jeopardising future generations' ability to meet their own. We require social and economic resources in addition to natural resources. Environmentalism isn't the only aspect of sustainability. Concerns for social fairness and economic growth are found in most definitions of sustainability.

While the notion of sustainability is a novel one, the movement as a whole has origins in social justice, conservationism, internationalism, and other long-standing causes.
Many of these concepts had come together by the end of the twentieth century in the push for 'sustainable development.'

Sustainability motives are frequently complicated, personal, and varied. It's impossible to describe all of the reasons why so many people, organisations, and communities are striving toward this objective. However, for the vast majority of people, sustainability is defined by the sort of future we leave for future generations.
Many individuals and organisations share the value of sustainability, which they exhibit in their policies, daily activities, and behaviours. Individuals have had a significant impact on the development of our contemporary environmental and social conditions. Today's citizens, as well as future generations, must devise solutions and adapt.

How Biodegradable Solutions to Plastic Benefit the World.


Plastics are an important component of modern life. They are adaptable, lightweight, and inexpensive to make. Only around 1% of plastics and plastic items on the global market are bio-based, compostable, and/or biodegradable at the moment.

The majority of plastics are still produced using fossil fuels, resulting in increased greenhouse gas emissions across their value chain. Plastics do, in fact, harm the environment throughout their entire life cycle, from manufacturing to use to disposal.

Plastic recycling rates are poor, and plastics seep into the environment through littering, incorrect waste management, and product wear and tear, among other things. They can live in the wild for a long time and possibly enter the food chain. When it comes to keeping compost generated from separately collected bio-waste clean, contamination with plastic particles is a particular difficulty.

Biodegradable, biodegradable, and bio-based plastics are becoming more popular as a solution to some of these issues. Plastic bags, packaging, and single-use cups are increasingly being labeled as 'compostable,' 'biodegradable,' or 'bio-based.'

Microorganisms can break down biodegradable and compostable materials into water, carbon dioxide, mineral salts, and new biomass in a certain amount of time. The settings under which a biodegradable or compostable plastic item dissolves and how rapidly it degrades are very dependent on the environment under which it is discarded. Temperature, time, the presence of microbes, nutrients, oxygen, and moisture are all factors to consider.

If designed for appropriate contexts and uses, biodegradable and compostable plastics can provide significant environmental benefits. More progress is desperately required. In the following years, the market for such items is expected to expand. Compostable and biodegradable plastics, on the other hand, are far from offering a