Her-Bivore Blog

Global Warming - Can We / Should We Fix it with Science?

Posted on

Global Warming Money

Global Warming - Can We / Should We Fix it with Science?

For such a widespread topic of panic (except in America where over a half of the population seems to think it isn't happening) it's amazing how so many experts in the field are either trying to avoid addressing the primary cause or are simply trying to put a lid on the problem as opposed to fixing it.

Check out this post by insidescience.org:

Can We Engineer Our Way Out of Global Warming?

The topic of this post is with regards to scientists discussing the risks and feasibility of using solar geoengineering to cool down the planet. What is solar geoengineering you ask? Tampering with the weather in short. The idea is to seed more clouds or even sending mirrors into orbit to keep the sun's rays from heating up the planet as quickly as it is. This is one of two methods being discussed. The other is the direct removal of greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere.

Now, option 2 is definitely the safer option. Solar geoengineering is by no means sustainable and when it comes to an end, we could see even more drastic weather patterns and global warming will be sped up tenfold.

My issue is that both of these options address the fact that there is a problem... but the solution for them is "How do we avoid this problem, even if just for a short while?"

Our Current Situation

I find option 2 interesting. Removing greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere. Strangely enough, we already know how this can be done but we're not doing it. Check out this video on Algae Farming:

An excess of carbon dioxide is one of the contributing factors to global warming and although I don't agree that this is the fix to global warming, imagine the difference it would make if we did have algae farms right next to these power plants? If cars did run on bio-fuel?

We know that cars aren't doing our atmosphere any good. People are encouraged to cycle where they can and what not. So why not do this? Why not impose some sort of legislation that ensures each one of these plants has an algae farm right next door to thrive off of their fossil fuels? It would certainly make one hell of a difference!

Why Not?

I'm going to take a stab in the dark here... No, I'm not, I'm pretty certain. The reason is money. It is always money. Governments could fund this idea TODAY. Give this gentleman all the money he needs to roll this initiative out full speed ahead.

But let's go back to the video. It talks about reducing deforestation by reducing crops for farmed animals to live off. It is stated in the video that for every 1000 acres of algae, 40,000 acres of crops don't need to be planted.

When we talk about reducing something, we are also talking about cutting back on revenue. There is a fat cat sitting in his glass tower somewhere, who has had these 40,000 acres of crops planted. That's a lot of money we're talking about. Enough money to line the pockets of the government and other institutions that support him while still keeping enough money to himself to be overly content.

Which leads me, very neatly, on to my next point... I smell a conspiracy

The Farming of Animals

It was inevitable that this was going to pop up on our blog at some point. It's every vegan's go-to documentary and if you haven't yet watched it, I implore you to do so.


The NUMBER ONE cause of global warming and pollution is animal farming. It is a huge industry because vegans are very much a minority. Everyone wants meat and dairy. Here are some facts and stats from the documentary I want to hit you with:

  • Animal agriculture is responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than the combined exhaust from all transportation.   [i]
  • Transportation exhaust is responsible for 13% of all greenhouse gas emissions.  [.i]
  • Livestock and their byproducts account for at least 32,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year or 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Methane is 25-100 times more destructive than CO2 on a 20-year time frame.
  • Methane has a global warming potential 86 times that of CO2 on a 20-year time frame.
  • Livestock is responsible for 65% of all human-related emissions of nitrous oxide – a greenhouse gas with 296 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide, and which stays in the atmosphere for 150 years.
  • Emissions for agriculture projected to increase 80% by 2050.
  • Energy-related emissions expected to increase 20% by 2040.
  • US Methane emissions from livestock and natural gas are nearly equal.
  • Cows produce 150 billion gallons of methane per day.   [xi]
  • Converting to wind and solar power will take 20+ years and roughly 43 trillion dollars.
  • Even without fossil fuels, we will exceed our 565 gigatonnes CO2e limit by 2030, all from raising animals.
  • Reducing methane emissions would create tangible benefits almost immediately.

Source: http://www.cowspiracy.com/facts/

That's without taking into account the water and land space that farming is affecting too. But that's another topic I will hit later.

Cowspiracy tackles the fact that many companies, even charities, will not tackle this topic. It's just being swept under the rug because, hey-ho, there's money involved.

In Summary

So, can we engineer a way out of global warming? Probably... but although none of us would like to admit it, Mother Nature is a heck of a lot smarter than us and in our race to stop global warming, she will undoubtably end us if we don't start thinking about it responsibly. Should we engineer a way out of global warming?

The human race is selfish. We're not engineering a way out, we are prolonging the inevitable. Until the fat cats can take responsibility for what they are doing and the human race starts to realise what they are doing, do we even deserve to find a way out? Maybe I'm being unkind to the top 1% responsible for these conspiracys, maybe they're creating a life of excess for their children to be happy. No, that's stupid and what kind of legacy do they even hope to leave if we've exceeded the safe level of CO2 emissions by 2030? None... That's what it boils down to.

We can't manufacture our way out of global warming and we can't cheat the system. We need to take responsibility for our actions and eat our way out of global warming.

But that's just my two penneths worth on the topic. What's your opinion on the matter? I'd love to hear what you have to say in the comments below. You can also find us on Instagram and Facebook. If you agree with me, please do give this post a share! Let's get more people involved in the discussion!

Written by Jack Ricketts
Marketing has always been my career focus. I am striving to promote a plant-based lifestyle to the masses through positive campaigns and sharing the benefits of veganism. The animals, and the planet, need us more than ever to make a change. 
You can find me on Instagram