研究發(fā)現(xiàn),肉類占食品加工產(chǎn)生的溫室氣體總量的近60%
Meat accounts for nearly 60% of all greenhouse gases from food production, study finds譯文簡介
衛(wèi)報內(nèi)容+紅迪評論
正文翻譯
A single kilo of beef creates 70kg of emissions. This feedlot in Colorado can hold 98,000 cattle.
每生產(chǎn)一公斤牛肉產(chǎn)生70公斤的廢氣??屏_拉多州的這個養(yǎng)殖場可以飼養(yǎng)98000頭牛。
The global production of food is responsible for a third of all planet-heating gases emitted by human activity, with the use of animals for meat causing twice the pollution of producing plant-based foods, a major new study has found.
一項新研究發(fā)現(xiàn),人類活動排放的三分之一的溫室氣體是由全球食品生產(chǎn)造成的,動物肉制品生產(chǎn)造成的污染是生產(chǎn)植物食品的兩倍。
一項新研究發(fā)現(xiàn),人類活動排放的三分之一的溫室氣體是由全球食品生產(chǎn)造成的,動物肉制品生產(chǎn)造成的污染是生產(chǎn)植物食品的兩倍。
The entire system of food production, such as the use of farming machinery, spraying of fertilizer and transportation of products, causes 17.3bn metric tonnes of greenhouse gases a year, according to the research. This enormous release of gases that fuel the climate crisis is more than double the entire emissions of the US and represents 35% of all global emissions, researchers said.
根據(jù)這項研究顯示,整個食品生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng),如農(nóng)業(yè)機械的使用、化肥的噴灑和產(chǎn)品的運輸,每年將造成173億噸溫室氣體。研究人員說,全球變暖元兇之一的這些氣體排放量是美國每年溫室氣體總排放量的兩倍多,占全球總排放量的35%。
根據(jù)這項研究顯示,整個食品生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng),如農(nóng)業(yè)機械的使用、化肥的噴灑和產(chǎn)品的運輸,每年將造成173億噸溫室氣體。研究人員說,全球變暖元兇之一的這些氣體排放量是美國每年溫室氣體總排放量的兩倍多,占全球總排放量的35%。
“The emissions are at the higher end of what we expected, it was a little bit of a surprise,” said Atul Jain, a climate scientist at the University of Illinois and co-author of the paper, published in Nature Food. “This study shows the entire cycle of the food production system, and policymakers may want to use the results to think about how to control greenhouse gas emissions.”
“排放量在我們預(yù)期的更高的水平上,這有點令人吃驚,”伊利諾伊大學(xué)的氣候科學(xué)家和在《自然食品》發(fā)表論文的共同作者之一Atul Jain說?!斑@項研究顯示了食品生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)的整個周期,政策制定者者可能有望借此利用研究結(jié)果好好考慮如何控制溫室氣體排放?!?/b>
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
“排放量在我們預(yù)期的更高的水平上,這有點令人吃驚,”伊利諾伊大學(xué)的氣候科學(xué)家和在《自然食品》發(fā)表論文的共同作者之一Atul Jain說?!斑@項研究顯示了食品生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)的整個周期,政策制定者者可能有望借此利用研究結(jié)果好好考慮如何控制溫室氣體排放?!?/b>
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
The raising and culling of animals for food is far worse for the climate than growing and processing fruits and vegetables for people to eat, the research found, confirming previous findings on the outsized impact that meat production, particularly beef, has on the environment.
研究發(fā)現(xiàn),飼養(yǎng)和宰殺動物作為食物對氣候的影響遠比種植和加工供人食用的水果和蔬菜糟糕,這證實了先前關(guān)于肉類生產(chǎn),特別是牛肉生產(chǎn)對環(huán)境的巨大影響的研究結(jié)果。
研究發(fā)現(xiàn),飼養(yǎng)和宰殺動物作為食物對氣候的影響遠比種植和加工供人食用的水果和蔬菜糟糕,這證實了先前關(guān)于肉類生產(chǎn),特別是牛肉生產(chǎn)對環(huán)境的巨大影響的研究結(jié)果。
The use of cows, pigs and other animals for food, as well as livestock feed, is responsible for 57% of all food production emissions, the research found, with 29% coming from the cultivation of plant-based foods. The rest comes from other uses of land, such as for cotton or rubber. Beef alone accounts for a quarter of emissions produced by raising and growing food.
研究發(fā)現(xiàn),使用牛、豬和其他動物作為食物以及這些牲畜所需飼料,占所有食品生產(chǎn)排放的57%,而來自植物食品種植產(chǎn)生的排放只占29%。其余部分來自土地的其他用途,如種植棉花或橡膠。單是牛肉生產(chǎn)加工就占了飼養(yǎng)和種植食品產(chǎn)生的總排放量的四分之一。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
研究發(fā)現(xiàn),使用牛、豬和其他動物作為食物以及這些牲畜所需飼料,占所有食品生產(chǎn)排放的57%,而來自植物食品種植產(chǎn)生的排放只占29%。其余部分來自土地的其他用途,如種植棉花或橡膠。單是牛肉生產(chǎn)加工就占了飼養(yǎng)和種植食品產(chǎn)生的總排放量的四分之一。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Grazing animals require a lot of land, which is often cleared through the felling of forests, as well as vast tracts of additional land to grow their feed. The paper calculates that the majority of all the world’s cropland is used to feed livestock, rather than people. Livestock also produce large quantities of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas.
放牧動物需要大量的土地,這些土地通常通過砍伐森林清理出來,還需要大量額外的土地來種植它們的飼料。該報告計算出,世界上大部分農(nóng)田用于飼養(yǎng)牲畜,而不是用來喂飽人類。牲畜也會產(chǎn)生大量的甲烷,這是一種重度的溫室氣體。
放牧動物需要大量的土地,這些土地通常通過砍伐森林清理出來,還需要大量額外的土地來種植它們的飼料。該報告計算出,世界上大部分農(nóng)田用于飼養(yǎng)牲畜,而不是用來喂飽人類。牲畜也會產(chǎn)生大量的甲烷,這是一種重度的溫室氣體。
“All of these things combined means that the emissions are very high,” said Xiaoming Xu, another University of Illinois researcher and the lead author of the paper. “To produce more meat you need to feed the animals more, which then generates more emissions. You need more biomass to feed animals in order to get the same amount of calories. It isn’t very efficient.”
“所有這些結(jié)合在一起意味著排放量非常高,”另一位伊利諾伊大學(xué)的研究員和該論文的主要作者Xiaoming Xu說。“為了生產(chǎn)更多的肉,你需要給動物生產(chǎn)更多的食物,這會產(chǎn)生更多的排放。你需要更多的總量來喂養(yǎng)動物,同時產(chǎn)生相同數(shù)量的熱量。這不是一種有效的生產(chǎn)方式?!?/b>
“所有這些結(jié)合在一起意味著排放量非常高,”另一位伊利諾伊大學(xué)的研究員和該論文的主要作者Xiaoming Xu說。“為了生產(chǎn)更多的肉,你需要給動物生產(chǎn)更多的食物,這會產(chǎn)生更多的排放。你需要更多的總量來喂養(yǎng)動物,同時產(chǎn)生相同數(shù)量的熱量。這不是一種有效的生產(chǎn)方式?!?/b>
The difference in emissions between meat and plant production is stark – to produce 1kg of wheat, 2.5kg of greenhouse gases are emitted. A single kilo of beef, meanwhile, creates 70kg of emissions. The researchers said that societies should be aware of this significant discrepancy when addressing the climate crisis.
肉類生產(chǎn)和植物生產(chǎn)之間的排放差異是巨大的——生產(chǎn)1公斤小麥,排放2.5公斤溫室氣體。同時,一公斤牛肉產(chǎn)生70公斤的溫室氣體。研究人員說,在應(yīng)對氣候危機時,社會應(yīng)該意識到這一重大差異。
肉類生產(chǎn)和植物生產(chǎn)之間的排放差異是巨大的——生產(chǎn)1公斤小麥,排放2.5公斤溫室氣體。同時,一公斤牛肉產(chǎn)生70公斤的溫室氣體。研究人員說,在應(yīng)對氣候危機時,社會應(yīng)該意識到這一重大差異。
“I’m a strict vegetarian and part of the motivation for this study was to find out my own carbon footprint, but it’s not our intention to force people to change their diets,” said Jain. “A lot of this comes down to personal choice. You can’t just impose your views on others. But if people are concerned about climate change, they should seriously consider changing their dietary habits.”
Jain說:“我是一個嚴(yán)格的素食主義者,這項研究的部分動機是發(fā)現(xiàn)我自身的碳排放足跡,但我們無意強迫人們改變飲食”,“這取決于個人的選擇。你不能把你的觀點強加給別人。但是如果人們關(guān)心氣候變化,他們應(yīng)該認真考慮改變他們的飲食習(xí)慣?!?/b>
Jain說:“我是一個嚴(yán)格的素食主義者,這項研究的部分動機是發(fā)現(xiàn)我自身的碳排放足跡,但我們無意強迫人們改變飲食”,“這取決于個人的選擇。你不能把你的觀點強加給別人。但是如果人們關(guān)心氣候變化,他們應(yīng)該認真考慮改變他們的飲食習(xí)慣?!?/b>
The researchers built a database that provided a consistent emissions profile of 171 crops and 16 animal products, drawing data from more than 200 countries. They found that South America is the region with the largest share of animal-based food emissions, followed by south and south-east Asia and then China. Food-related emissions have grown rapidly in China and India as increasing wealth and cultural changes have led more younger people in these countries to adopt meat-based diets.
研究人員建立了一個數(shù)據(jù)庫,收集了200多個國家的數(shù)據(jù),提供了171種作物和16種動物產(chǎn)品的碳排放概況。他們發(fā)現(xiàn),南美洲是動物性食品排放量最大的地區(qū),其次是南亞和東南亞,然后是中國。在中國和印度,隨著財富的增加和文化的改變,越來越多的年輕人開始食用肉類飲食,與肉類食品相關(guān)的排放量迅速增加。
研究人員建立了一個數(shù)據(jù)庫,收集了200多個國家的數(shù)據(jù),提供了171種作物和16種動物產(chǎn)品的碳排放概況。他們發(fā)現(xiàn),南美洲是動物性食品排放量最大的地區(qū),其次是南亞和東南亞,然后是中國。在中國和印度,隨著財富的增加和文化的改變,越來越多的年輕人開始食用肉類飲食,與肉類食品相關(guān)的排放量迅速增加。
The paper’s calculations of the climate impact of meat is higher than previous estimates – the UN’s Food and Agricultural Organization has said about 14% of all emissions come from meat and diary production. The climate crisis is also itself a cause of hunger, with a recent study finding that a third of global food production will be at risk by the end of the century if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at their current rate.
該論文對肉類之于氣候影響的計算結(jié)果高于此前的估值——聯(lián)合國糧農(nóng)組織表示,約14%的排放來自肉類和乳制品生產(chǎn)。氣候危機本身也是導(dǎo)致饑荒的原因,最近的一項研究發(fā)現(xiàn),如果溫室氣體排放量繼續(xù)以目前的速度增長,到本世紀(jì)末,全球三分之一的糧食生產(chǎn)將面臨風(fēng)險。
該論文對肉類之于氣候影響的計算結(jié)果高于此前的估值——聯(lián)合國糧農(nóng)組織表示,約14%的排放來自肉類和乳制品生產(chǎn)。氣候危機本身也是導(dǎo)致饑荒的原因,最近的一項研究發(fā)現(xiàn),如果溫室氣體排放量繼續(xù)以目前的速度增長,到本世紀(jì)末,全球三分之一的糧食生產(chǎn)將面臨風(fēng)險。
Scientists have consistently stressed that if dangerous global heating is to be avoided, a major rethink of eating habits and farming practices is required. Meat production has now expanded to the point that there are now approximately three chickens for every human on the planet.
科學(xué)家們一直強調(diào),如果要避免危險的全球變暖,就需要對飲食習(xí)慣和耕作方式進行重大反思。肉類生產(chǎn)現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)擴大到地球上人均三只雞(笑了)。
科學(xué)家們一直強調(diào),如果要避免危險的全球變暖,就需要對飲食習(xí)慣和耕作方式進行重大反思。肉類生產(chǎn)現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)擴大到地球上人均三只雞(笑了)。
Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist at Columbia University who was not involved in the research said the paper is a “damn good study” that should be given “due attention” at the upcoming UN climate talks in Scotland.
哥倫比亞大學(xué)的植物學(xué)家Lewis Ziska沒有參與這項研究。但他指出,這篇論文是一項“非常好的研究”,應(yīng)該在即將在蘇格蘭舉行的聯(lián)合國氣候會議上給予“應(yīng)有的重視”。
哥倫比亞大學(xué)的植物學(xué)家Lewis Ziska沒有參與這項研究。但他指出,這篇論文是一項“非常好的研究”,應(yīng)該在即將在蘇格蘭舉行的聯(lián)合國氣候會議上給予“應(yīng)有的重視”。
“A fundamental unknown in global agriculture is its impact on greenhouse gas emissions,” Ziska said. “While previous estimates have been made, this effort represents a gold standard that will serve as an essential reference in the years to come.”
Ziska說:“全球農(nóng)業(yè)的一個未知因素是它對溫室氣體排放的影響”?!半m然此前已經(jīng)做出了估算,但這一努力代表一個黃金標(biāo)準(zhǔn),在未來幾年將成為重要的參考?!?br />
Ziska說:“全球農(nóng)業(yè)的一個未知因素是它對溫室氣體排放的影響”?!半m然此前已經(jīng)做出了估算,但這一努力代表一個黃金標(biāo)準(zhǔn),在未來幾年將成為重要的參考?!?br />
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 0 )
收藏
And how much does food production account for global CO2 release?
而糧食生產(chǎn)占全球二氧化碳排放的多少呢?
https://ourworldindata.org/food-ghg-emissions
26% total. Plenty of data to drill down into however.
總共占26%。然而,還有大量數(shù)據(jù)需要深入研究。
So, 15.6% of total emissions are just because we eat/produce meat?
那么,15.6%的總排放量僅僅是因為我們食用/生產(chǎn)肉類?
That's just raw emissions. It doesn't count the lost stored carbon from land lost to animal agriculture. Cows need a lot of space, and when that space was previously forested/tree heavy then turned into pasture, a lot of carbon is lost to the atmosphere.
這只是凈排放。它不計算因畜牧業(yè)而占用的土地所產(chǎn)生的碳排放。養(yǎng)殖奶牛需要大量的土地,當(dāng)這些土地以前被森林/樹木覆蓋,然后被砍伐變成牧場時,大量的碳會流失到大氣中。
Also doesn't factor in stuff like how much of the Amazon is being burned down to make room for more cows, or the impact animal ag has on pandemic creation and antibiotic resistant bacteria, or the various toxic chemicals that the industry releases that don't cause climate change but still damage humans and the environment.
此外,還沒有考慮到亞馬遜地區(qū)有多少土地被燒毀以騰出空間飼養(yǎng)更多的奶牛,或者肉類生產(chǎn)對疫情和動物細菌的影響,或者可能該行業(yè)釋放的各種有毒化學(xué)物質(zhì)不會導(dǎo)致氣候變化,但仍會損害人類和環(huán)境?
So can I keep my V8 if I go vegetarian?
如果我改吃素,我還能攝入V8嗎?
No, vegetarians still pay for cows to be bred. Also, we need to reduce/get rid of both to avoid catastrophic climate change
不,素食者仍然要為飼養(yǎng)奶牛負責(zé)。此外,我們需要減少/消除所有這兩者,以避免災(zāi)難性的氣候變化
Not to mention that all of these animals gotta eat and so a very large portion of the emissions from growing food also are tied to animal agriculture.
更不用說所有這些動物都必須進食,因此,種植動物飼料所產(chǎn)生排放的很大一部分也與動物農(nóng)業(yè)有關(guān)。
ourworldindata shows meat productions accounts for 31% of their food sector, so 7.8% total
ourworldindata顯示,肉類生產(chǎn)占其食品生產(chǎn)一欄的31%,因此占排放總數(shù)的7.8%
Your data is older though, mind you, and I'm considering it based on the new findings.
你的數(shù)據(jù)比較舊了,提醒你一下,我正在根據(jù)新的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)來估算結(jié)果。
the data is newer by 8 years, actually. the study is older by 2.
if you look into OP's study, their findings are: 21% agri sector emissions are livestock directly, and 15% is from grazing, 36% total, which corresponds more closely to ourworldindata's 31%. i don't know where "nearly 60%" is coming from in the article.
事實上,數(shù)據(jù)更新了8年。而這項研究比它還舊2年。
如果你看看OP的研究,他們的發(fā)現(xiàn)是:21%的農(nóng)業(yè)排放直接來自牲畜,15%間接來自畜牧,總排放量為36%,這與ourworldindata的31%更接近。我不知道文章中的“近60%”是從哪里來的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
https://ourworldindata.org/food-ghg-emissions
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
Or less than half of 26%
或連26%的一半都不到
The second lix is US specific. It doesn't account for the other major animal food producers. China, Brazil, Russia, India, Argentina, Australia, New Zealand and Germany should be counted as a minimum when trying to paint a broader picture.
第二條鏈接單獨指向美國的。它沒有考慮到其他主要的動物食品生產(chǎn)商。如中國、巴西、俄羅斯、印度、阿根廷、澳大利亞、新西蘭和德國。
The overall estimate for food production in this study is 35%. The overall estimate for meat is 20% (a number they left out of the article but .57 x 35%). These are higher than previous estimates, which is the reason it's in the news I'd guess.
本研究中對食品生產(chǎn)的總體估計為35%。肉類的總體估計為20%(這是他們在文章中遺漏的數(shù)字,0.57 x 35%)。這比之前的估計要高,這就是我猜新聞中出現(xiàn)這一點的原因。
end factory farming.
把工廠關(guān)了吧。
Just stop factory farming’s lobbying against lab meat. Then this bullshit would be solved along with myriad of progress in bioengineering
停止農(nóng)場主們對合成肉類的抗拒。然后,隨著生物工程研究的進步,所有這些狗屎將被徹底解決
I honestly don't know if the 8 billion people living on earth can currently be fed sustainably. I agree with you in spirit and think there should be an effort to find solutions.
我真的不知道地球上的80億人是不是吃的都是可持續(xù)發(fā)展的食物。我個人同意你的看法,我認為應(yīng)該努力找到解決辦法。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Plant-based diets take much less land, even cropland, and produce far fewer emissions than diets with animal products.
Yet suggest people stop eating meat, or worse, utter a certain word starting with"V" on here and you are murdered for bringing up the idea.
以植物為基礎(chǔ)的飲食占用的土地更少,甚至所需農(nóng)田更少,產(chǎn)生的排放量也遠低于以動物產(chǎn)品為基礎(chǔ)的飲食。
然而,建議人們停止吃肉,或者更糟糕的是,說出一個以“V”開頭的單詞(vegetarian素食主義者),你就會因為提出這個想法而被謀殺。
To be fair the most effective use of land is some meat, not no meat. There's land that's not useful for crops, part of byproduct can be used for farm animals etc. (Based on Wageningen University's Prof. de Boer's research, IIRC a third of protein intake would be animal based.)
公平地說,土地的最有效利用方式是一部分用來生產(chǎn)肉,而不是完全不生產(chǎn)肉。有些土地不適合種植作物,部分副產(chǎn)品可用于飼養(yǎng)家畜等(根據(jù)瓦赫寧根大學(xué)de Boer教授的研究,如果我沒記錯的話,人體所需三分之一的蛋白質(zhì)通過動物制品攝入。)
What do you feed the animals with? The food they eat needs land to grow.
你用什么喂動物?他們吃的食物需要土地來種植。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Being vegan does not have that big of an impact against climate change. I mean, sure these factors/multipliers seem huge, but overall leaving coal and oil will have the biggest positive impact against climate change. Changing our diets is not as pressing/important as finding ways to be less energy demanding and produce energy in other ways than burning oil/coal.
That being said, I wouldn't mind slapping VAT on products that stress the environment more (this could even be vegan products, since intercontinental transport adds CO2 emissions), but in practice this would be a nightmare and hurts the poor the most.
素食主義者對氣候變化沒有那么大的影響。我的意思是,當(dāng)然這些因素/乘數(shù)看起來很大,但總體而言,離開煤炭和石油將才是對氣候變化產(chǎn)生最大的積極影響。改變我們的飲食并沒有比燃燒石油/煤炭更節(jié)省能源或者比找到其他方式生產(chǎn)能源更緊迫/重要。
話雖如此,我并不介意對那些更影響環(huán)境的產(chǎn)品征收增值稅(這甚至可能是純素產(chǎn)品,因為洲際運輸增加了二氧化碳排放),但實際上這將是一場噩夢,對窮人的傷害最大。
It's production that creates the bulk of emissions, not transport. Having a beef heavy diet will always be more environmentally damaging than a vegan diet, even if the meat eater only ate local beef and the vegan only ate avocados from the other side of the world. https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local
For most foods – and particularly the largest emitters – most GHG emissions result from land use change (shown in green), and from processes at the farm stage (brown). Farm-stage emissions include processes such as the application of fertilizers – both organic (“manure management”) and synthetic; and enteric fermentation (the production of methane in the stomachs of cattle). Combined, land use and farm-stage emissions account for more than 80% of the footprint for most foods.
Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%.
制造大量排放的是生產(chǎn)過程,而不是運輸。即使肉食者只吃本地牛肉,而素食者只吃來自世界另一端的牛油果,吃大量牛肉的飲食方式總是比純素飲食對環(huán)境的破壞更大。
對于大多數(shù)食品來說——特別是對肉類——大多數(shù)溫室氣體排放源于土地利用的變化和農(nóng)場階段的過程。農(nóng)場階段的排放包括施用有機(“大便”)和合成肥料等過程;腸內(nèi)發(fā)酵(牛胃里產(chǎn)生甲烷)。土地使用和農(nóng)場階段的排放加起來占大多數(shù)食品碳排放足跡的80%以上。
交通運輸只是碳排放的一個小因素。對于大多數(shù)食品來說,它所占的比例不到10%,而對于最大的溫室氣體排放國來說,這一比例要小得多。從牛群身上生產(chǎn)牛肉,這一比例僅為0.5%。
It's not economical.
Not all land can grow profitable crop. But they can grow grass. Cows can eat grass.
Also, a large % of food production every year is deemed unfit for human consumption. But animals can eat it.
Thank God for animal farming so producers have a market for product.
這不經(jīng)濟。
并非所有的土地都能種植有利可圖的作物。但是他們可以種草。??梢猿圆荨?br /> 此外,每年有很大一部分糧食生產(chǎn)被認為不適合人類食用。但是動物可以吃它。
感謝上帝,動物養(yǎng)殖業(yè)讓這些生產(chǎn)者有了養(yǎng)家糊口的辦法。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
How much of a % of that food production is done on land that could produce food. How about instead of growing grass we grow something that captures more carbon while reducing the methane emissions by stopping breeding of cattle.
有多少糧食生產(chǎn)是在能夠生產(chǎn)糧食的土地上進行的?與其種草,不如種些能吸收更多碳的東西,同時通過停止養(yǎng)牛來減少甲烷排放量。