Name: Everything Wrong With Environmentalism
Uploaded: 2018-04-11T00:17:57.000Z
Duration: 14 min 32 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Adverbs of degree

Most people care about the environment…at least enough to say they do on a study.

And most people have faith that the top environmental

agencies in the world are fighting the good fight to remedy the wrongs of humankind, certain

that they're focusing on the core issues with the greatest impact. Well, today we're

going to look at the top issues championed by the environmental agencies and the vast majority

of environmentalists and see why they're wrong. So…very…wrong.

Hi it's Emily from Bite Size Vegan and welcome to another vegan nugget, the first of the

“everything wrong with” series. Way back in the day I did a video comparing the effectiveness

of all the common “go green” tips to eating a vegan diet. That video's up there if you

want to check it out later. Unfortunately it was before I was very rigorous with citing

my sources and I haven't had time to cobble them back together for that post. So today

is a bit of a revamp with new numbers, many even more incredible.

I'm going to move more quickly in this video than usual but citations for every fact I

state and additional information are available on the blog post for this video which linked up

there and in the video description. I will also track any errors that I or anyone else finds in this

video there as well. I will also be far more sarcastic in this video but do not mean to

say that other environmental issues have no importance. You have been warned. Let's

get the tally of wrongness up [which you'll see is more of an art than a science] and

Environmental agencies focus on fossil fuels as the big bad baddy of greenhouse gas emissions

leading to global warming, suggesting alternative energy, carpooling, hybrid cars, and biking,

but animal agriculture accounts for more CO2 per year than all transportation methods combined.

A conservative 2006 study by the United Nations Food and Agricultural organization placed animal

agriculture at 7,516 metric tons per year or 18% of annual global GHG emissions with

a far more thorough 2009 World Watch study taking into account overlooked livestock respiration,

land use, methane and other oversights of the FAO, with the ultimate outcome of at least

32,654 million tons of CO2 per year coming from animal agriculture. That's 51% of all

global emissions compared to the 13% of all combined transportation.

And what do the environmental agencies point to: reducing fossil fuel usage.

If we completely stopped all use of gas, oil, fuel, electricity, et cetera, and never used

them ever again, we would still exceed our carbon equivalent greenhouse gas emissions

of 565 Gigatons by the year 2030 just with the impact of livestock alone.

So not using fossil fuels at all, which would be the wet dream of every environmental agency, we're

still gassing out the planet with the one contributor, the main contributor, which they

In a similar vein, the focus is always almost exclusively on CO2 but methane is 25-100 times

more destructive than CO2 and has 86 times the global warming power.

If we do reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere as all the organizations are calling for, it will

take around 100 years to see an actual decline, whereas reducing methane shows results almost

immediately with significant results within decades. So the proposed solutions are even

farther from the mark than the actual constructive change.

Additionally, livestock is responsible for 65% of all emissions of nitrous oxide – a

greenhouse gas 296 x more destructive than carbon dioxide and which stays in the

Put in comparative terms, your average car produces 3-12 kg/day of CO2. but to clear rainforest

to produce beef for one hamburger produces 75 kg of CO2. Eating one pound of hamburger

does the same damage as driving your car for more than three weeks.

But is animal agriculture ever mentioned by any of the top environmental organizations

or environmentalists in relation to global warming? No. They focus on alternative energy

when converting to wind and solar power will take 20+ years and roughly 43 trillion dollars,

and going vegan takes seconds and can be even cheaper than being non-vegan.

Environmental protection agencies recommend to use less water, take shorter showers, use

a low flow shower head. Now here is where you'll find the greatest variation from

my original calculations based on a 5 gallon per minute shower head. This time around I

found that the typical shower head after 1980 emits 2.5 gallons/minute with the low flow

emitting no more than 2gpm. If you take daily 15 minute showers with a low-flow shower head

you'll be saving 2,737.5 gallons per year. If, instead, you forgo one pound of beef one

time, you'll save 2,500 gallons of water for ONE POUND OF BEEF. That is a conservative

number as figures range all the way to over 8,000 gallons of water for one pound of beef.

477 gallons of water are required to produce 1lb. of eggs; almost 900 gallons of water

are needed for 1lb. of cheese. and 1,000 gallons or liters of water are required to produce 1 gallon or liter of milk.

Environmental agencies focus almost exclusively on curbing home water usage, but only 5% of

water consumed in the US is by private homes, while 55% of water consumed in the US is for

animal agriculture, and 20-33% of all fresh water consumption in the world today. That's

up to a third of the planets water for animal agriculture.

If you didn't consume beef, eggs, milk, or cheese, not even counting other meats or

other dairy items, based on American consumption habits from 2000

and the conservative figures of water per pound, you'd save 222,345 gallons

But the environmental agencies prefer saving 1,825-2,737.5 gallons a year by using a low

Oh and the little trendy Greek Yogurts out there? 90 gallons of water for a

6 oz. serving. And one stick of butter takes 109 gallons.

If we added all forms of dairy and meat for the average American in 2000, which is

less dairy and more meat than the data I had for my first video, and use a very conservative

average of 1,500 gallons per pound for the remaining meat as each type varies and

even more conservative 600 gallons for the remaining dairy, a vegan year would save approximately

Not only does that blow every water conservation recommendation out of the water, but with

the new calculations, forget what I've said before about not showering. You would

have to not shower AT ALL for over 66 years if you took daily 15 minute showers or close

to 100 years if you took daily 10 minute showers, both with a water saving shower head.

And the advice of the supposed environmental champions: shower less, turn off the water

while soaping your hands, run your sprinklers at night. Because that's how we're going

Issue Three: Fracking, no I did not  curse…

Fracking is the new golden child of environmentalists and their leading organizations. Fracking

is destroying the planet! It's polluting the waters. In the United States alone, fracking

uses from 70-140 billion gallons of water. Keep in mind for the big numbers that a thousand

seconds is 17 minutes, a million seconds is 12 days, a billion seconds is 31.7 years,

and a trillion seconds is 31,709.8 years.

In the United States alone, animal agriculture uses from 34-76 trillion gallons annually.

Taking into account the exponential difference between a billion and a trillion, animal agriculture

in the United States consumes anywhere from 486 to over a 1,000 times more water than fracking,

the largest threat to water according to environmentalists.

Issue Four: Ocean Dead Zones and Over-Fishing

Some of the worst human-created devastation is in our oceans. 3/4 of the world's fisheries

are exploited. 90 million tons of fish are pulled from our oceans each year. For every