Sunday, March 29, 2009

More Shams from Environmentalists

From time to time you hear various environmentalists expressing their distain of the government subsidies towards biofuels which totals around 6 billion a year. This is certainly worthy of attention as these fuels are counterproductive in solving our environmental problems, but I find it particularly funny that environmentalists still have not questioned the government subsides on animal products, something that is exponentially worse on the environment.




Currently, the US government subsidizes meat directly however in very small amounts( around $300 million). The real way the meat industry gets all of the government subsidies is from other sectors of agriculture (corn, soybeans, wheat, oats). Since the livestock sector consumes unreasonable amounts of vegetables, 80% of the US corn and 90% of soy meal crops, they use the subsidies from vegetables to feed their animals. To give you an idea of how much the US government subsides these crops, between 2000 and 2004, an average of $4.5 billion to corn and $2 billion to soy was given out to the agriculture sector. Nearly all of government subsides initially intended for vegetables went to livestock feed instead.

With this being said, when environmentalists start to complain about these subsides on biofuels, I question their sincerity. These subsides have only been around for a few years, yet meat subsides have been around since the early 1970’s. Both subsides are around the equivalent monetarily, yet the subsides for meat are far worse on the environment. Has anyone heard a main-stream peep out against these meat subsidies? I know I certainly haven't. I have however heard meat-eaters who ironically call themselves environmentalists(Al Gore) voicing plenty of disdain towards biofuel subsides(Mr. Krugman). The subsides on meat have already contributed to more environmental devastation over thier 40 years of existence than subsides on biofules could ever realistically contribute, yet environmentalists still haven't picked up on it. It's time that changed.

I know I've said this plenty of times, but the single best thing you can do for the environment is go vegetarian. And as the UN claims, "the livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global”.

For those who consider themselves environmentalists, I strongly urge you to reduce your consumption of animal products. It's the best thing you can do to mitigate your carbon footprint.

No comments: