Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Walking causes more global “warming” than driving

I swear, these eco-freaks get more hilarious every day! From the Times in Londonistan:

Walking does more than driving to cause global warming, a leading environmentalist has calculated.

Food production is now so energy-intensive that more carbon is emitted providing a person with enough calories to walk to the shops than a car would emit over the same distance. The climate could benefit if people avoided exercise, ate less and became couch potatoes. Provided, of course, they remembered to switch off the TV rather than leaving it on standby.

The sums were done by Chris Goodall, campaigning author of How to Live a Low-Carbon Life, based on the greenhouse gases created by intensive beef production. “Driving a typical UK car for 3 miles [4.8km] adds about 0.9 kg [2lb] of CO2 to the atmosphere,” he said, a calculation based on the Government’s official fuel emission figures. “If you walked instead, it would use about 180 calories. You’d need about 100g of beef to replace those calories, resulting in 3.6kg of emissions, or four times as much as driving.

If you want to save the planet, stop eating and exercising, m’kay? In other words, just do Mother Gaia a humungo favor and die right now. Thanks in advance.

About these ads

August 6, 2007 - Posted by | environuts, global warming

7 Comments »

  1. After reading the article I kind of get the feeling the guy is saying it’s not a matter WHAT we spend our energy on. Cars, Trains, Paper, Plastic, Cows, Trees…. Its how efficient the production of goods is relative to the amount of pollution that that production puts out.

    Still I’m surprised your ragging on this guy so hard. It seems to me that he’s helping make your point that environmentalists, especially the ones who are left wing environmentalists are barking up the wrong tree in terms of finding a real way of reducing our pollution output.

    Comment by Vince N | August 6, 2007

  2. The reason I’m on the guy, Vince, is that he’s implying that we need to stop living in order to save Mother Gaia. He’s also saying that we should stop walking and start driving, which is 100% opposite of what the other treehuggers out there contend. It’s like “Pick a remedy to the catastrophe du jour and stick with it, huh?” :-D

    People like this guy put the “mental” in “environmentalism”.

    Comment by crushliberalism | August 6, 2007

  3. The article must be secretly written by the Bush propaganda machine. I wouln’t be supprised if it was actually written by his sub-evilness himself, Karl Rove himself! The sinister Bush wants to encourage more Americans to burn more oil and shorten our lives with a lack of exercise. We all know Bush wants us all to die and destroy the earth in the process! Will Bush’s Evil Never End! :-)

    Comment by Steve | August 6, 2007

  4. Looks like I’ll be helping the climate all day! Cool.

    Comment by A.C. McCloud | August 6, 2007

  5. Wait, wait, you mean all those times I drove needlessly to the store to buy spray paint with the sole purpose to destroy the ozone, I’ve actually been helping the environment?

    If you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go hang myself. Wait, that’ll help the planet too. Nevermind.

    Comment by Ed | August 6, 2007

  6. @ Johnathan

    The way the article reads I think that conclusion has more to do with the articles author than what the guy he’s interviewing said.

    On the other hand if that is what he said and meant I’m sure that it was more made in a rhetorical fashion.

    Sort of like me saying less people would drown if we would just stay away from large bodies of water. True? Yes… Am I advocating actually doing that? No.

    In any event it is an interesting article i’d be interested in hearing more on it.

    BTW, How was your break?

    Comment by Vince N | August 6, 2007

  7. I read an interesting one yesterday on some website written by an idiot that said we in the US waste too much water with our flush toilets. We should be more like third world countries and not be so obsessed with cleanliness, and shouldn’t waste water washing our hands after using the can. We should be crapping thru a slit in the floor and the waste products should be used as fertilizer to help grow things to be eaten, just like they do in third world countries.

    There is a reason those places are called “third world”. Having spent lots of time in those places (looking down into one of those slits in the floor and seeing it crawling white with maggots is not something soon forgotten) and the byproduct in used as fertilizer. It is referred to as “night soil” and we were advised against eating anything local that had been grown in it.

    Water does NOT go away, after our waste products are run thru a sewage treatment plant, the water is reintroduced into the ecosystem. Flushing a toilet does not WASTE water but those in power listen to fools like that and we end up with “low-flow” toilets that need to be flushed two or three times to get rid of what would be gone with one flush of the old style shitter.

    Comment by Lee | August 7, 2007


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

« Previous | Next »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers

%d bloggers like this: