The question of how to eat an environmentally-conscious meal has a number of answers. For example, in Australia, researchers have suggested that kangaroo meat would be an ethical replacement for beef. Details after the jump.From PopSci:”Professor Ross Garnaut, a government adviser on climate change, is urging his fellow Aussies to serve kangaroo meat in place of beef or lamb, because the marsupials produce negligible amounts of environmentally damaging methane gas. On the other hand, cattle and sheep, according to Garnaut’s 620-page study, produce a considerable amount of methane gas through belching and flatulence, and are among the millions of livestock responsible for approximately 67 percent of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. In order to help the environment, he proposes that Australia, which is one of the world’s largest per-capita producers of greenhouse gas emissions, should decrease its cattle and sheep populations by seven million and 36 million respectively, and increase its kangaroo numbers from 34 million to 240 million by 2020. The study cites other benefits, too: kangaroo meat is low in fat and high in protein levels, and the animals survive better in times of drought.”This might not be as crazy as it sounds. But remember: You don’t just eat, you dunk-a-roo.
Tags
advertisement
More for You
-
14 images of badass women who destroyed stereotypes and inspired future generations
These trailblazers redefined what a woman could be.
Throughout history, women have stood up and fought to break down barriers imposed on them from stereotypes and societal expectations. The trailblazers in these photos made history and redefined what a woman could be. In doing so, they paved the way for future generations to stand up and continue to fight for equality.
-
Why mass shootings spawn conspiracy theories
Mass shootings and conspiracy theories have a long history.
While conspiracy theories are not limited to any topic, there is one type of event that seems particularly likely to spark them: mass shootings, typically defined as attacks in which a shooter kills at least four other people.
When one person kills many others in a single incident, particularly when it seems random, people naturally seek out answers for why the tragedy happened. After all, if a mass shooting is random, anyone can be a target.
Pointing to some nefarious plan by a powerful group – such as the government – can be more comforting than the idea that the attack was the result of a disturbed or mentally ill individual who obtained a firearm legally.
advertisement

