The Dog or the Car... one has to go.

[DrSquirrel]

I've heard this before, but only just now decided to check up on it.

Keeping a dog has a larger eco-footprint than a large car.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/2987848/Save-the-planet-time-to-eat-dog



Which leads me to think - how many car haters are there out there, as there are some serious ones, that have a herd of dogs (or cats/other large animals you dont eat)? What would their excuses be for it, and how many of them would easily be transferred to an argument for driving and that's impact to the environment.


Also this leads to - If you hit a dog a year, does it offset your carbon emissions? (don't hate me!)

 

[DrSquirrel]

[QUOTE 1291014"]
The article is utter bullshit and if they want to talk about the amount of CO2 emissions making and distributing the dog food then they should do the same for the car. An utter crass and ill thought OP quoting an ideology that has been done to death a few times on here. And don't even get me started on marginal costing and WTF is this doing in commuting? Are you proposing a mid ride commute snack on a dog leg or something along those lines to help with the ride to work or are you going to ride away with a tail between your legs?
[/quote]

Or call you a twat.

 

[al78]

[QUOTE 1291014"]
The article is utter bullshit and if they want to talk about the amount of CO2 emissions making and distributing the dog food then they should do the same for the car.
[/quote]

Exactly, this article looks like it has come straight out of the Jeremy Clarkson school of statistical analysis.

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

I'd rather have my little 3 legged dog rather than a car ANY day. You can't walk a car, a car has no personality AND a car doesn't love you seeing as it is a lump of metal! (Car advert makers take note).

Oh, and CO2 emmissions would depend on what was eaten. Obviously!

 

[asterix]

Presumably a three-legged dog has a smaller carbon footprint?

 

[DJ]

I like the argument here it reminds me of the similar arguement, that we should all stop eating meat beacause Cows give off too much methane gas!!!!

 

[pshore]

Your beef argument reminds me ... My bull detector (no pun intended) went off the other day when I stumbled across this article from 2007.

http://www.timesonli...icle2195538.ece

"Eating less and driving to save energy would be better [for the environment].”

"The sums were done by ..." someone who had a book out. Make sure you don't buy it.

 

[Crackle]

I've got a dog and a car. Sometimes I let him drive but he has a really heavy right foot. I dread to think how much his carbon pawprint goes up when he drives. We've considered offsetting it by eating George Monbiot but we don't think he'd taste nice, not much substance to him.

 

[Adasta]

This is a similar argument to the "don't have children unless you want a massive carbon footprint".

I mean, this line of reasoning is ridiculous:

"A lot of people worry about having SUVs but they don't worry about having Alsatians and what we are saying is, well, maybe you should be because the environmental impact ... is comparable."

This argument is totally specious and only works if you choose to neglect the argument's most significant oversight: one can't make carbon comparisons on living creatures, be they human, plant or animal. It's all well and good reducing carbon emissions where we can and ditching cars, but I dread to think of people shouting "3 children and a dog...in the city!" in disgust in the same way they do about 4x4s.

 

[subaqua]

This is a similar argument to the "don't have children unless you want a massive carbon footprint".

I mean, this line of reasoning is ridiculous:



This argument is totally specious and only works if you choose to neglect the argument's most significant oversight: one can't make carbon comparisons on living creatures, be they human, plant or animal. It's all well and good reducing carbon emissions where we can and ditching cars, but I dread to think of people shouting "3 children and a dog...in the city!" in disgust in the same way they do about 4x4s.

keeping a dog in the city is unfair to the dog really. but each to their own. I did hear something similar on QI but Fry quoted a different source for the CO2 calcs

those irresponsible owners who don't pick the 5hit up and bin it will be 1st up against the wall when the revolution comes.

 

[Adasta]

keeping a dog in the city is unfair to the dog really. but each to their own. I did hear something similar on QI but Fry quoted a different source for the CO2 calcs

those irresponsible owners who don't pick the 5hit up and bin it will be 1st up against the wall when the revolution comes.

I agree with you wholeheartedly; the quote was more for comic effect. How lazy must you be not to take your dog to a field so it can poo! What a disgrace.

 

[yello]

Let me put it this way, if the misses ditches me then she can have the car... but I'll be damned if she gets both the dogs!

 

[taxing]

So what's the environmental impact of humans eating meat?

 

[Adasta]

So what's the environmental impact of humans eating meat?

Not sure if this comment was a facetious one, so I'm going to answer seriously (but briefly) and say: huge.

 

[taxing]

Not sure if this comment was a facetious one, so I'm going to answer seriously (but briefly) and say: huge.

Well, it was a smug one. I'm a vegetarian.

I did mean compared to dogs though. A big dog probably eats more meat in a day than an average human would, but what's the trade-off with low-grade vs. high-grade meat?