• Penny7@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Considering this is about food that humans eat it makes sense that they don’t include children on this chart.

    Unless you’re living in a candy house in the middle of the woods, then yeah, you have a point.

    • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      Oh ho, I see, I didn’t realize children aren’t human and they don’t eat. My bad.

    • AndyMFK@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      Well the post tile says “other than not having a car and voting” which are also not about food.

      I get the linked article is about food, but OP worded the post in such a way that it’s just factually incorrect

    • BorgDrone@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      The title mentions not owning a car and voting, that’s not in the chart either.

      You can drive 12 hummers powered by crude oil and eat steak every day at not have even a fraction of the impact of just one child. Having one less child results in a ecological-footprint reduction equivalent to 58.6 tonnes of CO2 a year. By contrast, living car-free saves 2.4 tonnes a year, eating a plant-based diet saves 0.82 tonnes a year.

      Not reproducing is the single most impactful thing you can do for the environment by a huge margin.

      • 0x0@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        Not reproducing is the single most impactful thing you can do for the environment by a huge margin.

        Can you compare that with large container ships, commercial and private planes, coal plants…?