How Absurd! Inconvenient Sequel Doesn't Talk About Animal Agriculture
By Rachel Krantz
When I spotted fellow vegan James Cromwell in line for food at an advance screening of An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, I couldn't help but try to talk to him. Recently arrested at a protest against SeaWorld, the Babe and Six Feet Under actor is a remarkable environmental and animal activist.
"Can you believe they're serving chickens here?" I asked him. "I mean, I guess it's a little better for the environment than eating cows, but it's still ironic to be serving animals at a party for a documentary about climate change."
"Yeah, really!" Cromwell answered. "Besides the damage it does to the atmosphere from methane release, and the terrible torment of the animals, it is destroying us spiritually. You eat one hamburger and have no idea of the process that led to that one hamburger, how many animals suffered, how much waste, what it does to us, and what it does to the planet."
Al Gore's 'An Inconvenient Sequel' Conveniently Leaves Out This One Big Truth https://t.co/WJ5yf4U224 @SoilAssociation @eatsustainable— EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)1502243704.0
He's right. We aren't serious enough about the impact our diet has on the environment, despite overwhelming evidence. For instance, to produce one hamburger takes as much water as two months' worth of showering. Additionally, the livestock sector is one of the largest sources of carbon dioxide emissions and the single largest source of both methane and nitrous oxide. And according to the World Bank, animal agriculture is responsible for nearly 90 percent of Amazon rainforest destruction, with more than 80,000 acres of forest—and 135 animal and plant species—lost each day.
Study Links Most Amazon Deforestation to 128 Slaughterhouses https://t.co/K6CRKZr9Tc @lunchboxbunch @TheVeganSociety— EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)1501364707.0
Simply put, animal agriculture is one of the main culprits behind climate change. An Inconvenient Truth failed to address this, and people have been wondering whether the sequel would make up for it, particularly since it again stars Al Gore, who himself went vegan after realizing the connection between animal agriculture and global warming. Unfortunately, as James Cromwell and I were about to find out, the sequel likewise failed. And that's truly disappointing.
Instead, too much of the new documentary was devoted to spotlighting former vice president Gore as a leader, rather than informing viewers about the many concrete actions they can take to limit their carbon footprint, like adopting a plant-based diet.
At the end of the film, the audience is asked to take the pledge to #BeInconvenient, to keep demanding that schools, businesses and towns invest in clean, renewable energy. "If President Trump refuses to lead, Americans will," the call to action reads, encouraging viewers who want to fight climate change to use "your choice, your voice, your vote." This is great, but aside from a few seconds where Gore mentions that "agriculture is another major cause" of CO2 emissions, the link between climate change and eating animals is entirely left out of the film.
And any environmentalist worth her salt should find that outrageous.
The link between our diet and the environment is both direct and strong. To give you an idea, if every American committed to just one meat-free day a week, the impact would be equivalent to switching all our gas-powered cars to hybrids. In fact, according to research published in the journal Climate Change, if you adopt a plant-based diet, you'll cut your carbon footprint in half.
Yet these facts are nowhere to be found in this supposedly environmentalist documentary.
Perhaps the filmmakers thought that mainstream viewers couldn't handle the truth. I like to think otherwise.
It's time for environmentalists to face reality and start acknowledging the impact animal agriculture has on climate change. As Cromwell told me, "You can't consume another creature out of sloth, ignorance, and unconsciousness and then switch that off and go with dedication and consciousness in another area of your life. You have to be conscious in the entire course of living."
To call yourself an environmentalist and ignore what eating animals is doing to our planet is hypocritical and perpetuates the selfishness that got us into this mess in the first place. If you really care about the environment, take the film's pledge to #BeInconvenient, and tell everyone you know that one of the biggest things they can do to fight climate change is to leave animals off their plates. Whether or not they find your statement inconvenient, it's the truth.
New Zealand could be the first country in the world to require its major financial institutions to report on the risks posed by the climate crisis.
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Eco-friendly outdoor brand Patagonia has a colorful and timely message stitched into the tags of its latest line of shorts. "VOTE THE A**HOLES," it reads.
- 'Go Out and Vote' Patagonia Endorses Candidates for First Time in ... ›
- Tesla, Patagonia Join Growing Resistance Against Trump - EcoWatch ›
This year, the UK National James Dyson Award went to a team of student designers who want to reduce the environmental impact of car tires.
- Humans Eat More Than 100 Plastic Fibers With Each Meal - EcoWatch ›
- Microplastics Are Raining Down on Cities - EcoWatch ›
- Microplastics Are Wafting in on the Sea Breeze - EcoWatch ›
By Brett Wilkins
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the meatpacking industry worked together to downplay and disregard risks to worker health during the Covid-19 pandemic, as shown in documents published Monday by Public Citizen and American Oversight.
<div id="13077" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="11b9fe5ff48ebc437353df6df9c2c892"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1305915938148147205" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Just a week before the Trump administration issued an executive order aimed at keeping meat packing plants open, th… https://t.co/DkbXgPm4YR</div> — ProPublica (@ProPublica)<a href="https://twitter.com/propublica/statuses/1305915938148147205">1600189597.0</a></blockquote></div>
<div id="36e4c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e7c8048c2755109629a3b3072fcb3261"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1304424041814593539" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Meatpacking union @UFCW, which reps workers at this plant (four of whom died), slams OSHA for the small $13k fine a… https://t.co/tnhfKd89ab</div> — Dave Jamieson (@Dave Jamieson)<a href="https://twitter.com/jamieson/statuses/1304424041814593539">1599833901.0</a></blockquote></div><p>The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) International Union, which represents Smithfield Foods workers, <a href="https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/crime/2020/09/10/osha-fines-smithfield-foods-sioux-falls-south-dakota/5768786002/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=f7bf3f03-ce98-4df4-9c45-f44d9a6a5890" target="_blank">slammed</a> the fine as "insulting and a slap on the wrist."</p><p>"How much is the health, safety, and life of an essential worker worth? Based on the actions of the Trump administration, clearly not much," said UFCW president Marc Perrone.</p><p>"This so-called 'fine' is a slap on the wrist for Smithfield, and a slap in the face of the thousands of American meatpacking workers who have been putting their lives on the line to help feed America since the beginning of this pandemic," Perrone added. </p><p>Other critics, including vegans, vegetarians, and animal rights and environmental advocates argued that the accelerated spread of Covid-19 from meatpacking facilities is but the latest compelling argument in favor of reducing—or eliminating—meat consumption.</p><p>"We know that Covid-19 originated in a meat market and that previous influenza viruses originated in pigs and chickens," People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) <a href="https://www.peta.org/blog/meat-shortage-slaugherhouses-go-vegan/" target="_blank">said</a> in April amid news that a Foster Farms slaughterhouse in Livingston, California was <a href="https://www.peta.org/blog/coronavirus-covid-19-slaughterhouse-meat-concerns/?utm_source=PETA::Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=0420::veg::PETA::Twitter::Workers%20Blame%20Major%20Pig%20Slaughterhouse%20600%20Infected%20COVID-19::::tweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ordered closed</a> by local health authorities due to a Covid-19 outbreak that killed eight employees.</p>
<div id="28490" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="48ddd3480a2beb42597d9516ef652f0f"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1252416495990140929" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS! @SmithfieldFoods allegedly took NO PRECAUTIONS to protect the safety of its workers, leaving o… https://t.co/viAJ026pLy</div> — PETA (@PETA)<a href="https://twitter.com/peta/statuses/1252416495990140929">1587434336.0</a></blockquote></div><p>"It's not a matter of <em>whether</em> using and killing animals for food will give rise to another disease outbreak—it's a matter of <em>when</em>," said PETA. "There has never been a better, more obvious time for businesses to put an end to their dirty trade of slaughtering animals for their flesh." </p>
By Andrea Willige
More than half of the world's population lives in cities, and most future population growth is predicted to happen in urban areas. But the concentration of large numbers of people and the ecosystems built around their lives has also been a driver of climate change.