Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Save The Planet, Eat Your Dog



In the ever-expanding quest to reduce carbon and save the planet from the onslaught of global warming, forget studying cow flatulence, riding your bicycle or even recycling your SUV.

Robert and Brenda Vale, 2 New Zealand “specialists in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington,” have released their “study” claiming “the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle.”

John Barrett of the Stockholm Environment Institute in York, Britain, was asked by New Scientist magazine to confirm the results. Calculating “eco-pawprints” with his own data, he arrived at “essentially the same results.

Says Barrett, “Owning a dog really is quite an extravagance, mainly because of the carbon footprint of meat.”

Cat owners aren’t off the hook either, according to the Vales. They also claim, “Cats have an eco-footprint of about 0.15 hectares, slightly less than driving a Volkswagen Golf for a year, while two hamsters equates to a plasma television and even the humble goldfish burns energy equivalent to two mobile telephones.”

The Vale’s research also concludes, “pets environmental impact is not limited to their carbon footprint, as cats and dogs devastate wildlife, spread disease and pollute waterways.”

Animal rights advocates and lovers aren’t impressed.

Sylvie Comont, owner of seven cats and two dogs says, “I think the love we have for our animals and what they contribute to our lives outweighs the environmental considerations.”

Reha Huttin, president of France's 30 Million Friends animal rights foundation claims, “the human impact of eliminating pets would be equally devastating.” Reha says, “Pets are anti-depressants, they help us cope with stress, they are good for the elderly”

The Vales aren’t completely anti-animal, though. They also note that you can “offset” the carbon pawprint, or clawprint, by making sure your animal is dual purpose.

Robert Vale says, “Get a hen, which offsets its impact by laying edible eggs, or a rabbit, prepared to make the ultimate environmental sacrifice by ending up on the dinner table. Rabbits are good, provided you eat them.”

SOURCE

Am I the only one ready to put this farce of AGW behind us and start living our lives again?

7 comments:

Angie Lee said...

These people leave a far larger "carbon print" than pets, so why don't they eat themselves, save the planet?

They are getting just a little too ridiculous to even take seriously. Greenies holler that species man is merely a parasite sucking the life out of Mother Earth, so why aren't they doing more to eliminate the parasite?

Ohhhh, wait. That's what HEALTHCARE DEFORM is all about.

Lew Waters said...

If you think this is bizarre, Angie, check out how these environmentally friendly people really feel about these so alled "green" alternative energy sources.

Senator Feinstein Seeks to Block Solar Panels In Mojave Desert

An Ill Wind Off Cape Cod

Ted Kennedy Blocks Cape Cod Wind Farm

Environmentalists Fight Calico solar farm

Animals Rights Activists Blocking Wind Farms

It would seem that "green" is only aceptable when constructed in someone elses back yard.

Angie Lee said...

In someone else' backyard or at someone else' expense. Heaven forbid they pay for it themselves.

I find it curiouser and curiouser, how EEEEVIL capitalism must be destroyed - at any and all cost - yet they have no answer as to how the they will pay for their when wealth is no longer being created?

They have a serious problem grasping the concept that MONEY DOES NOT EQUAL WEALTH. They can turn the printing presses on at any time and flood the market with useless fiat money (and they're happily doing that, too), diluting and/or destroying REAL wealth and making things generally for everyone - ESPECIALLY for the poor and downtrodden they claim to wish to save/help.

Morons. They want to get rid of us, but man's spirit and sense of perseverance (not to mention self-preservation) keep getting in their way, huh?

Canuckguy said...

So I suppose these pet haters would think it was a good thing that 60 million farting bison were eliminated in the wild west by the late 1800's.

The planet made do with all those bison. It will just have to make do with pets.

It's those type that give the AGW believers(I am one) a bad name. I rather they just shut up unless they have something semsible to say.

Lew Waters said...

Canuck, as I'm sure you know, I disagree with you on AGW. But, I appreciate we can do so agreeably, thanks.

That being said, I do believe in protecting our environment and using our resources responsibly. I'm not going to go into all the ways I think we can do it right now, but I'd like to see a more balanced approach, which these pet haters do not represent, any more than people like Al Gore does.

As I linked to in a later post, it bothers me too how supporters in our government down here of AGW take such measures to block the construction of "green energy sources" when in their back yard.

To me, if you are going to talk the talk, walk the walk.

Merry Christmas, my friend.

briancam1 said...

Global climate is changing -- CO2 now==410 ppm Bush EVIL ONE = Science = HANSON reports 350 ppM to sustain climate we have. USA=EVIL ONES == MORE CO2 PER PERSON THAN ANY NATION

BY 2020 450 ppm CO2 AND NO STOPPING
JUST THE FACTS -- USA CHANGING CLIMATE MORE THAN ANY OTHER NATION.

Lew Waters said...

And yet, you give absolutely no documentation to support your "facts."

Look out the window, we are in one of the colder winters in many years.

So, thank God for global warming.

Imagine how cold it would be without it.