Comments by "antonyjh1234" (@antonyjh1234) on "DW Planet A" channel.

This is where I have been saying for years this zeitgeist is wrong, Beef's main diet is grass, usually on non arable land, or land that doesn't get fertilised. Going vegetarian/vegan causes more of the synthetic fertilisers to be used. Of what we feed to them as grain it's 15% of the corn crop in USA, 9% beef and 6% to dairy, a lot of place around the world have their beef on pasture and they wouldn't see grain until the got to the yard. Nothing beats weather irrigated, self fertilised produce from non arable land that we barely put anything into. Over 100 years methane is 28 times worse than CO2, N2O is 298, there is only 5.6 times more methane in the atmosphere. Moving to a vegetarian diet, away from beef, would be the opposite advice I would give if we wanted to lower nitrogen emissions.
1
640 kilowatts of energy in a tank of diesel, around 3 months of summer air conditioning going 24/7 electrical energy consumption, the conversion they had in the old charts I am presuming is heat loss, the induction hotplate might use less energy at the point but it would depend on how that electricity is produced. If it is coal that would still have the conversion loss of 65% to get it to the electrical outlet. Same as an electric car, a 100 kilowatt battery is still going to need four hundred kilowatts of energy to be emitted. Not as bad as diesel but not as good as is being portrayed. If electrcity is twenty percent of our energy, why is the conversation around only that part? Plastics, asphalt, medicines come from this oil. The amount of copper needed to electrify everything is all the copper in the last 500 years and this is the plan or what we missed about energy? If plastic comes from the same barrel as petroleum etc and all the new devices are going to need oil for plastics, delivery, I have to say my mind is not blown and have just been left disappointed DW pushes this false narrative.
1
Yeah if you want to cook a roast beside it.
1