Climate Destroying Shrimp

“Shrimp’s Carbon Footprint Is 10 Times Greater Than Beef’s”

Shrimp’s Carbon Footprint Is 10 Times Greater Than Beef’s – Mother Jones

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Climate Destroying Shrimp

  1. Conrad Ziefle says:

    How does this climate reporting work? You smoke some pot; have an idea, and then write authoritatively as if it were real? Tom’s a journalist, end of story.

    • Mike says:

      Add a little Meth and BANG that is how they do it.
      Remember Ladies & Gentlemen…Idiocracy is alive.
      President Camacho 9897

  2. Disillusioned says:

    Shrimp? Meh.

    I prefer to eat vegans – the ruminant type. Just a little over an hour ago I devoured a 1-1/2 inch slab I sliced off of a vegan’s rib section, which I then immediately blackened over fire (pink on the inside, of course). There is no food any more satiating or as healthy.

    (“Carbon footprint” is meaningless, fraudulent manipulation.)

      • Mike says:

        No…TASTY ?

        • Disillusioned says:

          Yes. A freshly sliced (salt-cured on a rack in the refrigerator for 24 hours) thick, fire grilled, fatty ribeye with a thick pat of pasture raised butter on top is the epitome of tasty. Mouth-watering and heavenly.

          And when you don’t combine that perfect meal with all the normal crap people eat, which sickly vegetarians try to live on (IOW foregoing all the starches and weeds people ruin their health with), a 16-24 ounce ribeye is an incredibly healthy meal.

  3. Was this written by Forrest Gump?

  4. Petit_Barde says:

    And wild pigs are destroying the planet too ! (

  5. arn says:

    His name is Phil Pot for a reason.

    But there seems a bit more to it than the typical “I need to put out my obligatory monthly fear&guiltporn article to keep my job – and I won’t invest more than 5 minutes in writing it”.

    Beef consumption per capita in your country is according to statista 60 pounds per year.
    Shrimp consumption is 6 pounds a year.

    This is where he got his 10* greater conclusion from.
    It seems that beef is not the only “meat” they want to phase out.
    That’s why shrimp farts are a magnitude more devastating than cowfarts.

    But here is the plottwist he will not tell us –
    Shrimps and Bugs are Pancrustaceas of the Phylum Artrophods(it took me more time to research the correct spelling of these latin words than Philpott invested in this whole article 🙂 and their brains are very much alike,
    but you will never ever find an article about bug carbon footprints being 10* greater than beef’s,
    because bugs is our future food.

    And is the beef with bugs what bugs shrimps the most?

    • Disillusioned says:

      In photos of cave paintings and drawings from early man around the world, I recall depictions of man hunting ruminant animals with bow and arrow, clubs or other instruments (presumably for food and health). I do not ever recall seeing a cave drawing of early man eating bugs. Or salads.

      I would wager our ancestors thrived on eating animal fat and protein – as much as they could get their hands on. And that bugs, berries and veggies would’ve been merely a snack – and only when in season during the short time each year grew (or flew) – surely not a way of sustaining and building strong bodies year-round.

      • arn says:

        I do not know wether “resolution” of early paintings would have allowed them to paint bugs
        and my guess is that those paintings were reserved for highlights and not the simple stuff like picking things up,
        BUT people would have never risked their lives in dangerous hunts if insects were THE thing.

        While I’m pretty sure that bugs are a standard where famines occure frequently (beggars are no chosers),
        the overall tendency is always away from insects towards fish,meat,fruits(food evolves with culture)
        and I’m pretty sure our metabolism has adjusted itself to that kind of food.

        And I also remember watching news with starving Africans –
        there were flies all over the place.
        This would not be the case if insects were that tasty.

        And lets be hoenest – there is so much crazy hipster food stuff going on – even vegan restaurants – but I have never eve heard of a bug restaurant,not even a bug receipy
        Considering how many crazy woke there are and how cheap
        bugs are this should be a billoon dollar business.

        • Disillusioned says:

          Lemme guess… the same people who would buy a Tesla to impress their hipster frien… acquaintances – although it’s an unsustainable fad with crashing vehicle values, plummeting faster than if they instead threw several ounces of gold over the Grand Canyon. 😉

  6. Francis Barnett says:

    There is no attempt at explanation/calculation in the Mother Jones article as to why the so-called carbon footprint is ten times larger than beef or how the deranged meat haters arrived at the ten times figure, obviously based on emotion not math.

  7. D. Boss says:

    First off, the article is from 2012. Next it’s from Mother Jones, meaning communist propaganda, hence ignore everything they say. And last it is ludicrous from several points of view – farmed shrimp only live for 6 months, and only amount to 10-20 times less consumption in the US by weight, per person as beef. Beef cattle on the other hand live 2 years and require considerably more resources to raise them.

    Probably the idiot math used for this nonsense headline is that shrimp farmed overseas must be transported via air cargo as it’s perishable so ship transport is out of the question. And yes a wide body cargo aircraft does burn a lot of fuel to cross the Pacific. But on a cost per pound basis, fuel for transport cannot be a huge factor based on the fact wholesale beef ranges from $3.25 to $8 per pound, while shrimp is around $4 to $7 per pound.

    So I call bullsh$t on this article.

  8. Eric Ahlm says:

    Long ago I worked at a fish farm. Rarely the fish would get parasites and we would use antibiotics or pesticide. But they cost money and pests develop immunity with continues use. Aquaculture like other industries has developed best practices to minimize problems and costs. Apparently Philpott can’t imagine this.
    Oxygen solubility in water is low and like all animals shrimp need it or suffocate. This necessitates circulation of fresh oxygenated water which negates turbidity.
    Shrimp do poop so sludge does accumulate necessitating periodic pond cleaning.
    Amazing how the rich mangrove fishers decided to make themselves poor by adopting non sustainable shrimp farming. If the Soviets had had Philpott’s management savvy they could have failed faster. Too bad!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *