Question for all vegans!

[thebestofenergy]

That is pretty much what I am saying, yes! I definitely think there are strong arguments for being vegan, just reading all these posts. I don't think environment is one of them (personally).

The environmental argument is most definitely one of the strongest in favors of veganism.
By making positive change, you don't aim to solve all the problems of the world, that's never the case. You aim to solve as much as possible.

In situation A, you are vegan and a big part of environmental harm is gone. In situation B, you are not vegan and nothing has changed for the better.
Which situation do you think is the better one?

If you go by that logic, then doing any change is pointless.
Why stop using your car and use your bike instead when possible, when you'll still have to use your car anyway somewhere else?
Why stop giving money to an immoral company, when you give money to another company that does questionable stuff?
Why try to be more polite, when sometimes something unnecessarily rude will come out of your mouth anyway?
Why try to stop slavery, when there will still be some people enslaved somewhere?

Again, when you change your habits to do more good, you don't expect to completely cover all of the problems by changing them. The point is to diminish the harm you're causing.
Going with your logic, no environmental change is ever worth doing, since there will be something else that you didn't change environmentally wise.

When you look at how impactful you can be to change the world in a better place, you do all that's practical.
No single change solves all the problems.

You're dismissing the environmental argument of veganism because it doesn't completely solve all of the environmental issues, when it never aimed to do so.
The point stands that by going vegan you'll reduce a lot of waste and pollution, which is a big help.

[Lauradf36]

Again, when you change your habits to do more good, you don't expect to completely cover all of the problems by changing them. The point is to diminish the harm you're causing.

See, my point is not that environmental change is pointless. Just that it's difficult to argue veganism is the best/only way to achieve this, and thus that one should logically go vegan - when there are better ways which would achieve more.

The point stands that by going vegan you'll reduce a lot of waste and pollution, which is a big help.

I definitely agree!

[thebestofenergy]

See, my point is not that environmental change is pointless. Just that it's difficult to argue veganism is the best/only way to achieve this, and thus that one should logically go vegan - when there are better ways which would achieve more.

Of course it's not the only way to help the environment. There are always other things you can do - and you can potentially do all of them.
But the environmental problems connected with factory farming will always be there, even if you do all the recycling you possibly can. There are environmental issues that won't be solved if you don't reduce animal products consumption - there will always be a huge waste of water, land and crops for cattle, main cause of deforestation for lack of space and main cause of greehnouse gas emissions. If you want to eliminate those problems related to breeding billions of animals, you have to stop breeding billions of animals - and you can do that by doing your part and reducing the demand.
One should logically go vegan if it substantially helps. And it does. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing. The numbers say it has a huge impact, it's not just my opinion.

What would be those ways that would achieve more?

[Lauradf36]

What would be those ways that would achieve more?

I'm thinking just general things which make sense to me.
Like electricity - electricity generation through the burning of fossil fuels accounts for 40 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States, according to the EPA. Coal is the largest producer of carbon dioxide emissions, giving off nearly twice as much carbon per energy unit as natural gas.
So, if you want to do the biggest action to stop environmental damage, you would have to stop using electricity.

Same diff with cars. And pollution, factory emissions, and fertiliser... they all do damage to the environment. There are many ways we can help the environment - veganism is certainly a fantastic way to do so from the sounds of it, but not the only one.

[Cirion Spellbinder]

I'm thinking just general things which make sense to me.
Like electricity - electricity generation through the burning of fossil fuels accounts for 40 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States, according to the EPA. Coal is the largest producer of carbon dioxide emissions, giving off nearly twice as much carbon per energy unit as natural gas.
So, if you want to do the biggest action to stop environmental damage, you would have to stop using electricity.

Same diff with cars. And pollution, factory emissions, and fertiliser... they all do damage to the environment. There are many ways we can help the environment - veganism is certainly a fantastic way to do so from the sounds of it, but not the only one.

It's certainly not the only way, and perhaps as you mentioned not the biggest action to take, but that doesn't make it any less useful. Veganism's environmental impact, even if not the most taxing, is incredibly easy for almost all citizens of first world countries to get rid of. On the other hand, ensuring that your spent energy does not produce carbon emissions or giving up your car is often not practical for people. How many people do you know that can make sure they have energy without a carbon footprint? For this reason, veganism may be one of the best methods of combatting climate change in terms of unit of effect per unit of effort.

[Lauradf36]

For this reason, veganism may be one of the best methods of combatting climate change in terms of unit of effect per unit of effort.

I definitely agree!
But does this mean all people should become vegan for purely environmental reasons? I would argue no.

[Cirion Spellbinder]

But does this mean all people should become vegan for purely environmental reasons? I would argue no.

On what grounds?

Most people don't want to change they're behaviors, especially if they're hard, so promoting the most easy and effective methods of combatting climate change would be the most efficient way.

[Lauradf36]

Most people don't want to change they're behaviors, especially if they're hard, so promoting the most easy and effective methods of combatting climate change would be the most efficient way.

But perhaps it isn't the way that best fits everyone - what is easy for you isn't always easy for everyone else. Someone else might find it better to give up their car and cycle to work. Or give up using plastic bags. Etc. Of course I think it's great you're promoting environmentally friendly activity, but that doesn't mean it's imperative everyone else does it.

[brimstoneSalad]

I posted a link here critical of the study referenced in Cowspiracy: http://philosophicalvegan.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2167

I'm against exaggeration; if a particular case for veganism can not be made honestly, it shouldn't be made.

But as it stands, the environmental argument is very strong.
Mainstream estimates put the effect of animal agriculture at comparable to all of transportation (that's not vegan estimates).

That doesn't just mean your car, but all movement of goods and people.
Giving up your personal car only gets you part of the way there.
To eliminate it, you would have to stop buying or using products that employed transportation... which is pretty much everything.

Someone else might find it better to give up their car and cycle to work.

That won't do it. It gets you maybe half way there, and that is being charitable.
Of course vegans should try hard to save gas and use green transit (being vegan is no excuse to give up on other ways to help), but a vegan driving a hummer is going to beat a person eating any significant amount of meat who only rides a bike.

Vegan is the biggest thing we can easily do.

Or give up using plastic bags. Etc.

Another drop in the bucket. Do you know how little emission comes from plastic bag use?

Vegans should strive to do this too, but it won't make up for eating a typical animal product rich diet. Neither will turning off your lights entirely make up for it. Even combining riding your bike and not using any electricity or gas for light, heating, refrigeration, etc. is unlikely to do it.

You need to think much bigger to make suggestions on par with going vegan: like living as a hermit in the woods.

If you will honestly want to go live as a hermit in the forest instead of going vegan, you may be equally green.
However, removing ourselves from society is not a good thing either: how can you inspire and teach your neighbor if you're off in a hut by yourself in the middle of nowhere?

It's important that we live realistic and practicable examples. Society moving into the woods would be a big step backward in terms of human progress: going vegan is a step forward.

Of course I think it's great you're promoting environmentally friendly activity, but that doesn't mean it's imperative everyone else does it.

There are other options aside from purely plant food. Oysters are often very green, for example. Also, insects.
If a person ate insects and oysters, it would not be difficult to be as green as the average vegan.

There's even a term for a vegan who eats oysters: a bivalvegan, or ostrovegan.

[Jaywalker]

It doesn't logically follow that you HAVE to be vegan if you want to help the environment. There are other ways, as you say. However, you've made two different arguments here.

So, following that ethical system - if you believe harming the environment is wrong, you have to be against all ways of harming the environment, to be consistent. That's my reasoning any how...
...As I say - to defend veganism from a purely environmental point of view (though of course this is not the only point of view), you'd have to be pretty consistent on that side. Which no one can expect really.

See, my point is not that environmental change is pointless. Just that it's difficult to argue veganism is the best/only way to achieve this, and thus that one should logically go vegan - when there are better ways which would achieve more.

You first argue that we cannot say that people should go vegan if they care about the environment unless we're consistent across the board and tell them to also stop driving cars and using electricity (or anything that harms the environment). Then you argue that the best way to help the environment is not veganism.

The latter is debatable; other things may affect the environment more but you'll definitely get the most bang for your buck by becoming vegan. However, the former is simply not a good argument.

You seem to believe harming the environment is wrong too. Are you against all ways of harming the environment, including animal agriculture? You have to be, in order to be consistent. Your words. Most vegans recognise that all needless harm done to the environment (which affects sentient beings) is wrong. The question is what can we do about it? What can YOU do about it, since you care?

The all or nothing approach is detrimental to every cause due to the limitations of the human will. What we can do instead is see which methods are more practicable, and that's an empirical matter. Lifting a finger doesn't take the same amount of effort as bench pressing your own body weight, and if both of these actions produce comparable effects in the world, we should start by lifting our finger.

Being a vegan takes virtually zero effort in a developed country and it helps the environment immensely. Therefore, the environmental argument for veganism is very strong.

Of course vegans should try hard to save gas and use green transit (being vegan is no excuse to give up on other ways to help), but a vegan driving a hummer is going to beat a person eating any significant amount of meat who only rides a bike.

I thought that was shown to be false? http://blogs.reuters.com/adam-pasick/2009/10/26/crunching-the-numbers-on-a-vegan-in-a-hummer/
It seems a vegan can still beat a meat eater by driving a prius, but not a hummer.