It already passed us for one. And secondly I never said we weren't breathing it in.

I suggested that the amount we actually inhale is unknown and isn't going to be the same concentration as the site of the contamination. Meaning, I don't think we should worry just uet because we aren't breathing in much more chemicals than a normal day

Yeah that's ass. I'd love to breath actual clean air but that won't happen. At least this doesn't pose an immediate health risk any more than the asbestos in the air from brake pads

I think it's still hard to say if we breathed in a lot of this or not. It's floating higher up as it gets closer to us, moving fast and diluting.

It's not good at all but I don't think we should panick compared to what we are breathing in on a daily basis

Choosing less animal products is a lot easier than reducing individual fossil fuel consumption.

Considering that CH4 is more potent and you'd also reduce supply chain emissions it really isn't that hard for the Huge impact it would make

UNTRUE.

Animal agriculture-30% Plant agriculture -18%

So total agriculture is 48%

A great deal of that plant agriculture is used as animal feed

Yeah, some other ways are not having a child (just one less child even... not zero children) and also drive an electric car. But considering most people est multiple times a day, those small choices are much more accessible than the other two. So to me small diet changes are the most accessible

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/12/4/20993654/chicken-beef-climate-environment-factory-farms

It's not as big of a difference as even the most transported meat substitute. since chickens have to eat a lot of calories to yield a lot of calories (trophic level heat loss) so we would still be growing all that grain to only yield 50% worth of calories of chicken. Did that make sense?

Do you know what reductio ad absurdum means by any chance?

I said eat less if you care about your environmental impact

I never said we have to genocide wtf why must you go to the extremes are you that much of a snowflake

https://www.science.org/content/article/grass-fed-cows-won-t-save-climate-report-finds

Grass fed cows live longer and each cow (each pound of meat it produces) takes longer to mature and so the cow produces more methane per pound of finished meat. And also all the food they eat (soy, wheat, corn etc) are a lot of the 'vegan food'you are saying is 'equally bad because of the transportation emissions'... how do you think cows food gets to them? And do you really think it makes sense for everyone to eat grass fed? That's some first world thinking right there

Again, read the comparison between CO2 (from transportation) in contrast to CH4. I already covered all of that. It's all bad but if you recycle or something like that I bet you care about the environment. Most plastic waste comes not from consumer goods but fishing nets in the ocean. Yet we applaud people using less plastic and recycling.

Maybe look into your actual impact and the facts instead of kidding yourself

"Most cattle don’t get past the age of two. American beef comes mostly from steers and heifers slaughtered between 18 and 24 months old." https://www.texasmonthly.com/bbq/old-cows-texas-steaks-heartbrand/#:~:text=Most%20cattle%20don't%20get,%2C%20red%20meat%E2%80%94the%20better.

Maybe just stop breeding more of them??

That was nice and incoherent

Methane(CH4) is an insanely bad GHG compared to CO2. "Methane is more than 25 times as potent as carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere."

https://www.epa.gov/gmi/importance-methane#:~:text=Methane%20is%20the%20second%20most,trapping%20heat%20in%20the%20atmosphere.

And it can be remediate out of the atmosphere way quicker too.

So it's worse, and easy to remove from the atmosphere (even with no extra efforts). So if we just focused on CH4 as a starting point we could slow down a lot of warning.

The biggest source of methane is from farmed animals burping and farting. On top of the fact that it takes fossil fuels to run the machines to farm grain to feed them and get the food to them we could reduce so much warming emissions just from the food we eat.

It's something we could all do that would have a very measurable impact.

If you are complaining about people not giving a shit but you still eat animal products because you "recycle and don't buy plastic straws" you are kidding yourself and part of the problem.

It's something we can do while we wait for the large companies to be held accountable

People are so not self aware at all... but come on, where else are there barriers in the middle of am area like that

That also seems like something that has happened a bunch. Can you explain? Nothing explains it in what you shared

Seriously out of the loop on this. Can someone fill in what's happening?

So it's 3 degrees colder than what you remember. Obviously it's dangerously cold and the windchill would be record's I'm sure if we kept track of them. But it's not all that uncommon and it definitely does get overblown (the air temp, not windchill)

Look at the historical weather Temps. Negatives in Massachusetts are relatively common for a day or two every winter