I suspect the real reason they're pushing for cutting back on livestock is that it's much easier to do that than drastically cutting the use of fossil fuels.

In order to cut fossil fuel use, you'd need to have most fossil fuel dependent power plants, heating systems, and transportation switched over to renewable energy sources. It's not just the power plants - many are already hydroelectric, nuclear, wind, or solar powered, or using those methods in conjunction with renewable sources.

I don't think that forcing home owners and business owners to replace their gas, oil and coal fueled heating systems with a renewable energy source would go over well either - that's a huge expense, and many home owners would not have the resources to cover that expense. Many businesses (especially family owned businesses) would need to go into debt or raise the price of their goods to afford replacing all heating equipment with heating systems that run on renewable energy.

We have electric cars now, but I don't think forcing every driver to abandon their gas or diesel cars and buy an electric car is going to go over well either. Not everyone who drives a gas powered vehicle has the funds to buy an EV. If you're trying to eliminate use of fossil fueled vehicles, you don't want to just sell them to someone else who will use fossil fuels in them. Another option is public transportation instead of a privately owned vehicle, but in far too many areas, public transportation (which is also fossil fuel powered) is so minimal that it could take all day just to get to and from the closest grocery store, good luck getting to a doctor that's miles away from a bus route. Not to mention that if you want to effectively eliminate the reliance on fossil fuels, the power source for EV chargers will need to be from a renewable source of energy. There are vast areas that still don't have any charging stations yet, although that's improving.

Relatively speaking, passing legislation that results in reducing the amount of Animal based foods available will result in achieving a goal of less livestock a lot faster than eliminating the use of fossil fuels.



I certainly don't think it's a good idea at all to eliminate animal proteins - we need animal proteins, whether they want to admit it or not.


But for those who buy into the idea that it's methane from cows that's largely responsible for climate change, then from that perspective, it's easier to change the food source than it is to change all the things that are affected by fossil fuels.