Are SUVs More Eco-Friendly Than Dogs?
Published November 04, 2009 @ 12:50PM PT
Is it time to chew on the chihuahua? Robert and Brenda Vale think it might be in their new book "Time To Eat The Dog." They consider the eco-impact of pets, and determine that when you look at the emissions data of an animal's consumption of both cereals and meats, it show that an SUV is twice as eco-friendly as owning a dog. This is largely down to the amount of meat that dogs eat; you'd need to feed your dog a vegetarian diet to be absolved of some of your sins, but the eco-pawprint is still a big one.
Michael Pollan weighed it to a similar debate recently, explaining that "A vegan in a Hummer has a lighter carbon footprint than a beef eater in a Prius." He later retracted that statement, but it's a statement that, like "Time to eat the dog," questions how much we are prepared to change our lives, and how many sacreds cows we will slaughter in order to cut the damaging and unsustainable aspects of our lifestyle.
Share this Post
Comments (1)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Email


















This has been thoroughly debunked by Sightline Institute:
http://daily.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2009/11/02/dogs-vs-cars
Posted by d j on 11/04/2009 @ 03:55PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.