• Nakrar@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m sure shipping vast quantities of almonds and almond milk from places like California to the rest of the world produces almost no greenhouse gases /s

    Not to talk about the ecological damage it does to California due to the immense water consumption.

      • nac82@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Per person or current polution rates? If this is a 1 to 10 comparison, having twice as much gasses produced doesn’t mean much.

        • agoseris@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The chart says those values are what it takes to produce one liter of each milk.

          • nac82@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            So we are talking about producing roughly 580 calories of almond milk vs producing 2400 calories of cow milk.

            So in terms of calories/pollution rate, we are talking about a scale of 1:2 in favor of cow milk efficiency.

            Meaning in terms of keeping people fed as a rate of efficiency in pollution, cow milk is twice as efficient.

            Does that math add up? feel free to check me.

            Edit: doubled the calories in an unsweetened silk almond milk for almond milk calorie count

            Used a local brand of whole milk that based on a short Google search seems pretty standard.

      • Nakrar@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes that neglects the transport though. Cow milk can PE produced locally almost everywhere. Cow milk I buy here was produced maybe 10km away from me. Almond milk was transported 5000+ km.