Comments
CLIMATE WATCH - A new report by EAT-Lancet Commission (EAT 2.0) explains how we are eating global warming, and what to do about it. This is the second go around by the Commission. An earlier report in 2019 EAT 1.0 was met by fierce meat-lover opposition to EAT’s credo: “Eat less meat and more plants.”
Regardless of fierce opposition, after all EAT doesn’t completely eliminate meat from your diet, rather, the rationale behind EAT’s credo carries solid logic, and it’s superbly helpful as a control mechanism, hopefully modulating excessive global heat, which has become a systemic problem for all life on Earth, as a similar issue reigns across the globe with ocean water turning into a gigantic hot tub, disrupting, destroying marine life, as sea surface temperature in August 2025 hit 20°C, a record for the ERSST data base going back to 1854. Global warming is hitting all aspects of humanity’s easy living off nature.
Industrial agriculture and burning fossil fuel for energy are major contributors to greenhouse gases and global warming. In that regard, the “climate realism” school of thought, which has been adopted over the past two years by the fossil fuel industry and corporations across the board, claims we need to accept climate change for what it is, live with it, adapt to it… “git a life.” However, the global warming issue has grown into a monster that’s bordering on complete takedown of major ecosystems supportive of thousands of years of the foundation of civilization, no laughing matter, in which the entire climate system re-engineers into a very bad dream, a worse-than-ever nightmare come true. Senior respected climate scientists claim ecosystem tipping points are on the verge of collapse. Oops… what to do? Is SRM (Solar Radiation Mgmt.) an answer, or is it Frankenstein in a sheep’s skin?
According to the EAT 2.0 report: “Food systems account for about a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, driven largely by animal farming, which is a major source of methane and a drain on land and water resources. Even if the world transitions away from fossil fuels, food alone could push temperatures past the 1.5°C threshold needed to limit warming. The onus falls disproportionately on the wealthy: The richest 30% of the world’s population are responsible for more than 70% of food-related pressures.” (Agnieszka de Sousa, Dinner Without a Side of Global Warming, Bloomberg/Green, Oct 4, 2025)
EAT’s prescription is not a radical concept. It’s called “planetary health diet” and provides for a mixture of flexibility and does not push veganism as a worldly solution. Animal-sourced foods are optional and recommend moderate use guided by the 1+1 principle of one dairy serving and one other animal protein daily. One goal of the planetary health diet is cutting greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture by 15%.
However, pushback is almost certain to overwhelm EAT’s best intentions. As things stand, global meat consumption continues to grow, and alternative protein is weakening in popularity. Plus, a new kid on the block threatens social acceptance of EAT as the manosphere and kissing cousin MAGA lather their chops on red meat. Indisputably, veganism doesn’t score well with right-wing politics, which is experiencing a worldwide renaissance. EAT 2.0 is thus up against powerful odds even as its prescription for better personal health and a cooler planet are commendable-plus.
All of which comes full circle back to the problem of climate change. Of course it’s real; just check nightly news broadcasts for the latest in climate system destructiveness. Ask anybody who’s been around decades, never seen anything like it. Of course it’s real, an email message from a 45-year wilderness guide who has logged over 5,000 miles canoeing found a disturbing number of dead trees amongst far-reaching loss of insect life in several regions as the wild turns still. Of course it’s real; climate change chases property insurance companies out of some regions of the country. Of course it’s real; it hammers the Midwest with pounding torrential rains/instant flooding and punishing hail that spikes up property insurance rates. Of course it’s real; flash floods, e.g., Texas 2025, becoming a regular feature. Of course it’s real; within just the past two weeks the European Union declared: EU Climate Breakdown.
A crescendo of historic proportions is brewing, on one side fossil fuel interests push more oil and gas production and pooh-pooh climate mitigation measures and turn up noses at ‘sissy’ planetary health diets. On the other side, climate scientists across the globe are warning, stop CO2 and all greenhouse gases or suffer a loss of centuries of nature’s support network as oceans also rise to the occasion in high fashion. The options are to live with chaos and fossil fuels or to live with nature and green solutions. There is no time to waste; the world must choose: (a.) Steak or Beyond Meat (b) Vivid Green or Smokestack Black.
Yet, ecosystems throughout the planet, e.g., (1) Greenland (2) Arctic ice mass (3) Tibetan glaciers (4) the Amazon rainforest, have been vastly altered by the human footprint, aka: the Anthropocene (Age of Humans) to such an extreme that nature is turning lopsidedly dangerous. By all appearances, something big must be done very, very soon to stem this increasingly out-of-control climate system or simply toss in the towel on massive worldwide mitigation and bear the burden of a slashing climate system that upends every source of life support.
But the problem is even bigger than that because the costs factor to ‘right the ship of state’ is humongous at $7 trillion per year installing/building renewables to achieve Net Zero by 2050. Last year (2024) was a record year for renewable installations globally at approximately $2 trillion. That’s a shortfall of $5 trillion. Therefore, only an all-in all-world commitment can maybe solve this. But the all-in world can’t even come together to stop the utter insanity of slaughter of innocent people with the highest number of countries engaged in armed conflict since World War II according to the Peace Research Institute Oslo; where does that leave worldwide prioritizing of $7 trillion/yr for Net Zero/2050?
“Our entire infrastructure & civilization are based around climate that no longer exists.” (John Marsha, Professor of Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds)
This article was originally published on Oct. 10, 2025 © Counterpunch
(Robert Hunziker, M.A. in Economic History from DePaul University and a member of Pi Gamma Mu International Honor Society, is a freelance writer and environmental journalist. With over 200 published articles featured in more than 50 international journals, magazines, and online platforms, his work focuses on climate change, sustainability, and global ecological issues. Hunziker is a regular contributor to CityWatchLA, where he brings a global perspective to urgent environmental challenges facing Los Angeles and beyond.)
