Given there are many critical minds here, I’d like you to take a look at this article which claims driving as opposed to walking 3 miles is better for the environment. Why? Because when you refuel with beef (because that’s all I eat after any exercise), and you factor in the energy to grow that beef, it’s more than a car would’ve contributed.
Your training is ruining the earth.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece
Some of the more tenuous correlations masquerading as causation:
-
“The troubling fact is that taking a lot of exercise and then eating a bit more food is not good for the global atmosphere. Eating less and driving to save energy would be better.”
-
“Driving a typical UK car for 3 miles adds about 0.9 kg of CO2 to the atmosphere,” he said, a calculation based on the Government’s official fuel emission figures. “If you walked instead, it would use about 180 calories. You’d need about 100g of beef to replace those calories, resulting in 3.6kg of emissions, or four times as much as driving.* Organic beef is the most damaging because organic cattle emit more methane.
-
The ideal diet would consist of cereals and pulses. “This is a route which virtually nobody, apart from a vegan, is going to follow,”
-
Someone who installs a “green” lightbulb undoes a year’s worth of energy-saving by buying two bags of imported veg, as so much carbon is wasted flying the food to Britain
-
Trees, regarded as shields against global warming because they absorb carbon, were found by German scientists to be major producers of methane, a much more harmful greenhouse gas
