Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Thank you, re palm oil

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,608 ✭✭✭Feisar


    Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
    Ah come on folks we can't have the consumer society we crave without something being destroyed.

    Before that great Iceland ad not many really gave a fcuk about what palm oil did or did not do.

    So we move on from palm oil but soooner or later realise that the short term alternative is too expensive.
    But by that time the manufacturer has come up with a cheap alternative, but that cheap alternative involves destroying something else

    And it goes on and on and on.

    If we want 'cheap' consumer goods something has to be destroyed.

    Only those well off can chose to be as socially/environmentally conscious as they want to be.

    In monetary terms cheap however there is a massive social cost to these things. Be it child labour somewhere or an orange monkey.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #63
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Feisar wrote: »
    In monetary terms cheap however there is a massive social cost to these things. Be it child labour somewhere or an orange monkey.

    There is child labour harvesting palm oil .


  • Options
    #64
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Wabbit Ears wrote: »
    TBH I dont care about the deforestation or the monkeys or anything. I dont buy products with palm oil and haven't for years because palm oil is filler muck on low quality foodstuffs.

    Far more than that as it is in leading brands that are top quality.


  • Options
    #65
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,608 ✭✭✭Feisar


    Graces7 wrote: »
    There is child labour harvesting palm oil .

    Double hit so.

    I used to think peanut butter was the palm oil problem, so thanks for informing me it's more widespread than that.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #66
    Witchie
    Registered Users Posts: 5,597 ✭✭✭Witchie


    My friend is an environmental and animal rights journalist and has written about this on her website and also wrote this.

    https://animalpeopleforum.org/2017/12/26/palm-oil-animal-rights-can-combat-destruction-wild-animals-habitat/

    Oh and good news, one of the world's biggest producer countries are committed to sustainable production by the end of 2019.https://certifications.controlunion.com/en/certification-programs/certification-programs/mspo-malaysia-sustainable-palm-oil


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,292 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Graces7 wrote: »
    I copied from the other thread?

    Yes I know there is another thread, but it had got very over political and then died, and my take is of personal responsibility and involvement.

    There was one on reddit a while ago where folk listed foods containing palm oil so we can choose to veto it.

    Up to the moderators; just the site of orang utans...... if we do not act they will all be gone in a few decades.

    at first I thought it was a typo but you've done the same thing in two successive posts

    It's "Orangutan" - all one word


  • Options
    #68
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,608 ✭✭✭Feisar


    lawred2 wrote: »
    at first I thought it was a typo but you've done the same thing in two successive posts

    It's "Orangutan" - all one word

    To be fair I used the term orange monkey as i couldn't be bothered look up how to spell it.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #69
    Witchie
    Registered Users Posts: 5,597 ✭✭✭Witchie


    lawred2 wrote: »
    at first I thought it was a typo but you've done the same thing in two successive posts

    It's "Orangutan" - all one word

    Actually can be spelled either way. By the by Orang is the Malay/Indonesian word for people and hutan means forest.


  • Options
    #70
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Witchie wrote: »
    Actually can be spelled either way. By the by Orang is the Malay/Indonesian word for people and hutan means forest.

    Thank you. I have always written it as two words perfectly correctly.


  • Options
    #71
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Witchie wrote: »
    My friend is an environmental and animal rights journalist and has written about this on her website and also wrote this.

    https://animalpeopleforum.org/2017/12/26/palm-oil-animal-rights-can-combat-destruction-wild-animals-habitat/

    Oh and good news, one of the world's biggest producer countries are committed to sustainable production by the end of 2019.https://certifications.controlunion.com/en/certification-programs/certification-programs/mspo-malaysia-sustainable-palm-oil

    We shall see.

    It is still an unhealthy oil. Bad healthwise.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    lawred2 wrote: »
    at first I thought it was a typo but you've done the same thing in two successive posts

    It's "Orangutan" - all one word

    Yeeeeeeeeeeees. :rolleyes:... perfectly correctly.


  • Options
    #73
    Witchie
    Registered Users Posts: 5,597 ✭✭✭Witchie


    Graces7 wrote: »
    We shall see.

    It is still an unhealthy oil. Bad healthwise.

    For me here though where sometimes the choice is palm oil or coconut oil, palm is my choice as with my allergy to it, coconut can kill me!


  • Options
    #74
    Fr Tod Umptious
    Registered Users Posts: 15,044 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    DamoKen wrote: »
    Would you say the same if the small town had a heavy industry plant emitting greenhouse gases unchecked as it's main source of employment? What if every second small rural town had one? I always find it weird that the beef industry has if you'll excuse the pun some sort of sacred cow status. Even weirder is how this status goes relatively unchallenged.

    Any other industry known to be a major contributor to a nations carbon footprint (29% agriculture) would have people protesting to beat the band, fines imposed by the government, targets to reduce by in set periods. But the beef industry? The targets seem to be to increase herd size. Not only that it's rewarded with subsidies. Might be wrong but I can't think of any other industry treated like this?

    Fair enough, livelihoods depend on it. But the same argument applies to factories with smokestacks belching fumes into the atmosphere which people campaign to close down.

    If even China has started cracking down on pollution (https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2017/10/24/china-shuts-down-tens-of-thousands-of-factories-in-widespread-pollution-crackdown/) maybe it's time we at least acknowledged it's a big problem and started discussing ways for the industry to adapt and change before the same draconian measures are eventually introduced? That applies both at the production as well as consumer side.

    At the moment though as evidenced by your post there seems to be a total unwillingness to even discuss ways of reducing this. The attitude seems more of a well that's just the way it is, deal with it. And the impact of the pollution is shrugged off as a vague possibility that "might" effect your children or grandchildren ignoring all evidence such as record droughts, storms etc that suggest that we are the generation that is going to have to start adapting to ensure the next generation has a chance to live, never mind adapt.


    Climate activism for the people who can afford it. The people who can afford the more expensive products made from more sustainable source, the people who can afford the electric or hybrid cars.

    The rest of us have to get on with our lives and buy the products we can afford.

    And it’s arrogance of the highest order.

    Arrogance that the generations that come after us will not have the ability or intellect to deal with the circumstances that face them.

    And arrogance because we as a people want it all, we want the good lifestyle regardless of the impact of climate change.

    Look at the population increase in south Florida between hurricane Andrew in the early 90s and now.

    The population is up over 35% even though we all are well aware of climate change and rising sea levels.

    If anyone really gave a f**k about climate change and preservation they would be moving to less vulnerable areas, not into more vulnerable ones and trying to fight mother nature

    Government’s should stop pumping millions into initiatives to try and curtail climate change and spend it the things people really care about, housing, work, education etc


  • Options
    #75
    razorblunt
    Registered Users Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    Iceland going to do anything about the shíte meat they use in their food?


Advertisement